Clause 5

by deleting subsection (2) and substituting the following subsection:“(2) To avoid doubt, where a person alleges a mistake of fact or ignorance of a fact that may negate the fault element of the offence that the person is charged with, the prosecution must prove the fault element in order to establish liability under the offence.”;

by renumbering the Explanation as Explanation 1, and by inserting immediately thereafter the following Explanation:“Explanation 2.—Where an alleged mistake of fact or ignorance of a fact may negate the fault element of an offence, the accused person does not need to rely on the defence of mistake. The accused person may allege the mistake of fact or ignorance of the fact for the purpose of raising a reasonable doubt that the accused person had the requisite fault element as a result of labouring under the mistake of fact or ignorance of fact. The prosecution must prove the fault element in order to establish liability under the offence.”; and

by deleting the words “as he did not intend to dishonestly take the watch out of Z’s possession” in illustration (f) and substituting the words “as A did not possess the requisite fault element of dishonesty when A took the watch out of Z’s possession. There is no need for A to rely on a defence under this section”.