PART VI M INORITY 230 When child between seven and fourteen years may be held criminally liable (1) The presumption referred to in section seven as to the criminal incapacity of a child between the age of seven and below the age of fourteen years may be rebutted if, at the time of the commission of the crime for which such child is charged, the child was sufficiently mature (a) to understand that his or her conduct was unlawful or morally wrong; and (b) to be capable of conforming with the requirements of the law. (2) Subsection (1) shall apply to all crimes, whether or not any form of intention, knowledge, realisation or negligence is required for their commission. (3) In deciding, for the purposes of subsection (1), whether or not a child was sufficiently mature to have the understanding and capacity referred to in that subsection, a court shall take into account the following factors, in addition to any others that are relevant in the particular case (a) the nature of the crime with which the child is charged; and (b) the child’s general maturity and family background; and (c) the child’s knowledge, education and experience; and (d) the child’s behaviour before, during and after the conduct which forms the subject of the charge. (4) Where a child who is of or over the age of seven years but under the age of fourteen years does or omits to do anything in the presence of an older person whom in all the circumstances the child would be expected to obey, it shall be presumed, in any criminal proceedings arising out of that conduct, that the child was acting under compulsion from that older person, unless the contrary is proved. (5) For the purposes of subsection (4), a child shall be deemed to be in the presence of an older person if the older person is so placed as to be able to control the child’s conduct. 231 Attorney-General to authorise prosecutions of children under fourteen years No proceedings in respect of any crime shall be instituted or continued against any person who is under the age of fourteen years, other than proceedings for the purposes of remand, without the authority of the AttorneyGeneral. PART VII M ISTAKE OR IGNORANCE OF F ACT 232 Interpretation in Part VII of Chapter XIV In this Part “essential fact”, in relation to a crime, means any fact or factual circumstance which relates to an essential element of the crime; “ignorance”, in relation to a fact, means complete lack of knowledge that the fact exists; “mistake”, in relation to a fact, means an erroneous impression concerning that fact. 233 When mistake or ignorance of fact a defence to subjective crimes (1) If a person does or omits to do anything which would be an essential element of a crime if done or omitted, as the case may be, with any form of intention, knowledge or realisation, the person shall have a complete defence to a charge of committing that crime if, when he or she did or omitted to do the thing, he or she was genuinely mistaken or ignorant as to an essential fact of the crime concerned. (2) Subject to this Code and any other enactment, mistake or ignorance of an essential fact may be a defence to a crime referred to in subsection (1) even if it is not reasonable: Provided that the reasonableness or unreasonableness of any mistake or ignorance may be taken into account in determining whether or not it is genuine. 234 When mistake or ignorance of fact a defence to objective crimes If a person does or omits to do anything which would be an essential element of a crime if done or omitted, as the case may be, negligently, the person shall have a complete defence to a charge of committing that crime if (a) when he or she did or omitted to do the thing, he or she was genuinely mistaken or ignorant as to an essential fact of the crime concerned; and (b) the person’s mistake or ignorance of that essential fact was reasonable in all the circumstances. PART VIII M ISTAKE OR IGNORANCE OF LAW 235 Interpretation in Part VIII of Chapter XIV In this Part