Citation

Maatz KR. Blutalkohol 2001; 38(2): 40-51.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2001, International Committee on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety and Bund gegen Alkohol und Drogen im Straßenverkehr, Publisher Steintor Verlag)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Following the valedictory reading of Prof. em. Dr. Ulrich Heifer with the motto "the part and the whole", the article examines the relation between legal medicine and the law or - in more general terms - the significance of medical scientific findings on the judges' decision making in court. This is done using the concept of "what is and what should be". The limit for alcohol related absolute driving inability is defined by legislation. This example highlights and compares the responsibility of science to come up with empirically established facts ("what is") and the judges' responsibility for their normative conversion ("what should be"). Despite this antinomy of type of problem and method, a synthesis is revealed of the joint search for the "right" law i.e. the law that can also be scientifically backed. Criteria for the determination of driving inability following drug consumption as well as the introduction of breath alcohol sampling as evidence are discussed as further relevant problematic issues in cases of law infringements and criminal justice.