Presumption(s) and minority in criminal law (notice n° 1050660)
[ vue normale ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 02500cam a2200157 4500500 |
| 005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION | |
| control field | 20250126171903.0 |
| 041 ## - LANGUAGE CODE | |
| Language code of text/sound track or separate title | fre |
| 042 ## - AUTHENTICATION CODE | |
| Authentication code | dc |
| 100 10 - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Jacopin, Sylvain |
| Relator term | author |
| 245 00 - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Presumption(s) and minority in criminal law |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2020.<br/> |
| 500 ## - GENERAL NOTE | |
| General note | 27 |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | The ordonnance of February 2, 1945, relating to delinquent children poses the principle of criminal responsibility based on discernment, understood as “the capacity to understand and to want,” to use the expression borrowed from the Laboube judgment of December 13, 1956. This question is left to the judge. Now, with the ordonnance of September 11, 2019, there is an additional condition: the age of the minor. It is a question of establishing a threshold for the minor’s capacity of discernment. The age of thirteen is now a threshold for presumption: below this age, a lack of discernment is presumed, and beyond this age, it must be proven by the public prosecutor. However, whereas the texts do not specify it, the presumption must be considered “simple”: as before, it will remain for the judge to decide, but within a more limited legal framework. It is especially important not to confuse this new age threshold with the minimum legal age threshold from which a sentence can be imposed on a minor (called “the age of criminal capacity”). This threshold, put in place as of the ordinance of February 2, 1945, is maintained at thirteen. It is also reinforced within the framework of the new system of applicable sanctions. The reform therefore brings the age threshold (thirteen) of criminal capacity into line with that of criminal minority. This situation begs questions because it reproduces the ambiguities of the past and leads to new confusion within the legal regime applicable to minors. In these circumstances, it would have been more appropriate to reserve criminal irresponsibility only for “infans” (seven years old). The solution adopted, which consists in affirming the criminal irresponsibility of the minor on the basis of a system of “presumed lack of discernment/lack of discernment to be proven,” in connection with the pivotal age of thirteen, is highly prejudicial to the criminal law of minors. |
| 786 0# - DATA SOURCE ENTRY | |
| Note | Revue de science criminelle et de droit pénal comparé | - | 1 | 2020-03-31 | p. 27-42 | 0035-1733 |
| 856 41 - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS | |
| Uniform Resource Identifier | <a href="https://shs.cairn.info/journal-revue-de-science-criminelle-et-de-droit-penal-compare-2020-1-page-27?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080">https://shs.cairn.info/journal-revue-de-science-criminelle-et-de-droit-penal-compare-2020-1-page-27?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080</a> |
Pas d'exemplaire disponible.
Réseaux sociaux