Bien que constituant un élément essentiel à tout régime de responsabilité, la notion imputation n’a engendré qu’un nombre très réduit d’études en matière de responsabilité des personnes publiques. Cette recherche s’attachera à démontrer tant l’importance du rôle joué par l’imputation que la pertinence d’une approche visant à appréhender la responsabilité par le prisme de l’opération d’imputation. Loin de se résumer à un simple aspect technique tenant à la détermination du patrimoine responsable, la problématique de l’imputation nous semble à même de permettre l’émergence d’une réflexion plus générale sur la responsabilité elle-même. En effet, parce qu’elle permet de désigner la personne débitrice de la dette de responsabilité, l’opération d’imputation correspond toujours à une prise de position sur la fonction de la responsabilité. Que celle-ci désigne l’auteur du fait générateur ou toute autre personne n’est jamais anodin. Permettant de répondre à la question de savoir pourquoi une personne est responsable, l’étude de l’imputation permet également de découvrir le fondement de la responsabilité. Plus encore, il nous sera possible de constater que le choix d’une modalité d’imputation n’est jamais neutre et induit toujours des conséquences perceptibles sur la physionomie des régimes juridiques des diverses hypothèses de responsabilité. Par le prisme de l’imputation, il nous semble donc possible de proposer une réflexion permettant de saisir la fonction de la responsabilité, d’expliquer l’existence d’une grande diversité de régimes juridiques et, surtout, de proposer une classification des hypothèses de responsabilité prenant appui sur la logique interne qui les anime. / Although every attribution system constitutes a key element regarding the matter of liability in the public sector, the concept of imputation has only been the object of a few studies. Our research shows both the importance of the role played by the notion of imputation and the relevance of an approach which would examine the concept of liability through the imputation process. Far from constituting a simple technical tool employed to ascertain the source of liability, the notion of imputation seems to promote the emergence of a wider inquiry regarding liability itself. Indeed, because this notion serves to indicate the debtor of liability, the process of imputation always indicates a statement of views on the function of liability. The utilization of this device is never inconsequential whether it is used to designate the author of the causal event or any other person. Studying the concept of imputation does both answer the question as to why someone can be held accountable and uncover the founding principles of liability. Furthermore, it will come to our understanding that the selection of a particular method of indictment is never neutral and always involves consequences in regards to the physiognomy of the legal status of the various hypotheses of liability. By analyzing the function of liability through the lens of indictment we can grasp its meaning and thus explain the reason behind the wide diversity of legal regimes and above all, offer a classification of the various hypotheses of liability which would rely on their own internal logic.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:20:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fabricio de Carvalho Serafini.pdf: 2174708 bytes, checksum: b4b0a81d724e6647978c41ed2cd174c0 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-04-23 / Starting with the forecast, in our positive law, about the extinguishing of the punshability of the tax crimes, for the tax payment (regardless of the time), we arrive at the conclusion that the criminal law is working as collecting agent of the tax law, what it opposes the characteristic of ultima ratio of the first one, characteristic this, pointed since its origins, until the present days, as basic with respect to the same, being one of its differentials for other branches of low. This show us that's more important for our State the payment of the tax then the punishment for who commit tax crimes. This coaction propagated by the accusation for tax crime ended showing very efficient, therefore it increased the tax collection, which will be argued in terms of the general theory of the law, once confirmed what we always defend, unique as characteristic of the complete rules of law, of the several species of norms, that is the forecast of a sanction, for the State, for the one who did not follow the law, imposed in coercitive way. This took us to study the sanction, as well as differentiating the coaction of the coercion, therefore the first one happens before the non compliance of the complete rule of law, threatening the expectation of a sanction, while the second one happens after the non compliance of the complete rule of law, being the application form of the sanction. Confirming our sanctionist idea, we look for the reasons of the fulfilment of many of the rules of law are given by the fear of the sanction, what took us to look for answers in psychology, more specifically in its analysis of the behavior stream (behaviourism), but for our surprise, this showed unfruitful. With this disillusionment, we went to search aid in an opposing chain, the psychoanalysis, more precisely in the ideas of its founder Sigmund Freud. Its ideas in social, cultural and anthropological terms, permeated for its fundamental concepts of the psychoanalysis, had supplied what we looked for, that is, the confirmation of that the human beings follow many norms due to the fear of its sanctions, what it strengthened our sanctionist idea of the law / Partindo da previsão, em nosso direito positivo, da extinção da punibilidade dos crimes tributários, pelo pagamento do tributo (independentemente do seu momento), chegamos à conclusão de que o direito penal está funcionando como agente arrecadador do direito tributário, o que contraria a característica de ultima ratio do primeiro, característica essa, apontada desde seus primórdios, até os dias de hoje, como fundamental para o mesmo, sendo um de seus diferenciais para os demais ramos do direito. Isso nos mostra que mais importa para o nosso Estado o pagamento do tributo do que a punição para os que cometem crimes tributários. Essa coação veiculada pela acusação por crime tributário acabou por se mostrar muito eficiente, pois aumentou a arrecadação tributária, o que será discutido em termos da teoria geral do direito, pois confirmou o que sempre defendemos, como característica diferenciadora das normas jurídicas completas, das demais espécies de normas, que é a previsão de uma sanção, pelo Estado, para seu descumpridor, imposta de maneira coercitiva. Isso nos levou a estudar a sanção, bem como diferenciar a coação da coerção, pois a primeira se dá antes do descumprimento da norma jurídica completa, ameaçando, pela previsão de uma sanção, ao passo que a segunda se dá após o descumprimento da norma jurídica completa, sendo a forma de aplicação da sanção. Ao confirmamos a nossa idéia sancionista, procuramos buscar os porquês do cumprimento de muitas das normas jurídicas se dar pelo temor da sanção, o que nos levou a buscar respostas na psicologia, mais especificamente na sua corrente análise do comportamento (behaviorismo), mas para nossa surpresa, isso se mostrou infrutífero. Com essa decepção, fomos buscar auxílio numa corrente oposta, a psicanálise, mais precisamente nas idéias de seu fundador Sigmund Freud. As suas idéias em termos sociais, culturais e antropológicos, permeadas por seus conceitos basilares da psicanálise, nos forneceram o que procurávamos, ou seja, a confirmação de que os seres humanos seguem muitas normas devido ao temor de suas sanções, o que reforçou a nossa idéia sancionista do direito

No description available.

