| dc.description.abstract | Amid social changes, it becomes clear that Criminal law is called to solve problems that were once unimaginable. While the field of activity of this one is widening, it turns out to include new legal property, especially of a collective issue, supra-individual nature. As a result of this expansion, the range of responsibilities is widen, extending to the legal person, perceiving this tendency in other legal systems. From a systemic-constructivist methodology approach, the research technique is used based on a bibliographical research, mainly on theories previously analyzed and discussed by the doctrine, based on its bibliographic productions, encompassing, the present research, also, legislative texts and analysis of the jurisprudential perspective on the political-criminal option. Whereas problems are shown when identifying authorship among the business activity, problems come to light while regarding the attribution of responsibilities through the rules of imputation inherent in Criminal law. As a response, the doctrine identifies two ways of solving it: using the rules of imputation from the individual that operates inside the enterprise or using rules of imputation specific to the legal entity. Assuming that the rules of imputation should be used directly to the legal entity, towards the development of business activities, an analysis is required about the adequacy of the imputation rules - action, subjective typicity and culpability – especially so that they can allow the attribution of this liabillity. For this adequacy, the development of a theory of crime is made from own criteria of the legal entity, from its own organizational structure. From this analysis, it turns out that the doctrine is not peaceful and, although susceptible to criticism, seeks a solution to this problem. | |
