Culpability in Criminal Law The diploma thesis deals with the topic of culpability in criminal law, which is an obligatory attribute of the subjective aspect of the criminal offence. It characterizes the offender's psyche in relation to the criminal offence. In Czech criminal law, the principle of liability for fault (nullum crimen sine culpa), according to which there is no crime without fault, applies. The diploma thesis is divided into five chapters. The first chapter is focused on the general introduction; in which the crime and its merits are discussed. The largest part is left to the interpretation of the subjective aspect of the criminal offence and its obligatory and facultative characteristics. The chapter concludes with a treatise on the concept of guilt in criminal law. The second chapter deals with the historical development of the institute of culpability in the criminal codes, which used to be applicable in our territory, from the period defined by the applicability of the Act on Crimes, Offenses and Misdemeanours to the Criminal Code of 1961, which was replaced in 2010 by the current Criminal Code. The third chapter deals with the current regulation of culpability in criminal law, the most part is left to the general characteristics of the regulation of culpability in the applicable...

Culpability in criminal law Abstract The topic of this diploma thesis is culpability in criminal law. Culpability is a traditional institute of substantive criminal law and is an obligatory feature of the subjective aspect of a criminal offense. It expresses the internal psychological relationship of the perpetrator to the facts constituting the crime. Criminal liability in the legal system of the Czech Republic is based on the principle of liability for fault. If actual facts relevant from the point of view of criminal law are not covered by the culpability of the perpetrator, his criminal liability cannot be inferred. The thesis is divided into an introduction, 6 chapters and a conclusion. In order to understand the position of culpability within the structure of criminal offense, the first chapter defines the concept of a crime as a whole and its individual features. A general characteristic of the institute of culpability is offered in chapter two. It discusses the principle of liability for fault and the definitional features of culpability, including its individual components, i.e. the consciousness and volitional components, as well as the content of culpability, its degree, and procedural aspects, including the proving of culpability in criminal law. The central chapter of this diploma thesis is...

Diese Diplomarbeit beschäftigt sich mit dem Irrtum im Strafrecht und seine Problematik. Zweck der Arbeit ist die Wichtigkeit von diesem strafrechtlichen Institut zu betonen und seine Rolle im Rahmen des Strafrechts klarzustellen. Daraus entspringt auch seine sehr enge Verbindung zwischen dem Irrtum und dem Grundsatz der Subsidiarität der Strafrepression, auf welchen muss man in einigen Fällen des Rechtirrtums eine besondere Rücksicht nehmen. Der Irrtum des Straftäters ist für die Rechtstheorie wesentlich. Und es hat eine große Bedeutung auch für den Täter, weil es Einfluss auf seine strafrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit hat. In dem ersten Teil definiere ich erstens einige Begriffe, die wesentlich für das Verständnis des Irrtums sind und auf welche wir nicht verzichten können. In dem ersten Kapitel geht es um den Straftat. In dem zweiten Kapitel verlege ich mich mit der subjektiven Seite der Straftat und mit den Begriffen wie das Verschulden, der Vorsatz, die Fahrlässigkeit, der Versuch, die Vorbereitu ngshandlung und Weitere, also die meist mit Zusammenhang mit dem Strafrechtirrtum verwendeten Begriffe. In dem dritten Kapitel stelle ich kurz auch die Umstände, die die Widerrechtlichkeit beseitigen, vor. Kurzgefasst zahle ich auf, um welche es geht und was wir uns unter diese Begriffe vorstellen...

O presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar as implicações, na estrutura de imputação penal, das recentes pesquisas em neurociência voltadas a investigar os processos de formação da vontade no cérebro humano. Considerando-se que, dos resultados de experimentos acerca do funcionamento do sistema nervoso central, alguns pesquisadores têm interpretado que as condutas humanas são desencadeadas a partir de processos determinísticos, e não originadas da vontade livre do indivíduo, busca-se verificar de que maneira tais conclusões impactam a responsabilidade penal, notadamente no que diz respeito à culpabilidade, uma vez que sua concepção tradicional e consolidada está fundamentada fortemente na ideia de livre-arbítrio. Com esse escopo, valendo-se do método teórico-bibliográfico, o trabalho se desenvolve em três grandes etapas. Assim, primeiramente, visa-se compreender a relação entre culpabilidade e livre-arbítrio, inicialmente expondo-se de que maneira o primeiro conceito arrogou o segundo como pressuposto no decorrer de seu desenvolvimento epistemológico, para tornar possível, depois de realizada uma análise das razões da consolidação - e da posterior crise - de sua concepção normativa no pensamento penal, examinar quais são (e se são firmes e coerentes) as alternativas teóricas a esse conceito apresentadas pela doutrina contemporânea. Em seguida, volta-se ao estudo da relação entre livre-arbítrio e neurociências. Nessa etapa, investiga-se a natureza dos argumentos utilizados pelos penalistas tanto para sustentar, quanto para refutar a ancoragem da responsabilização penal no livre-arbítrio, examinando-se, ainda, eventuais fragilidades e inconsistências, além dos possíveis aportes que as pesquisas em neurociência podem lhes proporcionar. Tudo isso, com o intuito de se verificar se o advento da neurociência representa uma mudança de paradigma na polêmica em torno da liberdade de vontade. Na fase final do trabalho, o estudo é orientado a traçar um esboço do futuro da responsabilização penal em face dos aportes da neurociência, analisando-se se representam (ou não) o fim da culpabilidade na estrutura de imputação e, além disso, qual o modelo de punição mais adequado tendo-se como parâmetro as finalidades da pena aos postulados neurocientíficos. / The goal of this study is to analyze the implications on criminal liability of the recent researches in the field of neuroscience that relates to will-formation in human brains. Taking into account that some researchers have interpreted, based on experiments about the functioning of the central nervous system, that human behavior become from deterministic processes, instead of the free will of the person, we aim to verify in what ways those conclusions affects the criminal liability. The focus of the review is on criminal culpability, whose traditional concept is based on the idea of free will. With three major portions, the thesis is developed by the bibliographic method. At first, the target is to understand the relationship between criminal culpability and free will and how that one is grounded on this one. Then, after the analysis of the reasons of the consolidation, and subsequent crisis, of the normative concept of culpability among the criminal authors, the purpose is to assay the theoretic alternatives to this notion that are provide by the contemporary doctrine. After that, the work follows with the study of the relationship between free will and neuroscience. At this stage, we investigate the nature of the arguments used by criminalists both to support and to refute the anchor of the criminal liability in free will. We also examine possible weaknesses and inconsistencies, as well as likely contributions that research in neuroscience can provide them. All this in order to verify if the advent of neuroscience represents a paradigm shift in the controversy surrounding free will. In the final phase of the work, there is the attempt to draw a sketch of the future of criminal responsibility in light of the contributions of neuroscience. Thus, we analyze whether these represent (or not) the end of culpability in the structure of criminal liability and what is the most appropriate punishment model to neuroscientific postulates, taking as parameter the purposes of the penalty.

Culpability in criminal law Abstract The culpability is fundamental institute of the Czech criminal law, because it is mandatory attribute of the subjective aspect of the criminal offence. The culpability is necessary to fulfill any of the facts of the criminal offence as the fundamental principle of liability for fault, which implies that there is not a criminal offence without fault. This thesis deals with the culpability in criminal law and is divided into six chapters, including introduction and conclusion. The introduction is followed by the chapter about general introduction, namely the placement of the culpability in the facts of the criminal offence. In this section the differences between the fault and culpability are explained, and it deals in detail with the content of the culpability, which means the extent of the facts included by culpability. This chapter is also concerned with the intensity and degree of individual form of culpability known as degree of culpability. In addition to the above, this chapter includes also a section dedicated to the matter of proving the culpability in the criminal law. The next chapter summarizes the historical development of culpability. Starting with the Act on Crimes, Offences and Misdemeanors (1852), the Criminal Code od 1950, the Criminal Code of 1961 and...

