Elimination of legal error in German law

Abstract

The subject of this paper is inevitability of mistake of law in Criminal Law. In the first part of paper the author analyzes term and the effect of mistake of law in the German criminal law. Furthermore, the theory of premeditation and theory of guilt are analyzed as a theoretical basis for distinguishing the mistake of fact and mistake of law. To the acceptance of the theory of guilt during 70's of last century in German Criminal Law there was no mistake of law as an autonomous institute. It has been pointed out the importance and advantages of the theory of guilt in relation to the theory of premeditation. The author analyzes the relationship between mistake of law and premeditation in case when mistake of law is avoidable. The view that mistake of law regardless it is avoidable or unavoidable is not significant for the existence of premeditation is substantiated. Premeditation is not excluded as the awareness of the unlawfulness is an independent element of guilt, as well as premeditation. This view can not be questioned, because it may happen that the perpetrator with premeditation performs act, but because of unavoidable or avoidable mistake of law did not know that the act is prohibited. The existence of premeditation is not in question; the existence of guilt depends on whether the mistake of law in the particular case is avoidable or unavoidable. Part of this paper refers to the evaluation of criteria by which the German theory and jurisprudence establish whether the mistake of law is avoidable or unavoidable. The prevailing concept according to which the effect of mistake of law depends on three criteria: 1. whether in particular case there was reason for perpetrator to doubt that the act is prohibited; 2. whether there was a real possibility that the perpetrator finds out whether the act is prohibited; 3. whether the perpetrator could have known that the act is prohibited.

U prvom delu rada razmatramo pojam pravne zablude u nemačkom pravu. Osim toga, analiziraćemo dejstvo pravne zablude. Na kraju, najveći deo rada se odnosi na razmatranje kriterijuma koji nemačka pravna teorija i sudska praksa koriste pri oceni da li je pravna zabluda u konkretnom slučaju otklonjiva ili neotklonjiva. Ovo je veoma značajno pitanje, jer od odgovora zavisi dejstvo ovog instituta krivičnog prava. Obrazložićemo naše zalaganje za prihvatanje objektivno-subjektivnog kriterijuma otklonjivosti pravne zablude. Pokušaćemo da uočimo sličnosti i razlike između rešenja koje je u pogledu otklonjivosti pravne zablude prihvaćeno u našem KZ i zakonodavstvu Nemačke. Pri izradi rada je korišćen dogmatski i logički metod.