Summary of AUTORIA Y PARTICIPACION ZAFFARONI

00:00:00 - 00:55:00

This video discusses the theory of autoría y participación, or authorship, and how it applies to different types of cases. It emphasizes the legal concept of the autoría única, which is based on the theory that one person is responsible for the entirety of a work. The video then discusses the concept of participación, which is similar to autoría, but is usually applied in cases where multiple people are involved in a criminal act.

• 00:00:00 This video introduces the topic of dogmática jurídico-penal, or the theory of law governing criminal justice. It discusses how Chile has a long tradition of studying criminal law dogmáticos, and how German and Italian positivism, which dominated criminal law theory in the 20th century, had a significant impact on Chilean criminal law. The video then goes on to introduce the neokantian, finalisitic, and post-finalist theories of crime, and how each has had a significant impact on Chilean criminal law. Finally, it discusses how each of these theories was brought to Chile by German or Italian scholars, and how their theories were divorced from ideology and instead relied on technocratic constructs.
• 00:05:00 This video discusses the theory of autoria y participación, or authorship, by lawyer Guillermo Zaffaroni during the era of German Chancellor Guillermo von Schleicher (1881-1934). During this time, there was a strong interventionist economic policy, which led to concessions being made to social democrats, as well as economic interventions. Zaffaroni's famous conception of the role of the penal law was that it was the cornerstone of criminal behavior, i.e. the limit of what he understood by political criminal law, or the policy of eliminating crime. One worked in a positive sense, focusing on restraining law enforcement through judicial agencies, while another worked in a negative sense, focusing on controlling law enforcement through police agencies. With the rise of the Nazi regime, Zaffaroni brought along the neokantian theory of authorship, which emphasized the autonomy of the artist. This theory was distorted by the Nazi regime, which created a theoretical conflict between the neokantian school that said with my system, with my theory of crime, I can serve any political model, and another school that said no, not for any political model, there needs to be a different theory. After the rise of the
• 00:10:00 The video discusses the concepts of autoría and participación, and how they are defined in Chilean law. It emphasizes the legal concept of the autoría única, which is based on the theory that one person is responsible for the entirety of a work. The video then goes on to discuss how the concept of autoría can be applied to different types of cases, including cases of authorship, liability, and authority. Finally, the video discusses the concept of participación, which is similar to autoría, but is usually applied in cases where multiple people are involved in a criminal act.
• 00:15:00 The same phenomenon is to say that he had to limit part of that everything causing is an author and the participation would not be more than a attenuated authority, inasmuch as then attenuates the author's authority well, he had to appeal to subjective criteria, the Saw Tories' mentality that is, an author is the person who causes the fact for himself and participates, the person who does not want the fact for himself, this led to some very interesting aberrations, especially two jurisprudential cases from Germany that always cite themselves: the case of the bathtub which is about a woman who just gave birth she asks her exhausted sister for the effect of childbirth, she asks her sister to set the pen on the infant in the bathtub because they were hiding the whole pregnancy and the birth, the father having an aggressive reaction to the father etc. and the sister does it, but then they condemn the parturient as author and the sister as participant, despite the sister's direct performance of direct action constituting her own act, the other case is more complicated because it has a
• 00:20:00 The video discusses the concept of "autoría," which refers to the ability of an individual to control the outcome of an event. The main problem with this concept is that it is difficult to determine who is actually responsible for an event. The theory of "dominio del hecho" tries to solve this problem by assuming that one person is responsible for the event, even if they did not actually carry out the action itself. This theory is often used to determine who is responsible for criminal actions.
• 00:25:00 The video discusses the concept of "authority and participation" in the context of Zaffaroni law. Three subjects are shown stealing three items and exercising force or violence on people in the process. The three subjects carry the stolen items away with them. There is no problem with authority when it comes to parallel authority, but it is possible for two subjects to rob a bank at the same time one pointing at the teller, while another approaches the cashier and fills a bag with money. This is called a "distribution" robbery, in which no one person actually steals the money. The three authors each perform a part of the robbery, but none of them performs the whole robbery. Then, we have the "direct author" who performs the robbery directly, sometimes acting typically, sometimes acting legitimately, and sometimes acting improperly. There is also the "mediated author" who acts indirectly, sometimes acting typically, sometimes acting legitimately, and sometimes acting improperly. This last author is typically someone who is acting in an effort to fulfill a legal duty, for example, shouting next to a police officer to attract the thief's attention. The police officer fulfills his legal duty of apprehending the thief and holds him liable for the crime. The police officer is also a victim
