This is known as the doli incapax presumption.126 The common law position was received by
Trinidad and Tobago and has not been modified by legislation.
The minimum age for criminal responsibility around the world was impacted by the English
common law, due to colonization.127 Out of 75 countries that received the common law, 51 set
the age limit at 7, 8 or 10 and of 50 countries that do have doli incapax, 40 have been directly
influenced by English law.128 The same is true for Trinidad and Tobago, where the minimum age
of criminal responsibility remains as seven years, as it is governed by the original common law
position.
Trinidad and Tobago has not sought to define the minimum age for criminal responsibility in
statute.129 The doli incapax presumption applies to children over the age of seven and under the
age of 14. It is applied in conformity with the ruling in C. (A Minor) v DPP130, where the court
held that “There is a presumption that a child between these ages is doli incapax and the
presumption can only be rebutted by clear positive evidence that the child knew that his act was
seriously wrong at the time when he did it. Upon attaining the age of 14 the presumption ceases
and a child is presumed by the law to be capable of distinguishing good from evil.”131
Internationally by virtue of Articles the CRC places a duty upon states to “seek to promote” the
establishment of a minimum age for criminal responsibility. The Beijing Rules at Section 4(1)
seeks to establish a link between the age of minimum age for criminal responsibility with a
child’s development and maturity, and to provide guidance to states in setting a minimum age.132
Section 4(1) states, that the age of criminal responsibility shall “not be fixed too low an age
level, bearing in mind the facts of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity.”133 It was
recognized that the minimum age of criminal responsibility differs in various countries and it
126
Z McDowell, Elements Of Child Law In The Commonwealth Caribbean (1st, University of West Indies Press,
Jamaica 2000) 17,18
127
D Cipriani, Children's Rights and the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: A Global Perspective (1st,
Ashgate Publishing, England 2009) 87-108
128
Ibid
129
Supra fn 19
130
C. (A Minor) v DPP [1996] 1 A.C 1 (H.L)
131
Archbold Criminal Pleadings, Evidence and Practice (Sweet and Maxwell, London 1997) 90-94
132
Supra fn 8
133
Supra fn 2 at Article 4(1)
86