Reprehensibility
The legal term of reprehensibility is part of the criminal offenses of coercion , extortion and murder in German criminal law .
German law
background
In the historical development of today's Section 240 of the German Criminal Code , which regulates the punishability of coercion , until 1943 only the use of coercive means "violence" (which was understood in the sense of a narrow, physical term of violence) and "threat of a crime or Offense "threatened with punishment. In 1943 the paragraph was changed to the effect that the type of threat had to be a "sensitive evil". In order to limit the associated expansion of criminal liability again, the current reprehensible regulation of paragraph 2 was created at the same time. It ensures that the use of coercive means is not punished without restriction.
Definition of reprehensibility
In the case of coercion, reprehensibility is largely viewed as a necessary feature of the offense. It is disputed whether this is already checked in the facts or, as the prevailing opinion does, in terms of illegality. In the case of extortion, there is disagreement as to whether the reprehensibility clause is necessary.
The ratio of the means of coercion used (e.g. physical violence) must be viewed as reprehensible with regard to the purpose aimed at by the perpetrator (victim behavior) (purpose-means ratio). According to the prevailing view of the jurisprudence, coercion is reprehensible if the relation leads to the judgment that, according to general judgment, coercion is so morally disapproving that it represents an increased injustice worthy of punishment. If there is a reason for justification , the reprehensibility must be rejected, as the wrongdoing in this case is not punishable.
The review of reprehensibility takes place in three stages.
The means of coercion is reprehensible if circumstances arise that make the means of coercion appear grossly socially undesirable. The use of force or the threat of a sensitive evil is not in itself reprehensible. Otherwise this requirement would come to nothing. However, it is reprehensible if it complies with a criminal offense or otherwise violates the legal system, e.g. B. if the means of coercion used is a personal injury.
The intended purpose is reprehensible, for example, if the victim is supposed to commit a criminal offense or an administrative offense or if the perpetrator wants to enforce a claim that either does not exist or that, according to the legal system, should or can only be enforced with state help.
In the third stage, the relationship between the means employed and the end sought must be considered and appreciated. If the means and end or even just one of the two were classified as reprehensible, the relationship and thus the reprehensibility cannot yet be affirmed. However, the reprehensibility of one or both of the characteristics is an indication of the reprehensibility of the factual coercion. Likewise, reprehensibility should not be rejected immediately if neither means nor purpose are to be regarded as reprehensible. Here, too, one has to look at the overall picture, so that a factual coercion can be viewed as reprehensible even if the means and end are not.
