{"title":"(In)非法资助议会活动与贿赂罪的相容性(第2条)。248及以下(CP)","authors":"Gonzalo García Palominos","doi":"10.4067/S0718-33992019000100122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"espanolEste articulo problematiza la tesis sostenida por organismos publicos de persecucion penal de solucionar los posibles vacios de punibilidad anteriores (y probablemente tambien, posteriores) a la entrada en vigencia de la Ley N° 20.900 sobre financiamiento irregular de la politica, utilizando los tipos penales de cohecho de los arts. 248 y ss. del Codigo Penal. El articulo ofrece una reconstruccion del injusto tipico del delito de cohecho (de lege lata), confirmando la opcion del legislador por el “modelo del acuerdo ilicito”. Se llega a la conclusion que dicho modelo regulatorio es, por regla general, incompatible con la comprension tipica de las constelaciones de financiamiento irregular o ilegal de la politica de parlamentarios o congresistas. La solucion a aquellos vacios exigiria una modificacion legal que hoy no esta contemplada en la legislacion chilena. EnglishThis article examines the thesis of by the Attorney General’s Office to solve possible punitive gaps, that have existed before (and probably after) the inforce of Law No. 20.900 on politics’ irregular financing, using the criminal offenses of bribery of arts. 248 et seq. of the Criminal Code. The article offers a reconstruction of the crime of bribery (de lege lata), confirming the option of the legislator toward the \" illicit agreement model\". It is concluded that said regulatory model is, as a general rule, incompatible with the common understanding of irregular or illegal financing constellations of parliamentarian’s policy. The solution to those gaps would require a legal modification that is not currently contemplated in Chilean legislation.","PeriodicalId":38693,"journal":{"name":"Politica Criminal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(In)compatibilidad del financiamiento ilegal de la actividad parlamentaria con el delito de cohecho (art. 248 y ss. CP)\",\"authors\":\"Gonzalo García Palominos\",\"doi\":\"10.4067/S0718-33992019000100122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"espanolEste articulo problematiza la tesis sostenida por organismos publicos de persecucion penal de solucionar los posibles vacios de punibilidad anteriores (y probablemente tambien, posteriores) a la entrada en vigencia de la Ley N° 20.900 sobre financiamiento irregular de la politica, utilizando los tipos penales de cohecho de los arts. 248 y ss. del Codigo Penal. El articulo ofrece una reconstruccion del injusto tipico del delito de cohecho (de lege lata), confirmando la opcion del legislador por el “modelo del acuerdo ilicito”. Se llega a la conclusion que dicho modelo regulatorio es, por regla general, incompatible con la comprension tipica de las constelaciones de financiamiento irregular o ilegal de la politica de parlamentarios o congresistas. La solucion a aquellos vacios exigiria una modificacion legal que hoy no esta contemplada en la legislacion chilena. EnglishThis article examines the thesis of by the Attorney General’s Office to solve possible punitive gaps, that have existed before (and probably after) the inforce of Law No. 20.900 on politics’ irregular financing, using the criminal offenses of bribery of arts. 248 et seq. of the Criminal Code. The article offers a reconstruction of the crime of bribery (de lege lata), confirming the option of the legislator toward the \\\" illicit agreement model\\\". It is concluded that said regulatory model is, as a general rule, incompatible with the common understanding of irregular or illegal financing constellations of parliamentarian’s policy. The solution to those gaps would require a legal modification that is not currently contemplated in Chilean legislation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politica Criminal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politica Criminal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33992019000100122\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politica Criminal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33992019000100122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
西班牙这篇文章质疑公共刑事诉讼机构所持的论点,即利用艺术的刑事贿赂类型,解决关于非法资助政治的第20900号法律生效之前(可能也是之后)可能存在的应受惩罚的空白。248及以下。刑法。该条重建了贿赂犯罪的不公正类型(De Lege Lata),确认了立法者对“非法协议模式”的选择。得出的结论是,这种监管模式通常不符合对议员或国会议员政策中非法或非法融资星座的典型理解。解决这些空白需要法律修改,而智利法律今天没有考虑到这一点。这篇文章审查了总检察长办公室的论文,以解决可能存在的惩罚性差距,这些差距是在(可能是在)关于利用贿赂艺术的刑事犯罪为政治提供非法融资的第20900号法律报告之前(可能是之后)存在的。248等。刑法。该条对贿赂罪进行了重建,确认了立法者对“非法协议模式”的选择。结论是,上述监管模式作为一项一般规则,不符合对议会政策中非法或非法融资星座的共同理解。解决这些差距需要对智利立法目前没有考虑的法律进行修改。
(In)compatibilidad del financiamiento ilegal de la actividad parlamentaria con el delito de cohecho (art. 248 y ss. CP)
espanolEste articulo problematiza la tesis sostenida por organismos publicos de persecucion penal de solucionar los posibles vacios de punibilidad anteriores (y probablemente tambien, posteriores) a la entrada en vigencia de la Ley N° 20.900 sobre financiamiento irregular de la politica, utilizando los tipos penales de cohecho de los arts. 248 y ss. del Codigo Penal. El articulo ofrece una reconstruccion del injusto tipico del delito de cohecho (de lege lata), confirmando la opcion del legislador por el “modelo del acuerdo ilicito”. Se llega a la conclusion que dicho modelo regulatorio es, por regla general, incompatible con la comprension tipica de las constelaciones de financiamiento irregular o ilegal de la politica de parlamentarios o congresistas. La solucion a aquellos vacios exigiria una modificacion legal que hoy no esta contemplada en la legislacion chilena. EnglishThis article examines the thesis of by the Attorney General’s Office to solve possible punitive gaps, that have existed before (and probably after) the inforce of Law No. 20.900 on politics’ irregular financing, using the criminal offenses of bribery of arts. 248 et seq. of the Criminal Code. The article offers a reconstruction of the crime of bribery (de lege lata), confirming the option of the legislator toward the " illicit agreement model". It is concluded that said regulatory model is, as a general rule, incompatible with the common understanding of irregular or illegal financing constellations of parliamentarian’s policy. The solution to those gaps would require a legal modification that is not currently contemplated in Chilean legislation.