Crime in criminal law: legal construction and contemporary challenges

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71068/ec000028

Keywords:

Crime, Criminal Law, Legal Dogmatics, Normative Evolution

Abstract

This article addresses the historical development and conceptual evolution of the Theory of Crime, highlighting its transformation from an initial naturalistic conception focused exclusively on the descriptive aspects of human behavior to a more complex, comprehensive, and normative view, in line with the demands of modern criminal law. Throughout this process, criminal law doctrine has played a fundamental role in the development of new theoretical approaches that have allowed for the refinement of the criteria for attributing criminal responsibility, with particular emphasis on the theory of objective attribution, which represents a doctrinal convergence that seeks to provide greater rationality and coherence to the criminal justice system. Throughout this process, essential elements such as punishable conduct and the formal structure of crime have been the subject of in-depth debate, becoming central axes of analysis and discussion in criminal law, aimed at achieving greater legal precision. These advances, however, do not represent a final point in the evolution of the Theory of Crime, since contemporary social dynamics, characterized by constant technological, cultural, and legal transformations, pose new challenges that require a critical and ongoing review of traditional postulates. In this sense, criminal law doctrine continues to generate innovative theoretical proposals that allow us to adequately address new forms of crime and respond to the demands for a more just, fair, and respectful criminal justice system. Therefore, studying the evolution of the Theory of Crime not only allows us to understand its historical development but also opens spaces for critical reflection and the construction of new perspectives that strengthen criminal law in the face of the emerging challenges of today's society.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Castañeda Delgado OD. Evolución de la teoría del delito en la dogmática jurídico-penal alemana. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Penales. 2024;7(22):3-28. https://doi.org/10.57042/rmcp.v7i22.651.

2. Shute, S., & Simester, A. P. (Eds.). (2002). Criminal law theory: Doctrines of the general part. Oxford University Press. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199243495.001.0001"https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199243495.001.0001

3. de Jong F. The end of doctrine? On the symbolic function of doctrine in substantive criminal law. Utrecht Law Review. 2011;7(3):8-45. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.170"https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.170.

4. Pieth, M., & Ivory, R. (Eds.). (2011). Corporate criminal liability: Emergence, convergence, and risk. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0674-3

5. Celis Vela, D. A. (2024). Investigación dogmática en el derecho: Un análisis reconstructivo sobre el quehacer académico de los juristas. Revista de la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Políticas, 54(141). https://doi.org/10.18566/rfdcp.v54n141.a9

6. Hurd, H. M., & Moore, M. S. (2026). Culpability: Its nature and role in punishable blameworthiness. Criminal Law and Philosophy. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-026-09808-8"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-026-09808-8

7. Ma Y, Ryder N. Progress or stagnation? The evolution and reform of corporate criminal liability in the UK. Journal of Economic Criminology. 2025;10:100172. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconc.2025.100172"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconc.2025.100172.

8. Escalante-Huisacayna, L., Riega-Virú, Y., Nilupú-Moreno, K., & Salas-Riega, J. L. (2025). Criminal liability and artificial intelligence: A systematic review of the scientific literature. En A. Nagar, D. S. Jat, D. Mishra, & A. Joshi (Eds.), Intelligent sustainable systems: Selected papers of WorldS4 2024 (pp. 473–483). Springer. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-8695-4_43"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-8695-4_43

9. Maskur MA, Masyhar A, Damayanti R, Ramada DP, Sanyal S. Reimagining criminal liability in the age of artificial intelligence: Toward a comparative and reform-oriented legal framework. Journal of Law and Legal Reform. 2025;6(4):1805-1838. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v6i4.35540"https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.v6i4.35540.

10. Cordini, N. S. (2015). El renacer de las teorías de la imputación en la dogmática jurídico-penal: ¿Hacia una etapa superadora o involución a concepciones precientíficas? Revista Derecho Penal y Criminología, 36(100), 89–123. https://doi.org/10.18601/01210483.v36n100.06

11. Tiffany E. Imputability, answerability, and the epistemic condition on moral and legal culpability. European Journal of Philosophy. 2022;30(4):1440-1457. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.12763"https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.12763.

12. Dsouza M. Criminal culpability after the act. King's Law Journal. 2015;26(3):440-462. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2015.1104947"https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2015.1104947.

13. Moreno-Martínez JA, Santacruz-Vélez MA, Aguilar-Rodas MP, Álvarez-Pacheco JC. La imputación objetiva en el delito de comisión por omisión en la práctica médica ecuatoriana. IUSTITIA SOCIALIS. 2021;6(1):213-236. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.35381/racji.v6i1.1468"https://doi.org/10.35381/racji.v6i1.1468.

14. Hefendehl R. Corporate criminal liability: Model Penal Code Section 2. 07 and the development in Western legal systems. Buffalo Criminal Law Review. 2000;4(1):283-300. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2000.4.1.283"https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2000.4.1.283.

15. Cavanagh N. Corporate criminal liability: An assessment of the models of fault. The Journal of Criminal Law. 2011;75(5):414-440. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2011.75.5.729"https://doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2011.75.5.729.

16. Brodowski, D., Espinoza de los Monteros de la Parra, M., Tiedemann, K., & Vogel, J. (Eds.). (2014). Regulating corporate criminal liability. Springer. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05993-8"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05993-8

17. Hallevy, G. (2015). Liability for crimes involving artificial intelligence systems. Springer. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10124-8"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10124-8

18. Osmani N. The complexity of criminal liability of AI systems. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology. 2020;14(1):53-82. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2020-1-3"https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2020-1-3.

19. Saud A. Criminal liability about the use of artificial intelligence: Investigating the actus reus element of AI-driven technology. American Journal of Law. 2024;6(1):1-25. HYPERLINK "https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1648"https://doi.org/10.47672/ajl.1648.

20. Mamak, K. (2026). AI agency and criminal responsibility: A category mistake. Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2026.2720904

21. Horder J. Corporate criminal liability under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. Legal Studies. 2025;45(1):133-148. https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2024.46.

22. Horder, J. (2026). Corporate crime and conceptions of a corporate person. Criminal Law and Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-026-09809-7

23. Radutnyi OE. Criminal liability of the artificial intelligence. Problems of Legality. 2017;138:132-141. https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.138.105661.

24. Fornasier MO. Criminal liability and artificial intelligence: Responsabilidade penal e inteligência artificial. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Criminais. 2022;187:153-170. https://www.publicacoes.ibccrim.org.br/index.php/RBCCRIM/article/view/63.

Downloads

Published

2024-04-26

Issue

Section

Artículos Originales

How to Cite

Bastidas González, K. A. (2024). Crime in criminal law: legal construction and contemporary challenges. Sapiens Evolución Cientifica , 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.71068/ec000028