Hypothetical Causation, Possibility of Avoiding Result and Objective Attribution Theory
Che Hao
2009-01-01
Abstract:Hypothetical causation and possibility of avoiding result are two issues in the field of objective attribution theory. There exist certain similarities between them in appearance, but the two concepts are not only distinct in the basic nature but have different thinking methods and conclusions as to whether the result can be attributed to the perpetrator. Hypothetical causation means that even without the act conducted by the perpetrator, the result would still be triggered by other people or events. Hypothetical causation will not affect the attribution. Firstly, what criminal law need to and also has capability to handle, are only legal or illegal cases, rather than lucky or unlucky ones. Protection on some legal interest can not be given up solely because they would be ultimately damaged or difficult to be saved. Secondly, target of attribution is the relationship between the perpetrators' act and the result as a specific constitutive requirement rather than an abstract one. Possibility of avoiding result can be divided into two kinds of situations, that is, inevitable result and possible result. The former refers to the result which will still occur even if fully complying with the prudent duties. The latter refers to the situation whether the result will finally appear or not is uncertain. The former rejects the attribution, and whether the latter affects the attribution depends on the thinking method of "an alternative behavior of performing duties". There exist following differences between hypothetical causation and possibility of avoiding result. Firstly, hypothetical causation makes reference to "abstract results" while the inevitable result makes reference to "concrete particular result". Secondly, hypothetical causation normally assumes "an alternative perpetrator (or event)", while the inevitable result is "an alternative behavior of performing duties". Thirdly, hypothetical causation involves two causes, while there is actually only one cause for inevitable result. Fourthly, the cause for hypothetical causation is real in fact, while the "alternative behavior of performing duties" is a thorough assumption. Fifthly, in the case of hypothetical causation, the previous causation is undoubted, while in the case of possibility of avoiding result, the correlation between the result and the violation of duties is always unclear. Sixthly, hypothetical causation does not affect attribution and can be applied both in intentional and negligent offences, while inevitable result will reject attribution and is mainly applied in negligent offences.