El artículo se hace cargo críticamente de una asunción implícita en la recepción de los impulsos normativistas en la dogmática de la estafa en el ámbito iberoamericano, consistente en que una dogmática normativista confirmaría necesariamente la interpretación restrictiva del engaño típico de la estafa que tradicionalmente ha imperado en dicho ámbito. A través del análisis de los principales argumentos de la tesis restrictiva, el autor procura demostrar que ni la tendencia normativista en general ni los específicos desarrollos de esa tendencia en materia de estafa sirven de apoyo para dicha tesis, y que, más bien al contrario, son fuente de importantes objeciones en su contra.
The paper critically focuses on an implicit assumption made by Hispano-American criminal law doctrine concerning the current general tendency to construct in a normative way (“normativization”) the fraud offence. According to this assumption, the tendency to normative constructions in criminal law theory necessarily confirms the so far widely accepted restrictive interpretation of the deception element in the offence of fraud. Through an analysis of the premises for such a restrictive interpretation, the author aims to prove that nor the tendency to normative constructions, in general, neither the specific development of that tendency in the field of the fraud offence, in particular, support that conclusion; on the contrary, from these tendencies emerge important counterarguments against it.
See how this article has been cited at scite.ai
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.