A expansão do Direito Penal é um fenômeno jurídico da pós-modernidade que se encontra intrinsecamente relacionado com a configuração da sociedade atual como sociedade de riscos. Tal conjuntura social, política, tecnológica, econômica e, inevitavelmente, jurídica afeta a construção dos institutos dogmático-penais. Neste diapasão é possível observar novidades na realidade dogmática: o surgimento ou incremento dos crimes de perigo abstrato, o aumento da relevância da omissão, bens jurídicos supra-individuais, discussão sobre a responsabilidade penal da pessoa jurídica, dentre outros. O efeito deste novo contexto social expansivo da punição não implica apenas o surgimento de novas estruturas dogmáticas, mas, também, ocasiona a reconstrução das categorias dogmático-penais clássicas. A culpabilidade é um instituto pré-existente que enfrenta modificações de natureza semântica, ou seja, não está sendo construída no afã da novidade, mas reconstruída silenciosamente sob o manto dos costumes. Este estudo busca lançar luzes sobre a reconstrução histórica e funcional da culpabilidade, analisando e valorando as alterações práticas e teóricas sofridas pelo citado instituto no contexto da expansão penal na sociedade de risco. Para tal, o plano teórico condutor será o funcionalismo penal, que constitui escola de expressiva representatividade na pós-modernidade por coadunar-se com o momento histórico atual. O marco teórico específico será a obra de Günther Jakobs, em razão de a vertente funcionalista sistêmica deste autor estar alinhada com uma perspectiva funcional do Direito. O objetivo central do presente trabalho científico será, justamente, analisar em que medida confundir culpabilidade com prevenção geral positiva para atender anseios sociais de confirmação jurídica comunicativa, como faz Günther Jakobs, se coaduna com as funções da culpabilidade em um Estado Democrático de Direito. Assim, com a análise crítica da obra de Günther Jakobs, busca-se reconstruir o instituto da culpabilidade a partir de sua função histórica de valorização do indivíduo oriunda da subjetivação da responsabilidade e limitação da punição. / The expansion of the Criminal Law is a post modernity juridical phenomenon that is deeply related to risk society. This social, political, technological, economical context affects the criminal legal institutions. It is possible, in this situation, observing news concerning dogmatic reality: the emergence of abstract danger crimes, the increase of omission´s relevance, diffuse juridical estate, discussion about the responsibility of companies, among other effects. The effect of this expansive new social context of punishment, not only implies the emergence of dogmatic news, but also affects the reconstruction of the classic dogmatic categories. Culpability is an pre-existing institute in criminal doctrine that faces semantics changes. In other words, culpability is not built by post modernity changes, but it is quietly rebuilt under customs. This study aims to illuminate this reality of culpability reconstruction in post modernity, by analyzing the changes in culpability institute caused by criminal expansion in risk society. In order to accomplish that, the leading theory for the study will be the criminal functionalism, which is a representative criminal school of post modernity because of its consistency of the current historical moment. The specific theoretical framework is Günther Jakobss work, as this systemic functionalism author is related to a post-modern functional law tendency. The central goal of this work will be analyzing to what extent mistaking culpability for general positive prevention, in order to apply social anxiety of juridical communicative confirmation, as Günther Jakobs does, respecting the functions of culpability in a democracy or not. In this way, with a critical analysis of Günther Jakobs´s work, this study pursues the reconstruction of culpability through the historical function of the individuals appreciation, arising from subjective responsibility and punishment limitation.

This thesis investigates the relationship between our rational capacities and the norms that govern our practice of blame. The conclusion it reaches is rather shocking: it is impossible to satisfy the conditions of blameworthiness. The argument that reaches this conclusion is what I call an internal criticism. Unlike other skeptical arguments about moral responsibility, the one advanced in this thesis does not depend on any metaphysical theses external to the theory of blame. The thesis begins by looking at a position I call rational capacity compatibilism (RCC). My interest in RCC concerns the fact that it has done more than any other theory of responsibility to set out the relationship between our rational capacities and the practice of blame. I use the most well developed RCC view—that of R. Jay Wallace—as the backdrop for the skeptical argument that follows I next defend a recent argument advanced by Gideon Rosen according to which an agent cannot be blameworthy for a given act if akrasia does not occur somewhere in the act's etiology. This serves as the first major premise in my skeptical argument. Next, I turn to the second major premise of my argument, which is comprised of two controversial claims. The first is that akrasia results from a failure in one's rational capacities. The second is that an agent cannot be blameworthy for committing any act that results from a failure in his or her rational capacities. Together, these two claims produce the following premise: when an agent acts akratically she cannot be blameworthy for that act. Now, for any given act, either akrasia occurs in that act's etiology or it does not. If it does not, then the agent in question is not blameworthy (first premise); but if akrasia does occur in the act's etiology, then the agent in question is still not blameworthy (second premise). It follows that for any given act, the agent who performs that act cannot be blameworthy for so acting. I end with a brief discussion of what I call "the moral up-shot" of my skeptical argument: what does a world without blame look like? I suggest, contra the main party line (often associated with P.F. Strawson), that blame is not a requirement for significant and meaningful interpersonal relationships, nor is it a necessary component of morality.

