The Preliminary Research for Making Judgment on Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity and Guilty but Mentally Ill / 대한법의학회지

BACK GROUND: Our object is to conduct a questionnaire research with psychiatrists who have the experience of mental examination to suggest judgment standard for Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity and Guilty But Mentally Ill(diminished capacity). In addition, this study is expected to reduce the gap between the judgments on Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity and Guilty But Mentally Ill. METHODS: In making judgment on Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity and Guilty But Mentally Ill by experts, the questionnaire research is conducted through e-mail on the judgment standard on each mental disorders. According to the definition of mental disability, the item that shows higher percentage than the items of cognitional ability and volitional ability is considered as the requirement for judging mental disability. RESULTS: In all of 7 major mental disorders and disease groups, the symptoms and characteristics of the disease and the range of the influence of the symptom on the case were higher in 2-4 times than the induced standard (cognitional ability and volitional ability) from the legal and academic definitions of mental disability. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for judging normal or mental disability is the cognitional ability and volitional ability. The criteria for judging Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity and Guilty But Mentally Ill in mental disability is the symptom and characteristics of the disease and the range of the influence of the symptom on the case.

Las medidas de seguridad en materia penal juvenil / Security measures in juvenile criminal law

En la actualidad exite una ardua discusión sobre las sanciones dentro del derecho penal juvenil, tema que cobra especial relevancia cuando nos enfrentamos a conductas delictivas cometidas por personas menores de edad en las cuales se ha determinado su condiciçon de inimputables o toxicómanos a partir de las conclusiones de las pericias respectivas. El cuestionamiento nos lleva a dos posibles soluciones: una darle un abordaje como un problema de salud y excluirlo del derecho penal y otra, mantener la línea tradicional, en la cual se faculta al derecho penal sancionar la conducta delictiva, imponiendo una medida de seguridad. Si se admite la primera posición, la normativa aplicable lo constituye el Código de la Niñez y la Adolescencia, el cual contempla la posibilidad de imponer medidas de protección para quienes están en una situación de vulnerabilidad, dentro de las que se ubican los casos de inimputables y toxicómanos, esto implica admitir medidas de "seguridad o protección" con una naturaleza jurídica de carácter administrativo. Posición que implicaría no sólo una vulneración de derechos sino que contraviene lo señalado por Sala Constitucional, la cual al desarrollar el alcance del artículo 39 de la Constitución Política, ha señalado que la imposición de las sanciones y por ende de las medidas de seguridad gozan de la garantía de la reserva de ley, destacando su naturaleza jurisdiccional y exclusivamente ante la comisión de delitos. La única solución posible en aras del respeto de esta reserva legal, es aplicar, conforme al artículo 9 de la Ley de Justicia Penal Juvenil la legislación penal de adultos y admitir la imposición de medidas de seguridad en la justicia penal juvenil.

Currently, there has been an arduous discussion about penalties in juvenile criminal law, topic which becomes especially relevant when we are faced to criminal conducts from people who are underage, in which their condition of not guilty or drug addict has been determined from the conclusions of respective expertise. The question leads up to two possible solutions: first, face it like a health problem and exclude it from criminal law; second, keep the traditional line, in which the criminal law can punish the criminal conduct, imposing a security measure. If we admit the first solution, the laws applicable are the Code of Childhood and Adolescence, contemplating the possibility of applying protection measures towards those who are in a vulnerable situation, in which we would put the cases of the not guilty and the drug addicts; this would imply admitting "security or protection" measures with a juridical nature of administrative sort. Position that would imply not only a weakening of rights, but would also violate what the Constitutional Chamber has said, when studying the scope of Article 39 of the Political Constitution, that the imposition of punishments and security measures have the guarantee of law reserve, which makes its nature jurisdictional and exclusive to when a crime is committed. The only possible solution, in order to respect this law reserve, is to apply, according to Article 9 of the Law of Juvenile Criminal Justice, the legislation applicable to adults and to admit the imposition of security measures in juvenile criminal justice.