Search

Long-term safety has to be assured for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste to prevent contamination of the biosphere. A numerical framework for the probabilistic assessment of hazardous events regarding nuclear waste disposal in salt domes is developed here. The goal is to numerically simulate transport times and mass fluxes of radionuclides into the biosphere, and to couple this with a probabilistic framework for reliability assessment. This model can deal with uncertainties such as the impact of external events (major climate changes, human activities, earthquakes) on subsurface structure, material properties and boundary conditions. To quantify the impact of external events, a numerical model of the far field of a salt dome disposal site is generated. It includes the simulation of density-driven (thermohaline) flow, heat transport, transport of dissolved salt and a radionuclide in discretely-fractured porous media using the FE-code HEATFLOW-SMOKER Version V3/TC2.As a first step in quantifying the effects of uncertain parameters in the context of nuclear waste disposal in salt domes, the salt dome problem (HYDROCOIN level 1 case 5) is further investigated in terms of groundwater age. Groundwater age is one of the exclusion criteria in the site selection process for nuclear waste deposits and therefore of great importance. Groundwater age is here calculated as a transport problem using steady-state flow velocities. This problem is density-driven due to transport of salt into the model domain and the steady-state solution is highly dependent on dispersion. A sensitivity analysis is carried out to quantify the effect of uncertain dispersion on flow and salt distribution and resulting groundwater age. Preliminary simulation results demonstrate that both salt distribution and groundwater age in steady-state are significantly affected by longitudinal and transversal dispersivity. Resulting flow velocities are higher with increased dispersion and therefore lead to a decreased maximum groundwater age in the model domain.

espanolEl trabajo ofrece una reflexion en torno al elemento subjetivo de la imprudencia y la delimitacion entre esta y el dolo. Se cuestionan las doctrinas que, en ambos planos, niegan la relevancia de consideraciones subjetivas y adoptan concepciones normativas motivadas por el rechazo a las posturas “psicologizantes”. Los autores argumentan el caracter doloso de aquellos supuestos que suponen conocer o asumir el hecho tipico como consecuencia practicamente segura de la conducta (dolo directo) o, al menos, con una alta probabilidad, de modo que suponga prever un peligro concreto (dolo eventual). En cambio, las conductas imprudentes se refieren a una peligrosidad (ex ante) de menor entidad y a riesgos menos irrazonables: el agente solo alcanza a considerar un peligro general, representandose un riesgo abstracto de realizacion del hecho tipico. No obstante, puede haber imprudencia penalmente relevante, aun sin representacion actual del hecho tipico, cuando se adopte un comportamiento cuya peligrosidad no puede desconocerse, justificandose de este modo la imputacion de un “deber de prevision”. EnglishThis paper deals with the subjective element of criminal negligence and the conceptual distinction between negligence, or recklessness, and intention, as different mens rea states. The authors criticize the legal theories that deny the relevance of subjective considerations while adopting normative conceptions motivated by psychologizing objections. They argue that intention requires assuming the realization of the typical event as a practically certain consequence (direct intent) or, at least, with a high probability, so that it implies foresee a specific danger (eventual intent). On the other hand, negligent harmful conducts are dangers of lesser importance (ex-ante), or less unreasonable risks: the agent is conscious of a general danger, being able to foresee an abstract risk of realization of the typical harmful event. However, there may be criminally relevant negligence, even without actual foresight, when adopting a behavior whose danger cannot be ignored, thus justifying the imputation of a “duty of foresight”.

RESUMEN: El estudio aborda la relevancia de los cursos causales hipotéticos para la imputación normativa del resultado a la conducta imprudente. Se exponen argumentos centrados en el perfil teleológico de las reglas de diligencia que concretan el deber de cuidado, defendiendo la adopción de los criterios del “aumento del riesgo” o bien, tratándose de supuestos de comisión por omisión, de la “disminución de oportunidades”. Se aclara la relación dogmática entre dicha valoración y el criterio de la “realización del riesgo” (o “fin de protección de la norma”), reafirmando la correspondencia estructural entre los delitos comisivos y los “omisivos impropios”. Finalmente, se pone especial énfasis en el significado práctico y político-criminal de la estructura dogmática defendida en materia de responsabilidad penal médica por error de diagnóstico.

