Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §50.16.131.pr-50.16.131.1

Distinction Between Penalty and Fine and the Power to Impose

Passage 8945 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Ulpian explains the relationship between offence and punishment, details the conceptual distinctions between a fine and a punishment, and specifies the respective authorities empowered to impose them.

[IDEM libro tertio ad legem Iuliam et Papiam. ] §50.16.131.prAliud 'fraus' est, aliud 'poena': fraus enim sine poena esse potest, poena sine fraude esse non potest.
[THE SAME, from the third book on the Lex Iulia et Papia.] An 'offence' is one thing, a 'punishment' another; for an offence can exist without punishment, but punishment cannot exist without an offence.
poena est noxae uindicta, fraus et ipsa noxa dicitur et quasi poenae quaedam praeparatio.
Punishment is the vengeance for a harm; an offence is itself also called a harm, and is, as it were, a certain preparation for punishment.
§50.16.131.1Inter 'multam' autem et 'poenam' multum interest, cum poena generale sit nomen omnium delictorum coercitio, multa specialis peccati, cuius animaduersio hodie pecuniaria est: poena autem non tantum pecuniaria, uerum capitis et existimationis irrogari solet.
Furthermore, there is a great difference between a 'fine' and a 'punishment', since punishment is the general term for the coercion of all delicts, whereas a fine is for a specific fault, the penalty for which today is monetary. Punishment, however, is accustomed to be imposed not only monetarily, but also upon life and reputation.
et multa quidem ex arbitrio eius uenit, qui multam dicit: poena non irrogatur, nisi quae quaque lege uel quo alio iure specialiter huic delicto imposita est: quin immo multa ibi dicitur, ubi specialis poena non est imposita.
And while a fine indeed proceeds from the discretion of the one who pronounces it, a punishment is not imposed unless it has been specifically laid down for this delict by some law or other legal authority; indeed, rather, a fine is pronounced in those cases where a specific punishment has not been laid down.
item multam is dicere potest, cui iudicatio data est: magistratus solos et praesides prouinciarum posse multam dicere mandatis permissum est.
Likewise, he can pronounce a fine to whom the power of adjudication has been granted; it is permitted by the mandates that only magistrates and governors of provinces can pronounce a fine.
poenam autem unusquisque inrogare potest, cui huius criminis siue delicti exsecutio competit.
On the other hand, anyone can impose a punishment to whom the prosecution of this crime or delict belongs.

Notes

  1. 50.16.131.1coercitio — The noun 'coercitio' (coercion/restraint) stands in apposition with the preceding 'generale nomen' (general term), explaining the substantive role of 'poena' (punishment).
  2. 50.16.131.1magistratus solos et praesides prouinciarum posse multam dicere mandatis permissum est — An accusative with infinitive (AcI) construction ('magistratus solos... posse...') is used as the subject of the impersonal passive main verb 'permissum est'.
  3. 50.16.131.1cui huius criminis siue delicti exsecutio competit — The relative pronoun 'cui' (dative singular masculine) refers to the antecedent 'unusquisque' in the main clause. The verb 'competit' (belongs to, is within the competence of) governs the dative case.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §50.16.131.pr-50.16.131.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:50.16.131.pr-50.16.131.1

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.