Šiame darbe analizuojamas kaltės formos nustatymas Lietuvos Respublikos teismuose esant panašioms nusikalstamų veikų aplinkybėms, tačiau kilus skirtingiems padariniams bylose žmogaus gyvybei ir sveikatai. Darbe analizuojami kaltės turinio kriterijai, kuriais remiantis yra nustatoma kaltės forma ir rūšis. Taipogi darbe bandoma ištirti kokie turėtų būti universalūs bei objektyvūs kaltės turinio kriterijai, kuriais remiantis būtų galima nešališkai ir objektyviai nustatyti tikslią kaltės formą bylose žmogaus gyvybei ir sveikatai. Galiausiai bandoma išsiaiškinti, ar nusikalstamos veikos padariniai neįtakoja kaltės formos nustatymo. Pirmoje dalyje analizuojami ir nustatomi kaltės turinio kriterijai, kurie lemia kaltės formos nustatymą. Antroje dalyje analizuojama Lietuvos Respublikos teismų praktika siekiant nustatyti kokią reikšmę šie kriterijai turi nustatant kaltės formą bylose žmogaus gyvybei ir sveikatai, taip pat aiškinamasi, ar nusikalstamos veikos padariniai neįtakoja kaltės formos nustatymo. / This work analyzes the determination of culpability of the Republic of Lithuania courts in similar circumstances of the offenses, but in case of different consequences of the offense in cases of human life and health. The work analyzes the criterions of the fault content, which determines fault’s form and type. Also, the work attempts to explore what criterions of the fault content should be universal and objective, which impartially and objectively would allow determining the exact form of fault in human life and health cases. Finally, there is an attempt to find out whether the consequences of the offense do not affect the form of the determination of fault. Culpability in matters of human life and health recently raises a number of debates not only on the academic level, but also in the courts of the Republic of Lithuania, since the determination of culpability is very important in criminal law for the legal process. Incorrect determination of culpability adversely affects not only the fate of the accused, but the whole society, as society is interested that the criminals would be respectively punished and would respect society’s protected values such as human health or life. Thus if the fault is determined incorrectly, then it will not pursue justice. Eventually, legislature formed harsh penalties for the offenses that are committed with intent, as a deliberate offense is always regarded as more dangerous and more serious than negligent homicide. A person who acts... [to full text]

O presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar as implicações, na estrutura de imputação penal, das recentes pesquisas em neurociência voltadas a investigar os processos de formação da vontade no cérebro humano. Considerando-se que, dos resultados de experimentos acerca do funcionamento do sistema nervoso central, alguns pesquisadores têm interpretado que as condutas humanas são desencadeadas a partir de processos determinísticos, e não originadas da vontade livre do indivíduo, busca-se verificar de que maneira tais conclusões impactam a responsabilidade penal, notadamente no que diz respeito à culpabilidade, uma vez que sua concepção tradicional e consolidada está fundamentada fortemente na ideia de livre-arbítrio. Com esse escopo, valendo-se do método teórico-bibliográfico, o trabalho se desenvolve em três grandes etapas. Assim, primeiramente, visa-se compreender a relação entre culpabilidade e livre-arbítrio, inicialmente expondo-se de que maneira o primeiro conceito arrogou o segundo como pressuposto no decorrer de seu desenvolvimento epistemológico, para tornar possível, depois de realizada uma análise das razões da consolidação - e da posterior crise - de sua concepção normativa no pensamento penal, examinar quais são (e se são firmes e coerentes) as alternativas teóricas a esse conceito apresentadas pela doutrina contemporânea. Em seguida, volta-se ao estudo da relação entre livre-arbítrio e neurociências. Nessa etapa, investiga-se a natureza dos argumentos utilizados pelos penalistas tanto para sustentar, quanto para refutar a ancoragem da responsabilização penal no livre-arbítrio, examinando-se, ainda, eventuais fragilidades e inconsistências, além dos possíveis aportes que as pesquisas em neurociência podem lhes proporcionar. Tudo isso, com o intuito de se verificar se o advento da neurociência representa uma mudança de paradigma na polêmica em torno da liberdade de vontade. Na fase final do trabalho, o estudo é orientado a traçar um esboço do futuro da responsabilização penal em face dos aportes da neurociência, analisando-se se representam (ou não) o fim da culpabilidade na estrutura de imputação e, além disso, qual o modelo de punição mais adequado tendo-se como parâmetro as finalidades da pena aos postulados neurocientíficos. / The goal of this study is to analyze the implications on criminal liability of the recent researches in the field of neuroscience that relates to will-formation in human brains. Taking into account that some researchers have interpreted, based on experiments about the functioning of the central nervous system, that human behavior become from deterministic processes, instead of the free will of the person, we aim to verify in what ways those conclusions affects the criminal liability. The focus of the review is on criminal culpability, whose traditional concept is based on the idea of free will. With three major portions, the thesis is developed by the bibliographic method. At first, the target is to understand the relationship between criminal culpability and free will and how that one is grounded on this one. Then, after the analysis of the reasons of the consolidation, and subsequent crisis, of the normative concept of culpability among the criminal authors, the purpose is to assay the theoretic alternatives to this notion that are provide by the contemporary doctrine. After that, the work follows with the study of the relationship between free will and neuroscience. At this stage, we investigate the nature of the arguments used by criminalists both to support and to refute the anchor of the criminal liability in free will. We also examine possible weaknesses and inconsistencies, as well as likely contributions that research in neuroscience can provide them. All this in order to verify if the advent of neuroscience represents a paradigm shift in the controversy surrounding free will. In the final phase of the work, there is the attempt to draw a sketch of the future of criminal responsibility in light of the contributions of neuroscience. Thus, we analyze whether these represent (or not) the end of culpability in the structure of criminal liability and what is the most appropriate punishment model to neuroscientific postulates, taking as parameter the purposes of the penalty.

