Strict theory and Limited Theory of Culpability

Abstract

The finalist theory of action and the Normative Theory of Culpability Pure moved Odolo culpability for conduct, as a subjective element type, remaining in his guilt antinormatividade, as potencialconsciência of unlawfulness. Several problems have been solved with these novasconstruções both order practical and theoretical order, arising from deentão, the difference between the type of error and error of prohibition. Within this guilt novaperspectiva arises Limited Theory of Culpability, divergindoquando the treatment of the error that falls on the assumptions fáticosde a cause of justification, understanding the effects, in this case, exclude Odolo, as opposed to theory Strict defending the exclusion of guilt in casode inevitable error, or the punishment for fraud with reduced penalty in the case of erroevitável. The arguments of the Limited Theory are more practical, such as The issue of justice or injustice to be given the same treatment to all espéciesde error ban than strictly theoretical order, giving rise, so many problems in the dogmatic construction of guilt . This tensãoexistente between a dogmatic well built and the need for political and criminal decritérios incorporation by criminal law shows up, somehow semprepresente the law and not an error, but an adjustment needed to quenão departs from the man at the center and as the end of the law and all atividadeestatal, should, however, due caution not to seaproxime too extreme to be taken because the positivistic and dogmatic blindness Jase showed as incompatible to democratic rule of law as political and ideological adominação on the machine judicial.