The issue of criminal liability of the legal person is established and has given rise to different opinions in modern criminal science, some authors claiming that a legal person can not be an active subject of a crime, and others being
on the contrary view. Debates in international scientific forums in Bucharest (3‑12.X.1929) and Budapest (1978) were completed with the adoption of resolutions recommending the introduction of effective measures of social defense against legal persons for offenses committed.
In the Recommendation R (88) of 20.X.1988 the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, several states have regulated the criminal liability of legal persons, among which: France, Belgium, Italy, Finland, Portugal, Romania, Moldova and Spain, which amended the Criminal Code by the organic Law no. 5/2010, in force since 23.XII.2010.
In the conditions of liability of the legal person, there are considerable differences from country to country, which have been widely examined in this study.
The present article deals with an important aspect of criminal law, that is
committing an offence under criminal law when there is guilt.
The liability of a person, be it a legal or an illegal one, cannot be designed
without taking into account the establishment of the certainty of the guilt form.
In the field of law, guilt is a form of correlation between the illicit deed and
the azthor, which reveals deep psychological meanings and explains the
individual manifestation of a relative value system protected by legal rules.
When the legislator decides to incriminate or prossecute certain dangerous
criminal acts, he base his decision on specific, concrete mental processes used to
commit such acts. The incriminating rule must include in addition on the deed
description, also the description of guilt.
The second chapter within Title II of the new Criminal Code refers to the institution of the „reasonable excuses”, representing circumstances that exclude the second essential trait of an offence – the unjustified feature – or the anti-legal feature. These causes generate in rem effects and they extend to the participants.
The second chapter enshrines the „non-imputability causes” that remove the third essential trait of an offence – the imputability, and that impact on all participants.