Criminalised civil business

Qualitative case studies

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to exhibit the structure of the criminal offense under art. 187 of the Penal Code, namely, fraud, and to analyse its subsumption by means of a critical case studies of criminal cases number 67/2018 “R.F.P on fraud”; 1096/2017 “N.M.B.V on fraud”; and 483/2016 “J.N.B on fraud”, in order to obtain unified criteria regarding penal and procedural norms, at the process preparatory stage. Since the foundation to start the investigation of the mentioned criminal cases is a civil contract, this generates, within the justice system, different criteria. By resolving each case in different ways, there is a lack of consistency in the application of the penal norm and criminal procedural law, which means that at the beginning of the investigation, the punishible act cannot be rightfully graded as fraud, which in turn implies that the judicial proceedings carry different procedural situations, in some cases, the non-intervention of the Public Ministry is argued, pleading the principle of subsidiarity in criminal matters, in other cases it is argued that the cause is to be decided in the civil sphere. As a result of this disparity of understandings of the penal norm and the criminal procedural law, it is frequently the victim who is in disadvantage. For this reason, it is important to unify critiria within institutional actions, with regard to contractual fraud.