Benthamite Reflections on Codification of the General Principles of Criminal Liability: Towards the Panopticon

I. Leader-Elliott
{"title":"Benthamite Reflections on Codification of the General Principles of Criminal Liability: Towards the Panopticon","authors":"I. Leader-Elliott","doi":"10.1525/NCLR.2006.9.2.391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 of the Australian Commonwealth Criminal Code codifies the general principles of criminal liability. All federal criminal offenses, whether or not they appear in the substantive chapters of the Code, are subject to its provisions. Chapter 2 is based on article 2 of the American Model Penal Code and the equivalent general part of the UK Draft Criminal Code. It is, however, a more completely articulated statement of the elements of liability than either of its predecessors. This paper examines the relationship between physical and fault elements in chapter 2. It takes a Benthamite view of its provisions. Though chapter 2 was conceived as a legislative restatement of common law principles of criminal justice it can be expected to play a more significant role as a manual of instructions for the expression of legislative intentions. Chapter 2 enables the legislature to reclaim from courts the authority to define the grounds of criminal liability. There remain, however, areas of uncertainty resulting from the mismatch between the articulate clarity of most chapter 2 provisions and others that envisage the exercise of unstructured judicial discretion. Two issues in particular are discussed: liability for ulterior intentions and the effect of error or ignorance of law on criminal responsibility. The paper proposes enactment of a defense of reasonable mistake of law as a supplement to chapter 2. It concludes with an expression of hope that Australian criminal law theory might be based on a more unified consideration of legisprudence and common law.","PeriodicalId":344882,"journal":{"name":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Buffalo Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/NCLR.2006.9.2.391","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Chapter 2 of the Australian Commonwealth Criminal Code codifies the general principles of criminal liability. All federal criminal offenses, whether or not they appear in the substantive chapters of the Code, are subject to its provisions. Chapter 2 is based on article 2 of the American Model Penal Code and the equivalent general part of the UK Draft Criminal Code. It is, however, a more completely articulated statement of the elements of liability than either of its predecessors. This paper examines the relationship between physical and fault elements in chapter 2. It takes a Benthamite view of its provisions. Though chapter 2 was conceived as a legislative restatement of common law principles of criminal justice it can be expected to play a more significant role as a manual of instructions for the expression of legislative intentions. Chapter 2 enables the legislature to reclaim from courts the authority to define the grounds of criminal liability. There remain, however, areas of uncertainty resulting from the mismatch between the articulate clarity of most chapter 2 provisions and others that envisage the exercise of unstructured judicial discretion. Two issues in particular are discussed: liability for ulterior intentions and the effect of error or ignorance of law on criminal responsibility. The paper proposes enactment of a defense of reasonable mistake of law as a supplement to chapter 2. It concludes with an expression of hope that Australian criminal law theory might be based on a more unified consideration of legisprudence and common law.
边沁对刑事责任一般原则法典化的思考:走向圆形监狱
《澳大利亚联邦刑法》第2章规定了刑事责任的一般原则。所有联邦刑事犯罪,无论是否出现在法典的实质性章节中,均受其规定的约束。第二章以美国《示范刑法典》第2条和英国《刑法草案》的一般部分为基础。但是,它比前两部都更完整地阐明了责任要素。本文在第二章探讨了物理元素和故障元素之间的关系。它采用了边沁主义的观点。虽然第2章被认为是对普通法刑事司法原则的立法重述,但可以预期,作为表达立法意图的指导手册,它将发挥更重要的作用。第二章使立法机关能够从法院收回确定刑事责任理由的权力。然而,由于第2章大多数规定的清晰表述与设想行使非结构化司法裁量权的其他规定之间的不匹配,仍然存在不确定的领域。特别讨论了两个问题:别有用心的责任和错误或法律无知对刑事责任的影响。本文建议设置合理法律错误抗辩,作为对第二章的补充。最后,它表示希望澳大利亚刑法理论可以建立在对立法和普通法的更统一考虑的基础上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信