Resumen: El objetivo es exponer críticamente las distintas aproximaciones que se han realizado sobre las denominadas acciones neutrales en la cultura jurídico-penal alemana, de modo a traer a la nuestra una discusión de parte general que, debido a la estructura de nuestra regulación penal vigente, es completamente pertinente. Por acciones neutrales se entienden generalmente comportamientos que aparentan ser inofensivos, pero cuya ejecución u omisión posibilita la realización de un delito, planteando la pregunta por las condiciones (objetivas o subjetivas) que deben verificarse para que a un sujeto le sea atribuido a título de complicidad el injusto cometido por otro. El problema dogmático planteado por este grupo de casos ha llamado la atención tanto de la doctrina como de la jurisprudencia, la que ha elaborado un criterio mixto (objetivo-subjetivo) que se ha constituido en la opinión dominante. El carácter dominante de una teoría muchas veces no coincide con su corrección, este es precisamente el caso. La respuesta correcta al problema se encuentra en la regulación legal de la complicidad y en los principios que rigen la participación.
Abstract: The aim is to critically present the different approaches that have been carried out on the so-called neutral actions in the German legal-criminal culture, so as to bring to ours a discussions of the general part that, due to the structure of our current penal regulation, is completely pertinent. Neutral actions are generally understood as behaviors that appear to be harmless, but whose execution or omission enables the realization of a crime, rising the question about the conditions (objective and/or subjective) that should be verified for a subject to be attributed by title of complicity the unjust committed by another. The dogmatic problem raised by this group of cases has called attention of both doctrine and jurisprudence, which have developed a mixed criterion (objective-subjective) that has become the dominant opinion. The dominant character of a theory often does not coincide with its correction. this is the case. The correct answer to the problem lies in the legal regulation of complicity and in the principles that govern participation.
See how this article has been cited at scite.ai
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.