Abstract：
This Article analyzes the 2021 judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Mst. Safia Bano v. Home Department, Government of Punjab. The case has garnered significant local and international attention due to the Court\'s ruling that a death sentence may not be carried out on a defendant who has a mental illness. Setting the case against the backdrop of Pakistan\'s Islamic and colonial contexts, this article argues that the Supreme Court has reshaped the insanity defense in Pakistani law by placing the determination of a defendant\'s mental state mainly in the hands of medical professionals. However, the Court\'s reliance on medical professionals and the subsequent downplaying of the \"moral capacity\" element of the insanity defense-a determination of law made by courts-has created an obstacle for courts to punish offenders more stringently in future cases due to the popular belief that mental health professionals are ill-equipped to answer broader questions of justice for victims and society. The article recommends that this issue can be remedied by establishing an objective legal test for insanity that considers Islamic law, Pakistani precedent, and advances in medical science.
摘要：
本文分析了巴基斯坦最高法院在Mst案中的2021年判决。SafiaBano诉内政部,旁遮普邦政府。由于法院裁定不得对患有精神疾病的被告执行死刑，此案引起了当地和国际的广泛关注。以巴基斯坦的伊斯兰和殖民背景为背景，本文认为，最高法院通过将确定被告的精神状态主要掌握在医疗专业人员手中，重塑了巴基斯坦法律中的精神错乱辩护。然而,法院对医疗专业人员的依赖以及随后对精神错乱辩护的“道德能力”要素的轻描淡写-法院对法律的确定-为法院在未来的案件中更严格地惩罚罪犯造成了障碍，因为人们普遍认为，精神卫生专业人员没有能力为受害者和社会回答更广泛的正义问题。文章建议可以通过建立考虑伊斯兰法律的精神错乱的客观法律测试来纠正这一问题，巴基斯坦的先例,和医学科学的进步。