A discussion concerning whether to conceive Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems as responsible moral entities, also known as “artificial moral agents” (AMAs), has been going on for some time. In this regard, we argue that the notion of “moral agency” is to be attributed only to humans based on their autonomy and sentience, which AI systems lack. We analyze human responsibility in the presence of AI systems in terms of meaningful control and due diligence and argue against fully automated systems in medicine. With this perspective in mind, we focus on the use of AI-based diagnostic systems and shed light on the complex networks of persons, organizations and artifacts that come to be when AI systems are designed, developed, and used in medicine. We then discuss relational criteria of judgment in support of the attribution of responsibility to humans when adverse events are caused or induced by errors in AI systems.

This paper deals with the relevance of bioethical guidelines for the prioritization of patient care. These guidelines should guide health professionals’ triage procedures in exceptional situations of resource shortage. Also, they would contribute to evaluate the legal liability of professionals in these situations.

This paper deals with the relevance of bioethical guidelines for the prioritization of patient care. These guidelines should guide health professionals' triage procedures in exceptional situations of resource shortage. Also, they would contribute to evaluate the legal liability of professionals in these situations.

espanolObjeto de este estudio es el metodo de concrecion del deber de cuidado, esto es, el conjunto de criterios a traves de los cuales el juez tiene que definir la pauta de cuidado (la norma de conducta) objetivamente adecuada y exigible, expectativa normativa cuya infraccion integra la «dimension objetiva» de la imprudencia en Derecho penal. En la primera parte (par. 1-4) se consideran algunas teorias normativas y se destacan sus limites. Esta etapa del analisis permite proponer una perspectiva teorica alternativa basada en la distincion conceptual entre pautas de cuidado “tipicas” (positivas y determinadas, o predeterminadas por las praxis, las normas consuetudinarias, las leges artis) y “atipicas” (que solo pueden ser definidas por los tribunales acudiendo a parametros normativos ideales), que al autor desarrolla en la segunda parte (par. 5-7), llegando a definir un criterio general y comparativo de “gravedad” (y “exigibilidad objetiva”) para definir las conductas lesivas “objetivamente” imprudentes. Conforme a este criterio indicativo, la infraccion de una pauta de cuidado “atipica” (no predeterminada por lo “usual” y las leges artis) puede ser considerada tan grave como para merecer la misma relevancia (penal) atribuida a la inobservancia de las normas modales pre-definidas (“tipicas”) solo en la medida en que el cumplimiento de la expectativa de cuidado ajustada a la Masfigur (el “hombre cuidadoso”) pueda valorarse exigible de la misma manera. Cierran el estudio (par. 8-9) algunas reflexiones de iure condito y de iure condendo, con especial referencia a los ordenamientos italiano y espanol. italianoOggetto di questo contributo e il metodo di concretizzazione del dovere di diligenza, cioe l’insieme dei criteri attraverso cui il giudice e chiamato a definire la regola cautelare obiettivamente esigibile, aspettativa normativa la cui inosservanza integra la cd. «misura oggettiva» della colpa penale. Nella prima parte del lavoro (par. 1-4) vengono considerate alcune teorie normative ed evidenziati i loro limiti. Questa fase dell’analisi consente di avanzare un’ipotesi di studio basata sulla distinzione fra regole cautelari “tipiche” (positive e determinate, o predeterminate dagli usi, dalle prassi cautelari o dalle leges artis) e “atipiche” (definibili dal giudice in base ad un parametro normativo ideale), che l’autore sviluppa nella seconda parte (par. 5-7), dove giunge a proporre una criterio generale e comparativo di “gravita” (e di “esigibilita oggettiva”) funzionale alla definizione delle condotte lesive “oggettivamente” colpose. Secondo questo criterio indicativo l’inosservanza di una regola cautelare “atipica” (non predefinita dagli usi o dalle leges artis) puo essere ritenuta tanto grave da meritare la stessa rilevanza assegnata alla violazione delle regole modali predefinite (“tipiche”) solo qualora l’adeguamento all’aspettativa di condotta parametrata alla Masfigur possa ritenersi altrettanto esigibile. Il lavoro si chiude (par. 8-9) con alcune brevi indicazioni de iure condito e de iure condendo con particolare riferimento all’ordinamento italiano e a quello spagnolo.

