TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

1

Avtor pri iskanju razmerja med motivom in naklepom navaja, da jima je skupna volja storiti kaznivo dejanje. Značilnost obeh je namreč s posameznikovo voljo načrtovana (naklepna) usmerjenost k motivacijskemu cilju. Naklepno kaznivo dejanje je zgolj sredstvo za dosego motivacijskega cilja, kadar je motivacijski cilj zunaj opisa kaznivega dejanja. Drugače pa je, kadar je motivacijski cilj identičen s kazenskopravno relevantno posledico; motiv se lahko v takih primerih izenači z naklepom. Pri malomarnostnih kaznivih dejanjih ne gre za hoteno in voljno ravnanje v smeri izbranega cilja, ki bi bil izenačen s kazenskopravno relevantno posledico. Sprašujemo se, kakšno bi moralo biti ravnanje, da do kazenskopravno relevantne posledice ne bi prišlo. Storilec ima dva nasprotujoča si motiva: ali preprečiti prepovedane posledice in take težnje zavirati ali pa motiv voditi k pasivni zadržanosti oziroma tveganju.

The relation between motive and intent is according to the author a common will to commit a criminal act. The characteristic of both is an individually planned orientation to reach the target of motive. An intentionally committed criminal offence is only a means to an end when the target of motive is not statuary defined as a criminal offence. On the other side motive is identical with intent when its target causes relevant criminal consequence. With criminal offences committed through negligence, there is no willing purpose towards a selected aim, which would be identical with a criminal result. We are interested what kind of acting can avoid criminal issue. A perpetrator has two contradictory motives: either to prevent prohibited consequences or to avoid any activities.

Intent and Negligence and Motives