Concept and Significance of the Natural Unit of Action
Die natural unit of action is a term from criminal law that serves to properly assess and attribute human behaviors within the context of a criminal offense. It refers to the grouping of several individual acts into a legal entity when, due to their temporal and situational proximity as well as a unified intent, they appear as one coherent course of conduct. The definition and application of the natural unit of action are central for determining the rules of concurrence in criminal offenses and for distinguishing it from other forms of action, such as the natural or legal unit of action.
Dogmatic Classification
Distinction from Other Units of Action
The natural unit of action must be distinguished from the legal unit of action, which is determined by legal evaluations, such as in the case of a continuous offense or a multi-act offense. While the legal unit of action groups several individual acts together for normative reasons, the natural unit of action is based on an evaluative consideration of the facts.
Relationship to Action within the Meaning of Section 52 StGB
In connection with Section 52 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), which regulates ideal concurrence (tateinheit), the natural unit of action serves to assess several statutory individual acts as a single offense, provided they objectively constitute a unified course of events. This helps avoid artificial multiplicity of offenses and inappropriate prosecution.
Requirements and Scope of Application
Requirements for the Natural Unit of Action
A natural unit of action exists when several individual acts
- are closely connected in time and space,
- are substantively linked to each other,
- derive from a unified intent of the perpetrator,
- und appear, from the perspective of an objective third party, as a single coherent occurrence appear.
Typical examples include repeated firing of a gun within a very brief period or several blows in quick succession, which are regarded as a single physical altercation.
Areas of Application in Criminal Law
The natural unit of action is particularly applied in cases of
- offenses of bodily injury (for example, several blows during an argument),
- theft offenses (theft of several similar items in direct succession from the same location),
- fraud offenses (multiple acts of deception in direct connection),
- other crimes where several actions are to be considered as a single course of events.
Distinctions and Special Cases
Boundary of the Natural Unit of Action
A natural unit of action does not exist if there is a considerable temporal, spatial, or substantive separation between the actions or if there are different criminal intents. In such cases, multiple offenses (tatmehrheit) are generally assumed.
Combination with Other Units of Action
In practice, the natural unit of action may coincide with the legal unit of action. Where there are several natural units of action within the context of a continuous offense, the individual natural units are part of a more comprehensive legal unit of action.
Case Law and Practical Relevance
Key Judgments
Case law has specified the requirements and boundaries of the natural unit of action in several decisions. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) always decides based on the individual case, but regularly emphasizes the need for a unified situational event and a summary of circumstances.
A guiding principle from case law: “If the perpetrator continues his conduct in a direct spatial and temporal context and pursues a unified plan of action, a natural unit of action generally exists.”
Consequences for Sentencing and Prosecution
The classification of circumstances as a natural unit of action affects the applicable attribution rule (Section 52 StGB) and thus is of key importance for determination of concurrence and competition in criminal proceedings. If several individual acts are grouped into a natural unit of action, they are assessed as a single offense, which regularly leads to a more favorable overall penalty and prevents the accumulation of multiple punishments.
Summary and Significance for the Legal Order
The natural unit of action is a central instrument in the doctrine of concurrence in criminal law. It ensures appropriate and substantiated consideration of relevant life circumstances in the context of criminal prosecution and enables the unification of several outwardly separate but closely connected acts under one legal assessment. This guarantees balanced sentencing that neither creates an artificial multiplication of offenses nor allows for procedural overreach.
The precise determination of a natural unit of action is always based on the circumstances of the individual case and requires careful consideration of all relevant factors. The criteria developed for differentiation are of great significance for legal practice and contribute to clarity and fairness in criminal proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions
When does a natural unit of action exist in the legal sense?
In the legal context, a natural unit of action refers to the grouping of several individual acts into a legal entity, provided they are so closely linked that a natural perspective would regard them as a single occurrence. A natural unit of action is typically assumed when several actions are based on a unified intent and are closely connected in time and space. This is particularly relevant in criminal law when it must be determined whether multiple criminal acts are to be considered as a single offense (the so-called natural unit of action) or as separate offenses (multiplicity of offenses). Key criteria are therefore the unified intent, similarity of execution, and the connection of the acts. Typical examples from case law include a series of fist blows during a physical altercation or several instances of forging signatures in close temporal proximity.
What is the significance of the natural unit of action in criminal law?
In criminal law, the natural unit of action plays a major role in determining relationships of concurrence, i.e., whether one or several independent criminal acts are to be assumed. This is relevant, for example, within Sections 52 ff. StGB regarding sentencing for concurrence and multiplicity of acts. If a natural unit of action exists, several individual acts are treated as one “offense” in the criminal sense. This affects sentencing because only one penalty is imposed, based on the most serious offense committed. Therefore, recognizing a natural unit of action generally has a mitigating effect for the defendant. Whether such a unit is present in an individual case depends on the assessment of the actual circumstances and is differentiated by case law.
How is the natural unit of action distinguished from the legal unit of action?
The distinction from the legal unit of action is significant because the two concepts relate to different circumstances. While the natural unit of action stems from the actual, natural course of events (fulfillment of the elements of the offense by a coherent, unified action), the legal unit of action results from legal evaluations (such as through so-called bracket effects or relationships of specialty/subsidiarity). Thus, a legal unit of action may exist if several criminal offenses are fulfilled by a single act (e.g., theft and unlawful entry), whereas in the natural unit of action, several individual acts are grouped together due to their connection. The distinction is crucial in each case for the correct application of the rules on concurrence and sentencing.
Can different statutory offenses be fulfilled within a natural unit of action?
As a rule, the natural unit of action relates to similar acts that are connected within a single course of events. In exceptional cases, however, the fulfillment of different statutory offenses by a unified event can also be considered a natural unit of action if they are inextricably linked and represent part-acts of an overall event. In practice, however, this is rare and case law treats it restrictively in order to avoid an artificial reduction of criminal responsibility. The decisive factor is always a precise assessment of whether a truly unified course of events exists and whether the different offenses are exhausted in one and the same natural occurrence.
What are typical examples of a natural unit of action in case law?
Classic examples of a natural unit of action include hitting repeatedly during a brawl, firing several shots in quick succession in the course of an offense, continuous removal of cash from a register with a single intent to gain over a short time period, and successive damage to several objects during a single opportunity. The natural unit of action is particularly often accepted in cases of repeated, similar acts where the intent to achieve a unified goal is evident. Case law always requires a close temporal, spatial, and substantive connection as well as a unified intent.
What are the consequences of the existence of a natural unit of action for sentencing?
The existence of a natural unit of action means that only one penalty is imposed for several acts actually committed. For sentencing, this means that not every single action is assessed separately, but the entire course of conduct is regarded as one “offense” within the meaning of the Criminal Code. The decisive factor for the severity of the penalty is the most serious fulfillment of a single statutory offense within the natural unit of action, whereby aggravating circumstances from the remaining acts can be considered. Recognizing a natural unit of action can thus result in significant leniency compared to treating each act as a separate offense, as cumulative punishment is omitted.
How does a court determine whether a natural unit of action is present?
Courts determine the existence of a natural unit of action through an overall assessment of all relevant facts, especially the perpetrator’s intent, the substantive connection of the acts, as well as the time, place, and direction of the individual acts. The decisive point is whether the external course of events is so closely intertwined that distinguishing separate offenses would appear artificial. It is not based on mathematical calculation of time intervals, but on an evaluative consideration of the overall sequence in accordance with case law. The courts follow a consistent line set by supreme court decisions and carefully compare the course of events with established case groups of the natural unit of action.
