Contributi di Jorge Castro Trapote

Canon criminal law as ultima ratio: Subsidiarity or obligatory nature of criminal action?

ABSTRACT: Il diritto penale canonico ha riacquistato efficacia nel XXI secolo dopo diversi decenni di inattività. Sia le recenti riforme che la prassi manifestano un diritto canonico “disabituato” a trattare la materia penale e “disorientato” rispetto ai propri principi. Il diritto penale canonico è in fase di metamorfosi verso un vero e proprio sistema che sappia intrecciare i principi canonici con quelli della civiltà giuridica nel rispetto della dignità umana. Due sono i principi chiave di questa evoluzione del diritto penale canonico: il principio di legalità penale e il principio di obbligatorietà dell'azione criminale. Quest’ultimo principio comporta un diritto penale canonico ridotto ed efficace. La riforma del canone 1341 ha fatto un passo avanti verso l’efficacia del diritto penale canonico, anche se è insufficiente: gran parte del diritto penale canonico non è ancora applicato. D’altra parte, ci si chiede se si possa parlare di soddisfazione dei fini della pena senza una decisione ufficiale (processuale o procedimentale). In continuità con la riduzione della discrezionalità voluta dalla riforma del 2021, si propone di collocare il concetto di ultima ratio nella norma penale, e non nell’azione criminale.

ABSTRACT: Canon criminal law has regained its efficacy in the 21st century after several decades of inaction. Both recent reforms and praxis reveal a canon law “unaccustomed” to dealing with criminal matters, and “disoriented” with respect to its own principles. Canon criminal law is in a state of metamorphosis towards a true system that knows how to weave together canonical principles and those of juridical civilization in accordance with human dignity. In this evolution of canonical criminal law, two principles are key: the principle of criminal legality and the principle of obligatory criminal action. The latter principle entails a reduced and effective canonical criminal law. The reform of canon 1341 has taken a step towards the efficacy of canon criminal law, although it is insufficient: a large part of canon criminal law is still not applied. On the other hand, the question arises as to whether it is possible to speak of the purposes of punishment being satisfied without an official resolution (procedural or procedural). In continuity with the reduction of discretion sought by the 2021 reform, it is proposed to place the concept of ultima ratio in the penal norm, and not in the criminal action.

SOMMARIO: 1. Planteamiento - 2. Breve diagnóstico: un derecho penal en metamorfosis - 3. La ultima ratio en los ordenamientos civiles - 4. La ultima ratio en el derecho canónico - 5. Causas sistémicas de la noción canónica de ultima ratio - 6. Concepto de ultima ratio más adecuado en el derecho canónico - 7. Finalidad de la ultima ratio: el retorno a la clásica humanización del derecho penal aportada por el derecho canónico - 8. ¿Pueden existir los fines de la pena sin resolución oficial y pública? - 9. Conclusión: la interpretación sistemática y teleológica del canon.

The Church "is" communio fidelium and "has" communio hierarchica: foundation and consequences from a canonic constitutional approach 

ABSTRACT. Ecclesiology has undergone an important development since the Second Vatican Council: it has moved from an institutional ecclesiology to an ecclesiology of communio. Canonical science seeks to adapt to this reality. But in some approaches, communio fidelium and communio hierarchica are still considered on the same plane; in practice, communio fidelium would become a “product” or a “result” of communio hierarchica. But this introduces a “harmful separation between theory and practice” (cf. Veritatis gaudium, n. 4). In this paper I will explain, from a constitutional canonical approach more in line with the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, the foundations and consequences of the instrumentality of the communio hierarchica in relation to the communio fidelium, and what it means that the ‘institutional principle’ is born of the ‘communitarian principle’ (Hervada).

SOMMARIO: 1. Planteamiento - 2. Iglesia-Misterio, Iglesia-Comunidad y Iglesia-Sociedad - 3. El protagonismo de la communio hierarchica antes del Concilio Vaticano II - 4. Modos de relacionar la communio fidelium y la communio hierarchica - 5. La Iglesia “es” communio fidelium y “tiene” communio hierarchica - 6. El principio institucional nace del principio comunitario - 7. La autoridad nace de la comunidad - 8. La forma de gobierno eclesial procede de una norma divina positiva - 9. Conclusión: algunas consecuencias canónicas.

Notes on the theory of the validity of the canonical norm: existence, formal validity, substantive validity, efficacy and effectiveness

SOMMARIO: 1. Planteamiento: proseguir la intuición inicial de la Escuela laica italiana y corregir la actual ‘canonizatio práctica’ - 2. La rationabilitas como elemento central de la teoría de la norma canónica - 3. Conveniencia de la teoría de la norma canónica - 4. Notas sobre la teoría de la validez de la norma canónica - 5. Existencia / Inexistencia - 6.I. Validez formal / Invalidez formal; Validez material / Invalidez material - 6.II. Origen y necesidad de la distinción - 6.III. Dos tipos de normas humanas: principios y reglas - 6.IV. El principio de jerarquía normativa: formal, material y estructural - 7. Vigencia / Falta de vigencia - 8. Eficacia / Ineficacia - 9. Efectividad / Inefectividad - 10. Conclusión.

ABSTRACT: Canonical science, since its birth, has contributed to the progress of canon law when it has maintained a dialogue with the juridical theory and dogmatic of each epoch. In this direction, the Italian secular school gave canonical science a decisive impulse, later paralyzed as a result of some theories such as the canonizatio of Vincenzo del Giudice. The dialogue between canon law and juridical science is necessary to extract the progress made by the 1983 Code with the formalization of fundamental rights. With some excesses corrected thanks to the proposals of Lombardia and Hervada, the original intuition of the Italian secular school was correct and it is convenient to accompany and clarify the growing protagonism of the legislative activity of the Church. From this perspective favorable to dialogue with juridical science, revalued by the call to interdisciplinarity of the Apostolic Constitution Veritatis Gaudium, the article continues the reflection on the canonical norm raised with various nuances by the doctrine, and offers some notes on the theory of the validity of the canonical norm.