Comparison of the Structures of Criminal Law

In this project, the substantive criminal law of various countries is examined with respect to similarities and differences; special attention is paid to the specific interplay of normative rules and practical application. Hypothetical case scenarios involving the killing of an abusive spouse were designed in order to examine how the scenarios are categorized in each country under study and how they would proceed through each country’s criminal justice system in practice.
Project category: Research project
Organizational status: Institute project
Project time frame: Project commences: 1995
Project ends: 2011
Project status: In progress
Project language(s): German
Legal system(s): 8 European legal systems

Head(s) of project:

Contributors / Researchers:

  • Holger Barth
  • Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Karin Cornils
  • Dr. Helmut Großengießer
  • Susanne Hein
  • Dr. Barbara Huber [Email]
  • Dr. Peter Hünerfeld
  • Dr. Konstanze Jarvers [Email]
  • Prof. Dr. Ursula Medigovic (Universität Wien)
  • Prof. Dr. Hans Vest (Universitäten Basel & St. Gallen)
Top

Within basic research conducted in the area of criminal law, comparative criminal law is both an important research method and a central subject of research. In the course of such research, new insights into foreign law as well as into the similarities and differences in various legal systems are gained. In addition to basic research, comparative criminal law is also applied research that, de lege lata, either serves to supplement existing law or determines the prerequisites for its application. In its applied function, it supports de lege ferenda, the development of new legal policy approaches and their assessment with the assistance of foreign or international experiences.

Against this backdrop, the goal of this project, "Comparison of the Structures of Criminal Law," is to identify the patterns (similarities and differences) according to which the legal systems under study are organized in the area of substantive criminal law.

This research method accommodates both the practical and the normative-dogmatic perspectives. A set of hypothetical case scenarios was designed based on a specific topic – a wife’s killing of an abusive spouse. Each participating country examined the substantive legal categories that would encompass the scenarios and how the scenarios would proceed, in practice, through its criminal justice system. Underlying this research approach is the hypothesis that differences in substantive law cannot be understood solely on the basis of the laws themselves or normative-dogmatic considerations, but rather result to a large extent also from the practical consequences of the application of the law. In order to study this practical perspective, for each country, jurists from various professions (judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, professors) were interviewed about the substantive legal approach that would be taken for each scenario, what would happen procedurally, and what concrete sanction would be imposed.


Top

Publications (selection):

  • Gropengießer, H.: Der Haustyrannenmord.
    Eine Untersuchung zur rechtlichen Behandlung von Tötungskriminalität in normativer und tatsächlicher Hinsicht. Strafrechtliche Forschungsberichte, Berlin 2008, 214 p.
    • ESER, A. (2002): Von der Konkurrenz zur Kongruenz nationaler Strafrechtsordnungen: Wege zur Rechtsangleichung in Europa. Poinikos Logos 5, 2158-2170.
    • ESER, A. (1995): Eröffnungsansprache. In: Rechtfertigung und Entschuldigung IV. Hrsg. A. Eser & H. Nishihara. edition iuscrim, Freiburg i. Br., 3-7.
    • ESER, A. (1987): Einführung aus deutscher Sicht, sowie Justification and Excuse: A Key Issue in the Concept of Crime. In: Rechtfertigung und Entschuldigung. Rechtsvergleichende Perspektiven - Justification and Excuse. Comparative Perspectives. Eds. A. Eser & G. P. Fletcher. edition iuscrim, Freiburg i. Br., 1-8 resp. 17-65.
    • PERRON, W. (2001): Strukturen der strafrechtlichen Verantwortlichmachung und Tatbewertung im europäischen Vergleich. Waseda Proceedings of Comparative Law, Vol. 4, 233-247.
    • PERRON, W. (1998): Hat die deutsche Straftatsystematik eine europäische Zukunft? In: Festschrift für Theodor Lenckner. Hrsg. A. Eser, U. Schittenhelm & H. Schumann. München, 227-247.
    • PERRON, W. (1997): Sind die nationalen Grenzen des Strafrechts überwindbar? Überlegungen zu den strukturellen Voraussetzungen der Angleichung und Vereinheitlichung unterschiedlicher Strafrechtssysteme. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft 109, 281-301.
      Japanische Übersetzung in: The Journal of the Faculty of Law, Universität Aichi, Japan, Nr. 145, 1-25 (1997).
    • PERRON, W. (1997): Strafrechtsvereinheitlichung in Europa. In: Europa als Rechtsgemeinschaft. Hrsg. D. Dörr & M. Dreher. Baden-Baden, 135-154.
    • PERRON, W. (1996): Überlegungen zum Erkenntnisziel und Untersuchungsgegenstand des Forschungsprojektes “Allgemeiner Strafrechtlicher Strukturvergleich”. In: Grenzüberschreitungen. Beiträge zum 60. Geburtstag von Albin Eser. Hrsg. J. Arnold, B. Burkhardt, W. Gropp & H.-G. Koch. edition iuscrim, Freiburg i. Br., 127-136.
    • PERRON, W. (1988): Rechtfertigung und Entschuldigung im deutschen und spanischen Recht. Ein Strukturvergleich strafrechtlicher Zurechnungssysteme, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft Baden-Baden, 251 S.
      Veröffentlichung in japanischer Sprache (Übersetzung: Norio Takahashi) im Seibundo-Verlag, Tokyo 1992.
  • Last update: 11 October 2011
  • Top