A Study On The Error In Cognition Of Illegality

The error in cognition of illegality originated from the “ignorantia juris non excusat,ignorantia facti excusat”, a principle of Ancient Rome. Corresponded to error in cognitionof fact, the error in cognition of illegality was defined as the actor has realized his actionsconsistent with the facts of the constitution of a crime, but not a correct understandingabout the legal nature of his actions. It is included ignorantia legis and aequivocatione legis.The system of error theory was divided into the error in cognition of illegality and the errorin cognition of fact. But, Because of the normative elements of constitutive requirementserror, the expected error and exemption of illegality errors both fact and legal evaluation oferrors, leading to scholars on them to define the nature of public opinions are divergent.The expansion of Statute Law resulted of the error in cognition of illegality researchcontinuously thorough in criminal law theory, and traditional illegality cognition error doesnot affect the criminal liability principles began to waver. Foreign criminal legislation andthe theory confident the error in cognition of illegality should be mitigated or exempted thecriminal liability. But their theoretical basis has divided into the doctrine of natural crimeand statutory offender, the doctrine of strict deliberately, the doctrine of Restrictionsdeliberately, the doctrine of intentionally differences. As a result of our country’s fourelements plane coupled constitutive elements of crime theory and civil law’s three elementsof progressive elements of academic distinction, led to the error of illegal cognition in ourcountry is the focus of the social harmfulness cognition of abolition, and the doctrine ofdeliberately is our rational choice.The error in cognition of illegality is impossible to avoid, because of the criminal laware both the behavior norm and norm of adjudication. In order to better protect the actors’rights, we must to modify the concept of criminal intent to "knowing the action is inviolation of the laws of nature, but hope or indulge in acts of crime, and it is an intentionalcrime. When the perpetrator acts did not recognize its illegality, the error is unavoidable,which is not subject to punishment; the error can be avoided, the mitigation of thepunishment according to law."...