Search

On paper, no one doubts the significance that lines the motivation, at the same time, (judicial) duty and right (for the defendant). However, in practice, often one can encounter cases of merely apparent motivation -formal-, but that does not withstand rigorous critical analysis and cannot be identified with a real motivation -material-. Possible causes for this phenomenon obeying are explored in this paper. And, among all of them, it has been chosen, as an object of this study, the absence of clear standards and targets to respond to the questions «what is there to motivate?» and «how much (or how intensely) should be motivated a decision of this kind?» A few guiding rules are proposed, in order to provide an answer to both questions. Upon these bases, it is reviewed the most common type of deficits in justification, in forensic practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]