• 00:30:00 Zaffaroni discusses the issue of whether or not an actor can be considered an "author" of a crime, considering the different types of authorizations that can be given to someone to commit a crime. He points out that, in many cases, the person who commits the crime--the "actant"--does not have the necessary qualifications to be considered an "author" of the crime, as they do not have the direct responsibility for carrying out the act. Zaffaroni argues that, in cases of instigative crime, the person who instigates or induces another person to commit the crime--the "mediator"--can be considered the "author" of the crime, as they are the one who actually carries out the act.
• 00:35:00 The video discusses the concept of authorial responsibility, and differentiates between the concepts of autoría mediato (mediator role), autoría culpable (culpable role), and autoría culpable por error (culpable role due to error). It also discusses coauthority, and points out that, in order to be a coauthor, a participant must have the characteristic typical of the corresponding type of author. If they do not have this characteristic, they cannot be considered coauthors, and are instead involved in the crime as perpetrators.
• 00:40:00 Zaffaroni discusses the concept of "autoria y participación," explaining that the behavior that results in production is not determined by returning from production of the final result, but by planning the causal relationship and seeing the responsibilities of care and, as a result, putting into operation a causal relationship that causes another result. Autoria is based on the principle of causal determinism, which sees responsibility as lying wholly on the causal relationship. This is a different kind of responsibility that is absolute, and two people can be held accountable for the same act, even if one is acting with intent and the other is acting negligently. There is no problem with having two authors or perpetrators of the same crime, as long as their respective roles are distinguished. The concept of "participación" takes the form of instigation or complicity, and can be divided into degrees. One point of view is to eliminate the legal concept of "autor" altogether, basing only on the violation of a rule. This would be the dominant view in legal theory, as the purpose of criminal law is not to protect juridical goods, but to reaffirm the validity of a norm. The current dominant theory of "accessoria edad media" is that all participation must be
• 00:45:00 This video discusses the concept of autoría mediato, which is when a person instigates or complies with an act without actually committing the act themselves. It can be confusing to understand, and lawyers and judges often misuse the concept of autoría mediato. In Argentina, there is a law that confuses the concept, thinking that someone who participates in an act without actually committing it is also an instigator. This is not the case, and only applies in cases of dolus eventualis, or willful wrongdoing.
• 00:50:00 The video discusses the concept of "authority and participation" by Antonio Zaffaroni. He believes that in some cases, it is not necessary to determine if there was domination of the event and if there were reasons to presume that the person would act in that way. The person who commits the act in compliance with the legal authority or police officer who has reported the crime is acting in a legal manner. The official of justice to whom the order for detention of the painting was directed may have had a reason to presume that the person would comply, based on the agent's previous actions. The person who is acting in a situation of justification has a reason to presume that the interposed will comply. However, if the person is coerced, they will kill me. If they do not comply, then the act is considered a lesser evil and is presumed to be carried out. However, the person knows what they are doing and does not need the free action of cause to carry out their plan. In cases of presumed authorial mediacy, it is not actually the case that the person is acting on their own. This is because in some cases, the person is being instigated, which is a form of indirect action. If the person is capable of acting on their
• 00:55:00 The video discusses the theory of roles, which according to the speaker is sacralized in sociology. They discuss how this theory can be used to explain the actions of a taxi driver who sells knives to civilians. The taxi driver believes that if roles were not dynamic, we would not have a telenovela, where the protagonist's relative (such as the uncle of the protagonist's daughter) is revealed to be the lover of the protagonist's nephew. The video ends with the taxi driver saying that if roles were not dynamic, we would not have conflict between roles, and we would not have magnates (or powerful people).