They say that it would be deplorable to investigate in a civil

[mahbubamim077]

This reasoning is clearly flawed. In this case, civil liability is not independent of criminal liability, so much so that the applicable statute of limitations is not that of civil law but that of criminal law. Perhaps even more unacceptable is the other statement: that it is not important to investigate the moral element of the crime. However, this is the opposite of what is written in the law. If the law only requires the statute of limitations to be applied to criminal proceedings if the act or fact constitutes a crime , how can proof of the moral element be dispensed with? So can an act or fact constitute a crime with only its material element, dispensing with the moral element?

11. French and Belgian writers, in whose countries similar provisions exist, explain sms gateway taiwan the reason for the provision. They say that it would be deplorable to investigate in a civil action a crime that has already prescribed. DEMANTE et COLMET DE SANTERRE, 2nd ed., vol. 5, no. 364- bis , p. 660, elucidate the issue in a few words:

“It is understandable, moreover, that the legislator has subjected the prescription of civil action, which arises from a crime provided for in the Penal Code, to the same conditions as the prescription of public action, because he wanted to interest the injured parties in filing their actions in a timely manner, and because he feared the deplorable effect that would be produced by the judicial verification of an infraction of criminal law that the courts would be obliged to leave unpunished”.