Zasada określoności przepisów prawa karnego i strona podmiotowa a normy ostrożności (zagadnienia wybrane)

Abstract

The paper is devoted to the still unresolved question of the lack of compatibility between the objective and subjective side of the crime in respect to the norms of cautiousness. However clear it might be in the significant part of the continental legal systems that it is prohibited for a person to want to commit – as a result of their incautious behaviour – an act that is prohibited or that a person is positively obliged to foresee that their incautious behaviour might constitute a prohibited act, it is not certain what this premise of the incautiousness shall mean. This situation is not changed by the fact that there is a widespread consent that incautiousness is to be perceived as an infringement of a concrete norm of cautiousness. It leads to a situation when numerous authors in the literature of the subject, especially in the german science of criminal law, put in question the compatibility of the institution of the norms of cautiousness, and consequently of the entire construction of unintentional crimes, with the nullum crimen sine lege certa principle. There are also proposed various solutions to this problem, starting from an idea of entirely discarding norms of cautiousness to the proposition of their pro-constitutional interpretation. In this paper an attempt has been made to present the disadvantages of the existing answers to this problem and to propose a new solution to this unresolved in the science of substantial criminal law issue.

Keywords

• criminal law
• nullum crimen sine lege certa principle
• norms of cautiousness
• congruity of the norms of substantial criminal law with the constitutional regulations