CAUSAL LINK IN GERMAN AND UZBEK CRIMINAL LAW
Keywords:
causal link; criminal law; proof; conditio sine qua non (Bedingungstheorie); objective attribution (objektive Zurechnung); adequate causation (adäquate Kausalität); plurality of causes; alternative causation; expert examination; judicial practice; Germany; Uzbekistan.Abstract
The article is devoted to a comparative legal analysis of causation in the criminal law of Germany and Uzbekistan as a category connecting an act with the resulting consequence in offences with a material corpus delicti. The purpose of the study is to identify similarities and differences in the theoretical foundations for establishing causation, legal regulation, judicial practice and evidentiary problems, as well as to formulate recommendations for improving the quality of law enforcement. Methodologically, the research is based on functional-comparative and dogmatic approaches and draws on primary sources (the StGB/StPO and the practice of the Bundesgerichtshof; the Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code of Uzbekistan and acts of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan), as well as modern scholarly publications in Russian and German over the last three decades. The article shows that the German model combines the broad factual test of conditio sine qua non (Bedingungstheorie) with subsequent normative filtering through objective attribution (objektive Zurechnung), whereas in Uzbekistan causation is both a mandatory subject of proof under the Criminal Procedure Code and is specified through Plenum explanations and official reviews of judicial practice.
References
Strafgesetzbuch [StGB] (German Criminal Code), § 13, Gesetze im Internet (Laws on the Internet). from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/index.html
Strafprozessordnung [StPO] (German Code of Criminal Procedure), § 261, Gesetze im Internet (Laws on the Internet). from https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/index.html
Уголовно-процессуальный кодекс Республики Узбекистан (Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan). (1994, September 22). Art. 82. Lex.uz. https://lex.uz/docs/111463https://lex.uz/docs/111463
Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] (Federal Court of Justice). (2015, December 3). Urteil 4 StR 223/15 (Judgment 4 StR 223/15), HRRS 2016 Nr. 77. HRRS-Datenbank (HRRS database). https://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/4/15/4-223-15.phphttps://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/4/15/4-223-15.php
Ўзбекистон Республикаси Олий судининг Жиноят ишлари бўйича судлов ҳайъати томонидан 2024 йилнинг тўртинчи чорагида тафтиш тартибида кўрилган ишлар бўйича суд амалиёти обзори (Review of judicial practice in criminal cases considered by the Judicial Panel for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan in the supervisory review procedure in the fourth quarter of 2024) [Обзор судебной практики по уголовным делам, IV квартал 2024 года (Review of judicial practice in criminal cases, fourth quarter of 2024)]. Sud.uz. https://sud.uz/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/jib4.pdfhttps://sud.uz/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/jib4.pdf
Khudaykulov, F. (2022). Причинная связь в уголовном праве и ее соотношение с детерминизмом (Causation in criminal law and its relationship with determinism). Общество и инновации (Society and Innovations), 3(8/S), 122–131. https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol3-iss8/S-pp122-131https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol3-iss8/S-pp122-131
Постановление Пленума Верховного суда Республики Узбекистан от 27.06.2007 № 6 «О судебной практике по делам о причинении умышленного телесного повреждения» (Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated June 27, 2007 No. 6 “On judicial practice in cases concerning intentional bodily injury”). Lex.uz. https://lex.uz/docs/1592421https://lex.uz/docs/1592421
Постановление Пленума Верховного суда Республики Узбекистан от 26.06.2015 № 10 «О некоторых вопросах судебной практики по делам, связанным с преступлениями против безопасности движения и эксплуатации транспорта» (Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated June 26, 2015 No. 10 “On certain issues of judicial practice in cases related to crimes against traffic safety and the operation of transport”). Lex.uz. https://lex.uz/ru/docs/2710286https://lex.uz/ru/docs/2710286
conditio sine qua non — условие, без которого нет (Latin: a condition without which the result would not occur)
Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] (Federal Court of Justice). (1993, March 30). Urteil 5 StR 720/92 (Judgment 5 StR 720/92), BGHSt 39, 195 (alternative Kausalität / alternative causation). HRRS-Datenbank (HRRS database). https://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/5/92/5-720-92.phphttps://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/5/92/5-720-92.php
Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] (Federal Court of Justice). (1995, August 2). Urteil 2 StR 221/94 (Judgment 2 StR 221/94), BGHSt 41, 206 (Holzschutzmittel / wood preservatives). HRRS-Datenbank (HRRS database). https://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/2/94/2-221-94.pdfhttps://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/hrr/2/94/2-221-94.pdf