A expansão do Direito Penal é um fenômeno jurídico da pós-modernidade que se encontra intrinsecamente relacionado com a configuração da sociedade atual como sociedade de riscos. Tal conjuntura social, política, tecnológica, econômica e, inevitavelmente, jurídica afeta a construção dos institutos dogmático-penais. Neste diapasão é possível observar novidades na realidade dogmática: o surgimento ou incremento dos crimes de perigo abstrato, o aumento da relevância da omissão, bens jurídicos supra-individuais, discussão sobre a responsabilidade penal da pessoa jurídica, dentre outros. O efeito deste novo contexto social expansivo da punição não implica apenas o surgimento de novas estruturas dogmáticas, mas, também, ocasiona a reconstrução das categorias dogmático-penais clássicas. A culpabilidade é um instituto pré-existente que enfrenta modificações de natureza semântica, ou seja, não está sendo construída no afã da novidade, mas reconstruída silenciosamente sob o manto dos costumes. Este estudo busca lançar luzes sobre a reconstrução histórica e funcional da culpabilidade, analisando e valorando as alterações práticas e teóricas sofridas pelo citado instituto no contexto da expansão penal na sociedade de risco. Para tal, o plano teórico condutor será o funcionalismo penal, que constitui escola de expressiva representatividade na pós-modernidade por coadunar-se com o momento histórico atual. O marco teórico específico será a obra de Günther Jakobs, em razão de a vertente funcionalista sistêmica deste autor estar alinhada com uma perspectiva funcional do Direito. O objetivo central do presente trabalho científico será, justamente, analisar em que medida confundir culpabilidade com prevenção geral positiva para atender anseios sociais de confirmação jurídica comunicativa, como faz Günther Jakobs, se coaduna com as funções da culpabilidade em um Estado Democrático de Direito. Assim, com a análise crítica da obra de Günther Jakobs, busca-se reconstruir o instituto da culpabilidade a partir de sua função histórica de valorização do indivíduo oriunda da subjetivação da responsabilidade e limitação da punição. / The expansion of the Criminal Law is a post modernity juridical phenomenon that is deeply related to risk society. This social, political, technological, economical context affects the criminal legal institutions. It is possible, in this situation, observing news concerning dogmatic reality: the emergence of abstract danger crimes, the increase of omission´s relevance, diffuse juridical estate, discussion about the responsibility of companies, among other effects. The effect of this expansive new social context of punishment, not only implies the emergence of dogmatic news, but also affects the reconstruction of the classic dogmatic categories. Culpability is an pre-existing institute in criminal doctrine that faces semantics changes. In other words, culpability is not built by post modernity changes, but it is quietly rebuilt under customs. This study aims to illuminate this reality of culpability reconstruction in post modernity, by analyzing the changes in culpability institute caused by criminal expansion in risk society. In order to accomplish that, the leading theory for the study will be the criminal functionalism, which is a representative criminal school of post modernity because of its consistency of the current historical moment. The specific theoretical framework is Günther Jakobss work, as this systemic functionalism author is related to a post-modern functional law tendency. The central goal of this work will be analyzing to what extent mistaking culpability for general positive prevention, in order to apply social anxiety of juridical communicative confirmation, as Günther Jakobs does, respecting the functions of culpability in a democracy or not. In this way, with a critical analysis of Günther Jakobs´s work, this study pursues the reconstruction of culpability through the historical function of the individuals appreciation, arising from subjective responsibility and punishment limitation.