Fault Principle

The principle of guilt based on criminal responsibility and has several practical implications. The main fault is that the author is required (intent or recklessness) so that there is criminal offense and, therefore, entail punishment: nulla poena sine culpa. Article 5 of the Penal Code establishes the principle of fault as follows:

No punishment without malice or recklessness.

While the statement is true, the penalty is not the result of fraud or negligence, but as stated earlier, no fault there is no crime, no crime and no penalty. Will be extended in subsequent entries, the intent and recklessness can be briefly defined as:

Malice: the will to commit an act - in this case, crime - knowing its wrongfulness, in other words, the author intentionally commits the act.
Reckless: an act is committed unintentionally; the author carries out an action or proceeding without warning (caution) timely. The justification of the principle on the role of the sentence: If convicted of a crime does not understand the reason for the penalty, what's the use if their behavior will not be modified? The principle of guilt does not imply that criminal law cannot understand the cases where there is no guilt, it would be more correct to say that when there is no fault (no offense), no penalty, but it is a security measure.

On the other hand, it follows that no other person can be sanctioned than the author. If the penalty is imposed for the individual to adapt their behavior to the norm and not re-offend, would not make sense to convict a person not author and therefore not guilty. A clear example can be found in the crimes committed by minors, the parents or legal guardians will be the vicarious liability of damages resulting from the offense, but you will never impose penalties on these people for criminal acts committed by their children or wards. Of course, sometimes a third person "no author of the criminal" may be criminally liable for the actions of "other" illicit or omission of their duties: the teacher who does not give due diligence to monitor students charge.

The final important implication of this principle is that the penalty should be associated with the author's responsibility. For example, if two people are attacking each other, each author must answer for the injuries caused, both will be convicted of a felony or misdemeanor battery but if the share of each has been different, the penalty will vary.