TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

11

Motivi za kazniva dejanja in tudi motivacijski cilji s poštenimi sredstvi so se skozi zgodovino spreminjali, kakor so se spreminjale tudi vrednote. Že Platon je zahteval prevlado pravičnih motivov, za kar mora poskrbeti država. Rimsko pravo je zaradi nedopustnega nagiba (kavze) pravnega posla štelo, da gre za prevaro. V poznejših obdobjih so motivi prevzemali negativno vlogo, ker so absolutistični družbeni sistemi namesto nevarnosti dejanja skozi (domnevne) storilčeve motive skušali dokazovati nevarnost storilcev. Vprašanja o motivih so postala aktualna zlasti ob kritiki Lisztovih in Belingovih idej o strogi delitvi na objektivne in subjektivne elemente kaznivih dejanj. Elementi, ki jih je teorija obravnavala ločeno, so se začeli obravnavati tudi skupaj s krivdo, ki po psihološko-normativni koncepciji pomeni možnost očitka ali graje. Očitek ali grajo pa je mogoče nasloviti na storilca le v normalnih motivirajočih okoliščinah (in ne na primer na neprištevnega storilca). Motivi zato niso postali aktualni le za odmero kazni ali izbiro kazenske sankcije, ampak so vstopili v kaznivo dejanje samo.

The motives for criminal offences and the aims of motivation by fair means have changed with different values through history. Already Plato demanded prevailing of just motives, what must be secured by the state. In Roman law, an improper motive (cause) of transaction was considered as fraud. In later periods, motives got a negative role because absolutist social systems attempted to prove the danger of perpetrators instead of risk for their acting to achieve their motives. Questions about motives have become a topical issue in particular with the critics of Liszt’s and Beling’s ideas about strict division to objective and subjective elements of criminal offences. Elements treated by legal theory separately have begun to be considered together with guilt which according to psychological-normative concept means the possibility of allegation or blame. Complaint or rebuke can be addressed to an offender only in normal motivating circumstances (and not, for example, to an insane person). Therefore, motives have not become a topical issue only for the assessment of the penalty or the choice of criminal sanctions, but have entered criminal offence itself.

Actuality of Motives for the Criminal Law in the Past and Nowadays