Abstract

This article analyses the status of the principle of penal legality as a residual closure rule. It does so in the same sense in which Alchourrón and Bulygin use this notion but rejects its characterization as a rule that would qualify every action that is not “prohibited according to penal law” as “permitted according to penal law”. The crucial premise supporting this rejection can be found in the proposition that penal sanction norms have the status of constitutive rules, the function of which, in Hohfeld’s terminology, is to institute liabilities-to-punishment that are correlative to punitive powers. This position finds decisive support in Hart’s conception of rules that establish legal sanctions as secondary rules of adjudication, which back up some corresponding set of primary rules of obligation. On this basis, to serve as a residual closure rule for a system of penal sanction norms, the principle of legality must also be understood as a constitutive rule

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.