ABSTRACT
The impersonality of the fine stems from the impersonal nature of money, the object with which the fine is paid, which then makes the payment of the fine akin to the payment of any other debt of a civil type. Some legal scholars opposed the strictly penal nature of the fine and advocated converting the fine into a public or civil obligation. Consequently, few people at the time objected to an innocent third party paying the fine, either voluntarily or through the imposition of a joint or vicarious obligation. The possibility of categorizing third-party payment of fines as an offence has also been considered. There was also minimal objection to the fine being transferred to an innocent third party, as occurs when an offender dies before making payment. Precisely in one of the few cases in which the source of the money does not seem problematic, legislation prohibited measures being adopted to prevent payment by a third party.
