LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Defences – Automatism – Act Occurring Independently of the Will – Involuntary Act Not Punishable
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission which occurs independently of the exercise of his will. This is a situation where the will of a person was not involved; he did not exercise his will at all; the act was involuntary. Such an act is not punishable. No act is punishable if it is done involuntarily: and an involuntary act in this context—some people nowadays prefer to speak of it as 'automatism'—means an act which is done by the muscles without any control by the mind, such as a spasm, a reflex action or a convulsion; or an act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing, such as an act done whilst suffering from concussion or whilst sleep-walking.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Amayo v. State (2001) NLC-2412000(SC) at pp. 4–5; Paras A–C.
"A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission which occurs independently of the exercise of his will. This is a situation where the will of a person was not involved; he did not exercise his will at all; the act was involuntary. Such an act is not punishable. No act is punishable if it is done involuntarily: and an involuntary act in this context—some people nowadays prefer to speak of it as 'automatism'—means an act which is done by the muscles without any control by the mind, such as a spasm, a reflex action or a convulsion; or an act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing, such as an act done whilst suffering from concussion or whilst sleep-walking."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An act occurring independently of the will (automatism) is not punishable. The will is not involved—the act is involuntary. Examples: spasms, reflex actions, convulsions, acts during concussion or sleepwalking. The person has no control over their actions. The defence negates the mental element required for criminal liability. The accused must raise evidence of automatism. The prosecution must prove the act was voluntary beyond reasonable doubt. The defence is not available for self-induced automatism (e.g., intoxication). The principle ensures that only voluntary acts are punished. The court must distinguish between involuntary acts and voluntary acts with unintended consequences. The defence is exceptional.
