This article presents a critique to the duress' doctrine in Chile. It focusses, in particular, on the lack of awareness of the legitimacy problem that underlies it. The justification based on the idea of the limits of rights against the necessity (necessitas legem non habet) is irrelevant in a tradition that recognizes a theory of differentiation. On the other hand, the reference to the principle of overriding interest offers no justification or is expressive of a utilitarian justification of necessity. This, in turn, is incompatible with the structure of law and legal exculpations. Finally, the article offers a plausible reconstruction of the conflict that underlies duress and the reasons for exculpation.
|Translated title of the contribution||The justification of duress in Chilean criminal law. At the same time, introduction to the problem of the doctrine of duress in Chile|
|Number of pages||32|
|Journal||Revista de Derecho|
|State||Published - 2014|