Criminalization of Omissions in Contradiction of Autonomy and Welfare Principles

Criminalizing of omissions is a controversial issue in criminal law and two predominant legal traditions regarding this matter have arisen. At first, it should be proved whether there is any metaphysical difference between act and omission and then whether this difference is to bring about differentiated punishability. Consequentialism and utilitarian have a different view of deontologist. There are two competing principles regarding Criminalizing of omission: autonomy and welfare principles. On the bases of autonomy principle, the subject of criminal law is the negative obligations and criminalizing the omissions lead to the extension of criminal law’s network. Welfare principle’s argument insists on the social corporations and responsibility in the society. They believe that criminalization of omission is not related to existence of differences between an act and omission. However when the omissions brought in the criminal law, it will faced with several technical challenges. This article seeks to discuss arguments of these contradictory principles and technical challenges of criminalization of omissions.