Partial Defence Of Provocation In The NSW Criminal Justice System

The formation of the NSW Parliamentary Select Committee on the Partial Defence of Provocation in 2012, along with the introduction of the Crimes Amendment (Provocation) Act in 2014, are excellent examples in demonstrating how the NSW Criminal Justice System continues to reform and adhere to the needs and values of society, further more, it epitomises law reform and the changes taking place in regards to provocation being used as a defence to murder. Provocation falls under section 23 of the NSW Crimes Act 1900. It is the defence where the defendant claims that their actions were a direct result of another person’s actions, which caused them to lose control of their own actions. The NSW Criminal Justice system, prior the findings of the

Kaur bled to death from 22 wounds inflicted by her husband, in their Western (Westmead 2145) Sydney home. In court, January 2010, Singh claimed that he was provoked by the victim’s verbal abuse, saying that she had never loved him, as well as by her threatening to deport him. Although he was initially charged with murder he “was convicted of manslaughter based on the partial defence of provocation, and sentenced to a non-parole term of imprisonment of six years.” The sanction imposed upon Singh caused outraged public outcry from the Sydney Community as well as the victim’s family, this was because Singh claimed provocation and got such a lenient

Under the Act, the term ‘Partial Defense’ was recast to ‘Extreme Provocation’, one of the many amendments to section 23 of the Crimes Act 1900. The Act also restricted the use of the partial defense in a numerous number of ways including, a tighter objective test, this will simplify the jury’s task and provide greater focus on ordinary community standards in determining whether the provocation was such that an ordinary person would have lost self control to the extend of intending to kill or inflict grievous bodily