有不作为的罪行吗?悬而未决的误解

Q4 Social Sciences
Miguel Juan Ramón De Lezica
{"title":"有不作为的罪行吗?悬而未决的误解","authors":"Miguel Juan Ramón De Lezica","doi":"10.46553/prudentia.93.2022.pp.231-248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Detractors of the notion of crimes of action by omission affirm that it is a prohibited analogy that is harmful to the principle of legality. The solution, a specific type, or an equivalence clause. On the contrary, the location of the omission as a typical structure, or the doctrine of the action as the material assumption to be valued by the norm in the type, lead to an aporia that we understand is not resolved. If the omission must be located in the type; if, at the same time, we characterize the crime as a typical, unlawful and guilty action; the omission is not an action, therefore it is not a crime. Here an alternative is proposed from the doctrine of voluntariness as a formal cause of the human act. If voluntariness matters mastery of the act, we are as masters of acting and wanting as of not acting and not wanting.","PeriodicalId":36086,"journal":{"name":"Prudentia Iuris","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"¿Hay delitos de omisión? Un malentendido pendiente\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Juan Ramón De Lezica\",\"doi\":\"10.46553/prudentia.93.2022.pp.231-248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": Detractors of the notion of crimes of action by omission affirm that it is a prohibited analogy that is harmful to the principle of legality. The solution, a specific type, or an equivalence clause. On the contrary, the location of the omission as a typical structure, or the doctrine of the action as the material assumption to be valued by the norm in the type, lead to an aporia that we understand is not resolved. If the omission must be located in the type; if, at the same time, we characterize the crime as a typical, unlawful and guilty action; the omission is not an action, therefore it is not a crime. Here an alternative is proposed from the doctrine of voluntariness as a formal cause of the human act. If voluntariness matters mastery of the act, we are as masters of acting and wanting as of not acting and not wanting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36086,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prudentia Iuris\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prudentia Iuris\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46553/prudentia.93.2022.pp.231-248\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prudentia Iuris","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46553/prudentia.93.2022.pp.231-248","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

:不作为行为罪概念的批评者确认,这是一种被禁止的类比,有害于合法性原则。解决方案、特定类型或等价子句。相反,不作为作为作为一种典型结构的位置,或作为该类型规范所重视的物质假设的行为原则,导致了我们所理解的一种无法解决的aporia。如果遗漏必须位于类型中;同时,如果我们将犯罪定性为典型的、非法的和有罪的行为;不作为不是一种行为,因此不属于犯罪。在这里,从自愿原则中提出了一种替代方案,作为人类行为的正式原因。如果说自愿关系到对行为的掌握,那么我们就是行为和欲望的主人,就像不行为和不欲望的主人一样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
¿Hay delitos de omisión? Un malentendido pendiente
: Detractors of the notion of crimes of action by omission affirm that it is a prohibited analogy that is harmful to the principle of legality. The solution, a specific type, or an equivalence clause. On the contrary, the location of the omission as a typical structure, or the doctrine of the action as the material assumption to be valued by the norm in the type, lead to an aporia that we understand is not resolved. If the omission must be located in the type; if, at the same time, we characterize the crime as a typical, unlawful and guilty action; the omission is not an action, therefore it is not a crime. Here an alternative is proposed from the doctrine of voluntariness as a formal cause of the human act. If voluntariness matters mastery of the act, we are as masters of acting and wanting as of not acting and not wanting.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Prudentia Iuris
Prudentia Iuris Social Sciences-Law
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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