Lex Humana (ISSN 2175-0947)

INVOLUNTARY RESPONSES AND THEIR LEGAL CONSEQUENCES IN CRIMINAL LAW

Joaquim Ramalho — Mon, 04 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000

Criminal liability represents the foundational criterion in the evaluative process of attributing a criminal offense to an individual. Within the framework of criminal law, not all human conduct warrants legal scrutiny or penal response, even in instances involving the breach of legally protected norms. It is not sufficient to establish a mere violation of an objective legal duty, a subjective link must also be present between the agent and the act committed. This link is predicated upon the capacity for conscious decision-making and voluntary control. Accordingly, the primary objective of this study is to introduce insights from neuroscience that elucidate automatic and innate mechanisms underlying certain human behaviors, particularly reflex actions. These involuntary actions, by their very nature, lack the necessary volitional component and, therefore, fall outside the scope of criminal liability.

NEUROETHICS AND CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

Rodrigo Guerra — Mon, 04 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000

This paper aims to demonstrate the importance of integrating neuroethics into the doctrine of imputation. To this end, we will proceed as follows. First, we will examine the connections between brain damage and the lack of control in agents’ moral deliberation. Second, with the aim of illustrating the main contributions of neuroethics to agents’ decision-making, we will present its relation to the doctrine of imputation. Third, we will explore the notion of imputability in relation to the psychobiological capacity to understand the characteristics of blameworthy behavior, showing that in this area neuroethics can contribute on a second-order level. Finally, in the fourth section, we will reflect—by way of conclusion—on how it may be possible to establish a bridge between neuroethics and the lack of control in agents, whether from the field of neuroscience or psychiatry.

AI DECISION MAKING AND CRIMINAL LAW EXECUTION

Carlo Piparo — Mon, 04 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The execution of criminal judgements represents a crucial phase in the penal system, where the objectives of punitive justice and offender rehabilitation materialize. In recent years, however, the increasing complexity of prison management and the demand for greater efficiency in public administration have driven interest toward the integration of Artificial Intelligence technologies into the penal execution process. This paper investigates the intersection between AI, criminal law execution, and the rehabilitative aims of punishment. While AI holds potential for optimizing prison operations —through predictive analytics, behavioral monitoring, and improved resource allocatio — its application raises significant legal, ethical, and operational concerns. Core issues include the transparency of algorithms, the risk of discrimination, and the potential erosion of fundamental rights. The question at the heart of this research is whether AI-driven decision-making is compatible with public safety and with the constitutional and humanistic goal of inmate rehabilitation.

CRIMINAL MIND OR CRIMINAL SITUATION?

Md Sohel Rana — Mon, 04 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000

Rational Choice Theory (RCT) has consistently backed the theoretical development of criminal law's offender culpability and the justification of deterrent strategies, based on the assumption that crimes are committed via rational, calculative decision-making. This study critically explores the assumptions behind RCT in criminal law, using current breakthroughs in behavioral science and situational crime prevention theory. It contends that the standard rational offender theory fails to account for cognitive bias, emotional manipulation, and situational contingency, all of which have a significant influence on criminal behavior. From a doctrinal standpoint, it undermines the legal conception of mens rea as a pure exercise in reason and necessitates a rethinking of culpability norms that recognize restricted rationality and impaired decision-making capability. The article also emphasizes the fragility of deterrence theory based on rational actor assumptions and recommends legal alignment with integrative models that integrate behavioral information with environmental modification to prevent crime. The article further broadens the legal analysis beyond the rational actor model by placing offender decision-making within a broader contextual and psychological context, proposing that criminal responsibility and punishment would more accurately reflect the nuanced interplay of cognitive limitations and situational cues. This reconceptualization not only makes criminal law more consistent with scientific realities, but it also opens the door to more complex and successful crime prevention tactics that transcend punitive rationales. Furthermore, this study contributes to legal scholarship by encouraging a jurisprudential model that promotes interdisciplinarity, thereby improving the theoretical coherence and practical effectiveness of criminal justice systems in addressing contemporary crime and offender behavior challenges.

NEUROETHICS IN DIGITAL CONTRACT BREACH

Fernando Tantaru — Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0000

The digital age has introduced new and complex patterns of contract breaches that extend beyond traditional civil law frameworks into the realm of moral and cognitive behavior. As digital transactions become increasingly mediated by platforms, users’ decisions are often shaped not only by legal norms but also by psychological tendencies, cognitive biases, and the unique nature of virtual environments. This article explores how decision-making processes involved in the breach of digital contracts—such as subscription fraud, identity manipulation, and the misuse of trial-based services—can be examined through the interdisciplinary lens of neuroethics and non-criminal deviant behavior. Drawing upon insights from civil law, moral philosophy, and cognitive neuroscience, the study argues that certain contract violations are driven by internal justifications, reduced empathy in digital contexts, and utilitarian thinking patterns, rather than clear intentional wrongdoing. The research utilizes a normative-qualitative legal approach, contextualized within Indonesian civil law, while engaging broader interdisciplinary discourse. The objective is to demonstrate how civil law responses can be enriched by understanding the underlying neurocognitive and moral dimensions of contractual misconduct in digital settings. Ultimately, the paper proposes a shift in how we perceive accountability and legal responsibility in platform-based interactions—not merely as violations of formal obligations, but as moral choices influenced by human cognitive architecture. This perspective can contribute to a more adaptive and human-centered legal framework in addressing emerging legal challenges in the digital economy.

Keywords: Digital contracts. Neuroethics. Moral decision-making. Deviant behavior.