{"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}
引用次数: 0
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.