1. What does it mean to commit a crime in circumstances where one’s cognitive ability is limited through no fault of their own?
According to the guidance in Clause 11, Article 2 of Resolution 04/2025/NQ-HĐTP, committing a crime in circumstances where one’s cognitive ability is limited through no fault of their own refers to a case where the offender commits the criminal act while having limited cognitive ability, not being sober enough to fully perceive the danger level and consequences of their criminal act. The offender’s cognitive ability is limited due to objective causes or factors (such as being coerced or deceived into using strong stimulants, etc.), and not caused by the offender themselves.
When applying this mitigating circumstance, the degree of mitigation of criminal liability depends on the nature and extent of the offender’s limited cognitive ability, and the circumstances, causes, and objective factors affecting the offender’s cognition.
Example: Nguyen Van A knows that if Pham Van B drinks alcohol, B will experience a state of limited behavioral control. A pours alcohol into a soft drink can for B to drink. Knowing he had consumed alcohol, B became angry and left. On the way home, B saw Ms. Ta Thi C and attacked her, resulting in Ms. C sustaining a 30% body injury. The investigative agency requested a forensic psychiatric examination, and the results concluded that at the time of committing the crime, medically, B was in an acute psychotic state caused by alcohol (pathological intoxication). In this case, Pham Van B is subject to the mitigating circumstance specified in point l, Clause 1, Article 51 of the Criminal Code.
2. Is committing a crime in circumstances where one’s cognitive ability is limited through no fault of their own a mitigating circumstance for criminal liability?
The mitigating circumstances for criminal liability are stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Code of Vitnam 2015 (amended by Points a, b, Clause 6, Article 1 of the 2017 Law amending the Criminal Code) as follows:
– The offender prevented or reduced the harm caused by the crime;
– The offender voluntarily repaired, compensated for damages, or remedied the consequences;
– Committing a crime in circumstances exceeding the limits of legitimate self-defense;
– Committing a crime in circumstances exceeding the requirements of an emergency;
– Committing a crime in circumstances exceeding the necessary extent when apprehending an offender;
– Committing a crime due to mental provocation caused by the victim’s unlawful act;
– Committing a crime due to particularly difficult circumstances not caused by oneself;
– Committing a crime but not causing harm or causing insignificant harm;
– Committing a crime for the first time and belonging to a less serious case;
– Committing a crime due to being threatened or coerced by another person;
– Committing a crime in circumstances where one’s cognitive ability is limited through no fault of their own;
– Committing a crime due to backwardness;
– The offender is a pregnant woman;
– The offender is 70 years of age or older;
– The offender is a severely or specially severely disabled person;
– The offender has a disease that limits their cognitive ability or their ability to control their behavior;
– The offender surrendered;
– The offender sincerely confessed and repented;
– The offender actively cooperated with the competent authority in detecting the crime or during the resolution of the case;
– The offender performed meritorious acts to atone for their crime;
– The offender is a person with outstanding achievements in production, combat, study, or work;
– The offender is a person with merits to the revolution or is a parent, spouse, or child of a martyr.
Thus, committing a crime in circumstances where one’s cognitive ability is limited through no fault of their own is considered a mitigating circumstance for criminal liability.
3. Some notes when applying mitigating circumstances for criminal liability
– When deciding on a penalty, the Court shall base its decision on the provisions of the Criminal Code, consider the nature and social dangerousness of the criminal act, the personal background of the offender, mitigating circumstances, and aggravating circumstances for criminal liability.
– The Court may decide on a penalty below the minimum level of the applicable penalty framework but within the immediately lighter penalty framework of the article when the offender has at least two mitigating circumstances specified in Clause 1, Article 51 of the Criminal Code of Vietnam 2015.
– Mitigating circumstances belonging to a specific accomplice shall only be applied to that person.
– Mitigating circumstances that have been stipulated in this Code as elements for defining a crime or its framework shall not be considered mitigating circumstances when deciding on a penalty.
– When imposing a prison sentence not exceeding 03 years, based on the personal background of the offender and mitigating circumstances, if it is deemed unnecessary to enforce the prison sentence, the Court shall grant a suspended sentence and set a probation period from 01 year to 05 years, and impose obligations during the probation period as stipulated by the Law on Execution of Criminal Judgments.
