ABSTRACT

In countries where there is no statutory definition of "intention" for the purpose of criminal offences, cases of "practical certainty" confront courts as a problem concerning the proper interpretation of criminal offences. In Canada, the proposed draft Criminal Code of 1987 contains three fault terms concerning consequences: purpose, recklessness and negligence. The Draft Criminal Code for England and Wales of 1989 does not include the term '"purpose" in the list of fault terms appearing in the general part. A decision that in a certain offence recklessness should not suffice for conviction, and that only intention should suffice, should only be taken if there is a special reason to support it. In order to obtain a blackmail conviction, it is enough to show that one of the objectives of the accused in making the demand was to make a gain for himself or another.