This chapter consists of a brief discussion on some legal aspects concerning scientists’ responsibility in risk prevention processes. After proposing some introductory considerations on scientists’ responsibility as such, the author deals with the L’Aquila earthquake crisis of 2009, when a strong quake destroyed significant parts of L’Aquila (Italy) and surrounding villages, killing more than 300 people. The chapter focuses on the relations between scientific knowledge, normative expectations, decision-making and criminal negligence for ‘failed’ risk assessment and management, paying particular attention to the role of ‘regulatory science’ in constructing the ‘reasonable person’ normative standard of care in the theory of criminal negligence. This allows explaining why the first judgement in the L’Aquila trial (2012) is not convincing, having misunderstood how policy-relevant science should participate in prevention processes and the construction of normative standards. In his conclusions, the author suggests some reasons for the recent tendency to blame experts when natural or technological disasters occur.

espanolFrente al fenomeno de la medicina defensiva, una opcion politico-criminal consiste en reducir el alcance de la culpa (imprudencia) penal medica como criterio de imputacion, con el objetivo de conjugar, por un lado, el principio de responsabilidad y, por otro lado, la implementacion de mejores condiciones para el ejercicio de la actividad medica y la proteccion de los bienes juridicos involucrados. En este sentido, la presente contribucion analiza criticamente las reformas adoptadas por el legislador italiano en 2012 y 2017, y algunos aspectos propios de la “imprudencia profesional” regulada por el Codigo Penal espanol; poniendo un especial enfasis, en ambos contextos, a la problematica nocion de “impericia”. En las conclusiones se ofrecen algunas advertencias y sugerencias deducibles desde la perspectiva comparada tenida en consideracion. En particular, se muestran los limites de la heterointegracion normativa del cuidado debido a traves de protocolos y guidelines; se defiende la oportunidad de distinguir entre pautas de cuidado “tipicas” (leges artis predeterminadas) y expectativas de cuidado “atipicas” (definibles en el marco del juicio); y, sobre esa base, se propone un criterio de culpa (imprudencia) grave para las hipotesis de culpa medica in eligendo. EnglishOne of the possible political-criminal options, when facing the phenomenon of Defensive Medicine, consists in reducing the scope of criminal negligence as a criterion of imputation in the field of medical malpractice law, with the aim of combining, on the one hand, the principle of responsibility and, on the other hand, the implementation of better conditions for the protection of the fundamental rights involved. In this regard, the author analyses the reforms adopted by the Italian legislator in 2012 and 2017 and the “professional negligence” as provided by the Spanish Penal Code. The conclusions offer some suggestions and warnings inferable from the comparative perspective considered. In particular, the author argues some limits of the normative heterointegration of the duty of care by protocols and guidelines; he defends a distinction between “typical” (predetermined) standards of care and “atypical” duties of care (definable within the framework of a trial); and, on that basis, he proposes a criterion of “gross negligence” for the hypothesis of medical culpa in eligendo.

En la primera parte de este artículo se retoma el debate sobre la responsabilidad penal por mala práctica médica imprudente ante la progresiva estandarización de las prácticas clínicas. Su consideración crítica permite configurar un paradigma de imputación capaz de conjugar los intereses de los pacientes con aquéllos de los profesionales de la salud. En la segunda parte se plantea la hipótesis principal, argumentando cómo el mismo paradigma puede permitir marcar los límites de la responsabilidad del profesional por eventos adversos causados por la adopción de indicaciones erróneas de sistemas de inteligencia artificial. En las conclusiones se destaca cómo todo proceso de uniformación y automatización encuentra límites insuperables en el pluralismo, la autonomía y la ética de la responsabilidad.

Submitted by Patrícia Rabello (rabello@stj.jus.br) on 2017-01-30T20:52:59Z No. of bitstreams: 2 contribucion_victima_imputacion_perin.pdf: 410599 bytes, checksum: fd7342869b5b7450adea19e5abced933 (MD5) license.txt: 1239 bytes, checksum: c9b4c351324448672315a00808efb725 (MD5) Approved for entry into archive by Roberta Marins (rmarins@stj.jus.br) on 2017-02-07T17:41:43Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 contribucion_victima_imputacion_perin.pdf: 410599 bytes, checksum: fd7342869b5b7450adea19e5abced933 (MD5) license.txt: 1239 bytes, checksum: c9b4c351324448672315a00808efb725 (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2017-02-07T17:41:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 contribucion_victima_imputacion_perin.pdf: 410599 bytes, checksum: fd7342869b5b7450adea19e5abced933 (MD5) license.txt: 1239 bytes, checksum: c9b4c351324448672315a00808efb725 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 Desenvolve algumas reflexões críticas sobre a teoria do delito imprudente e a imputação objetiva do resultado, com referência aos limites do dever de cuidado do empresário na prevenção dos riscos laborais e os supostos de "contribuição culposa" da própria vítima na realização do trabalho danoso. O estudo avalia as experiências italiana e espanhola.