On The Punishableness Of Actio Libera In Causa

The reasons for the criminal law generally refers to the free exercise of the perpetrator intentionally or negligently no obligation to make ourselves into a limited liability capacity or ability of the state, and in this state, the implementation of criminal law in line with the behavior of constituent elements of crime. The theory originated in Germany, and then be carried forward in Japan. In recent years, the reasons for Liberty, especially the performance of the drunken, drug abuse, no obligation after the ability to remain trapped in the ability of state or limitation of liability under the criminal acts in large numbers in people's daily lives, it is harmful to society and no less than the general criminal offenses, but also seriously affected the normal social order, which caused widespread international concern about criminal law field to become a hot topic. China's traditional criminal law theory and the concept of Liberty is no reason, but in criminal law Paragraph Four of Article XVIII:"An intoxicated person who commits a crime shall bear criminal responsibility" that acts like punishment, it is clear that the legislation was the lack of clarity not adequately address the real problem, in theory, the support is insufficient.At present, many scholars have advocated civil law should be clear in the criminal law legislation in this area, certainly the reason can be fined Liberty, this criminal theory in the world, legislative and judicial affairs is also reflected. But admitted that the free exercise of reason can be fined as they are facing difficulties because of the principles of modern criminal law doctrine that the responsibility of the perpetrator have the responsibility to implement hazard behavior is punished according to ability, if the perpetrator is no obligation or limitation of liability capacity by capacity after the implementation of the harmful behavior, shall be exempt or reduce the punishment, therefore, is a crime not only illegal, but also has the responsibility, and this is the traditional view of criminal law, namely, the establishment should follow the crime "acts of Liability and implementation exist" principle. However, because freedoms of the occasion, the results of behavior is no obligation to capacity or limitation of liability under the state of implementation capacity, the result is against the legal interests only occur at this time, if the reason can be fined in accordance with the theory of free exercise, and you should bear full criminal responsibility, which is obviously the responsibility doctrine is contradictory requirements. So how to explain the reasons for the free exercise of whom may be fine principle of the relationship between Marxism and responsibility it In short, the reason can be fined based on principle and what the free exercise worth it Civil law scholars differ on this point, arguing. This article attempts to use comparative analysis and historical method, because the free exercise focuses on the theoretical basis for the penalty can be combined with Western criminal law and legislative practice in this theory, for the crime of criminal law provisions on defects drunk, except in the principle of responsibility made on the basis that a sound Paragraph Four of Article XIV of the Criminal Law of the legislative proposals.Paper is divided into three parts. The first part, the first cause of Liberty from the concept, a comparative analysis of the reasons for the concept of free exercise of broad and narrow sense, that made clear that I support the concept of generalized; then causes the origin and development of free exercise to start with the history Introduce the reason Liberty from the early to mid-aggravating the root causes of non-punishment, and then export the modern can be fined again necessary to establish its scientific. The second part is the full text of key chapters. First, the reason can be fined by introducing the characteristics of Liberty, in-depth understanding of responsibility for the content of Marxist principles, in understanding the basis of comparative analysis between the two does have a difficult to reconcile the contradictions and conflicts for the next step to better explain various theories doctrine to pave the way; Second, the principle of liability insisted that the principle of liability amendment, said exceptions to the principle of liability is the reason can be fined as a theory of free exercise doctrine of the three representative, through the author's introduction and critical analysis, that the exception to that adopted the principle of liability more appropriate, and made a systematic interpretation; Finally, the author of the reasons for the theory of free exercise of the most difficult aspects, you can fine the subjective reasons for the sins of the free exercise of identification and implementation of actions identified issues, in-depth discussion and analysis, so as to achieve accurate and can be identified as the cause of the free exercise of the purpose of punishment. The third part, first of all on the basis of the previous article discussed, through the focus on Switzerland, Germany, Poland and other countries to establish the reasons for the free exercise of criminal law can be fined for the specific provisions, summarized some of the legislative law; and then, in-depth interpretation of Article XVIII of the Criminal Code four provides that where the defects, and proposed to amend this provision, reference to legislation of the foreign mature to be penalty free exercise of reason as the basis for the theory, combined with the specific situation of China put forward specific legislative proposals.