Si la solidarité fait d’abord penser à une notion éminemment factuelle, elle est un concept juridique opérant en matière pénale. Bien qu’il s’agisse d’une modalité d’exécution d’une obligation civile, elle a été introduite au sein de notre système pénal par le législateur de 1810 qui entendait faire répondre à la solidarité morale dans l’infraction une solidarité matérielle dans la sanction. Or, loin de se limiter à son domaine originel, on la retrouve actuellement au sein de la matière pénale où elle inspire notamment les notions de solidarité criminelle, familiale et humaine ou encore de solidarité des amendes fiscales et douanières. Elle comporte ainsi différentes dimensions qui interagissent les unes avec les autres sans cohérence apparente. Pourtant, elle recouvre sous le même vocable deux réalités différentes et complémentaires. Elle se présente à la fois comme un sentiment moral qui relie les hommes et les oblige à des actes d’entraide et d’assistance mutuels et comme une technique juridique qui permet d’assurer le recouvrement d’une créance. Elle est une valeur sociale reconnue et protégée par le droit pénal en même temps qu’un mécanisme d’exécution d’une sanction pécuniaire prononcée à l’encontre de plusieurs auteurs. Désormais, de nombreuses dispositions l’intègrent au sein de différentes incriminations et en font un élément de la sanction. La solidarité se retrouve au cœur de la matière pénale où elle joue un rôle fondamental. Elle s’inscrit au soutien de valeurs sociales pénalement protégées et assure l’efficacité de la répression pénale en permettant le recouvrement des sanctions pécuniaires. Elle joue ainsi un rôle majeur au sein de notre système pénal / If solidarity first resembles a highly fact-concept, it is a legal concept operating in criminal matters. Although an implementation modality of a civil obligation, it was introduced into our penal system by the 1810 legislature intended to respond to the moral solidarity in the offense a material solidarity in the penalty. But far from being limited to its original domain, it is currently found in the criminal matters where she draws particularly the notions of solidarity criminal, family and human solidarity or of tax and customs fines. It has different dimensions and interacting with each other without apparent coherence. Yet it covers under the same word two different and complementary realities. It comes both as a moral sentiment that connects people and forces them to mutual acts of assistance and as a legal technique that ensures the recovery of a debt. She is a recognized social value protected by the criminal law as well as a delivery mechanism for a penalty imposed on a number of authors. Now, many provisions incorporate it in various offenses and make it a part of the penalty. Solidarity is at the heart of the criminal law where it plays a fundamental role. It falls to the support of criminally protected social values and ensures the effectiveness of criminal enforcement by allowing the recovery of financial penalties. It thus plays a major role in our criminal justice system

Qu’elle soit extranationale, transnationale ou internationale par nature, l’infraction internationale est toujours construite de la même manière : elle naît de la réunion d’un élément matériel et d’un élément moral, incluant parfois un élément contextuel. Cette constance structurelle dominant la diversité définitionnelle milite en faveur d’une unification des formes de la participation associées à ces infractions internationales : la spécificité de la participation à l’infraction internationale résiderait donc dans la spécificité, non des formes de la première, mais de la définition de la seconde. D’ailleurs, il n’existe que deux grands systèmes de participation applicables à l’infraction internationale : celui des juridictions pénales nationales et celui des juridictions pénales internationales. De leur comparaison, pourrait naître un système unique de participation à l’infraction internationale, permettant de mieux appréhender la criminalité collective en attribuant aux participants intellectuels une place plus juste au sein de la participation. En effet, après quelques adaptations nécessaires, il pourrait être fait appel au critère mixte du contrôle sur l’infraction internationale, développé récemment par la Cour pénale internationale, pour distinguer les formes principales des formes secondaires de la participation à l’infraction internationale. Ainsi, seraient des participants principaux les agents qui, avec l’état d’esprit idoine, prennent le contrôle de l’infraction internationale (coauteurs et auteurs intellectuels), tandis que seraient des participants secondaires les agents qui ne prennent pas un tel contrôle (complices par aide ou assistance et subordonnants). / Can it be extranational, transnational or international by nature, the international crime is always the same : it needs the reunion of a material element and a moral element, sometimes including a contextual element. This structural constancy, which dominates the definitional diversity, inclines us to campaign for the unification of the participation forms associated to the whole international crimes. In other words, the specifity of the participation in the international crime would be less due to the specifity of the first one’s forms than to the specifity of the second one’s definition. Now, there are only two grand systems of participation in the international crime : the one applied by the national criminal jurisdictions and the one applied by the international criminal jurisdictions. From the comparison of these two systems, it is possible to imagine a unique system of participation in the international crime, permitting a better understanding of the collective criminality by attributing a righter role to the intellectual participants within the participation. More precisely, and after a few necessary adaptations, control over the international crime, which is a mixed criterion recently developed by the International Criminal Court, could be used to distinguish the main forms from the secondary forms of participation in the international crime. Thus, main participants might be those who, with the suitable state of mind, take control over the international crime (co-perpetrators and intellectual perpetrators) while secondary participants might be those who don’t take such a control (accomplices by aid and assistance and “subordinators”).