FALSE. - I. F. IN GENERE. - Falsehood (Latin: falsum) in the broadest sense indicates any alteration of the truth. This alteration can be made either orally or in writing or by an act of counterfeiting; thus there is numismatic, documentary, personal falsehood, falsehood of emblems, honors, etc.
In the first case there is the lie, calumny, false testimony or perjury. In the second case there may be the alteration or suppression of the text, of the document, or its fabrication ex novo. In the third case the falsehood can take various forms ranging from the substantial alteration of the object to alterations of slight extent and entirely extrinsic.
In the second and third cases there is falsehood or falsification properly so called, which involves the immutatio veri, directed to the imitatio veri.
For there to be the fault and the crime of falsehood, a new element is required, a subjective one, namely dolus. The dolus here consists in the will and the consciousness of carrying out the falsification, whatever the inspiring purpose of the guilty party, even if he acted out of thoughtlessness or levity. It is not necessary that the guilty party represent to himself the possibility of harm as an effect of his falsification, it being sufficient that he acted with consciousness and will for unlawful ends.
The crime of falsehood can therefore be defined as the dolose counterfeiting or the suppression of the truth, carried out to the detriment of another. The object of this crime is to capture public faith. This at least is the classification used by Filangieri and Raffaelli and thereafter in almost all legislations. It is necessary, then, that public faith can be offended by that act. When the falsification descends to such a degree of grossness and obviousness as to be absolutely incapable of luring anyone, there may be sin or crime of attempted or consummated fraud, but not the crime of falsehood.
From this appears the difference between fraud (v.) and the crime of falsehood. In fraud one prescinds from the immutatio veri (proper to falsehood) and aims directly at deception to the detriment of others: moreover the direct object of this crime is the violation of individual faith, whereas in falsehood it is that of the violation of social trust. Likewise the crime of falsehood differs from the crime of plagiarism, where there is imitation of another's work, presented as one's own, prescinding here too from the immutatio veri or, if there is alteration, it is in the name of the author and not in the nature of the composition. The crime of falsehood is further distinguished from perjury, which is a false affirmation confirmed by oath, where there is moreover the invocation of the divinity as witness to the falsehood.
To conclude, two are the conditions necessary for the existence of falsehood, whether it be a crime or only a sin:
1) the alteration of the truth (immutatio veri), which constitutes the corpus peccati or delicti of all acts or facts qualified as falsehood. A record of proceedings containing voluntarily false affirmations of a witness can be considered as falsehood, even if the acts are not altered;
2) the fraudulent intention, that is, the intention of harming others. If the evil will is lacking, there can be no imputation.
There holds for every man in every ethical relationship of his with rational creatures the principle, which is one of clear opposition to every falsehood, poetically enunciated by Manzoni: « Il santo vero mai non tradir » (A. Manzoni, In morte di C. Imbonati, 213-14).
The worst kind of falsehood is found in the alteration of our relations with God: rendering to false gods the worship due to God alone, or rendering it to God himself in a false or superstitious manner (v. SUPERSTITION).
But the greatest field of applications is in our relations with our neighbor or even with ourselves. The vice is fundamental when the falsehood falls upon the proximate norm of morality, the conscience. The formation of a false conscience (v.) has its repercussions throughout life, and, naturally, if adverted to in the act of formation, even if afterwards no longer perceptible, it is culpable in cause, at least until the moment of a formal retraction.
In relations with one's neighbor the use of falsehood is unjust whenever the neighbor has the right to know the truth. Therefore the deceptions that men, even savages, use in hunting animals are neither sin nor crime of falsehood, given the ordering of animals to the service of man and the existence of rights only between man and man. Likewise admitted are the so-called "feints," the "traps" in fencing, in the game of soccer, of chess, etc.; where the apparent falsehood is nothing other than a proof of intelligence, which must not offend the opponent, who must expect such a manner of acting, consenting to the game within the limits of a certain legality.
Simulation too, so thoroughly introduced into the technique of war, is foreign to any injustice, because, as St. Augustine says, « cum aliquis iustum bellum susceperit utrum aperta pugna, utrum insidit vincat, nihil ad iustitium intercat » (Quaestiones in Heptateuchium, I, VI, q. 10). Quite different, however, is erecting falsehood into a system in individual, civic or private relations (contractual relations, obligations of a legal nature, etc.), and in international relations. Here one enters fully into the violation of the ethical and juridical field, where the general rule of the respect owed to truth is the norm.
Moralists here descend to specifications in an apiccola casuistry and speak of falsification of the brand, of money, of documents such as wills, etc.; of false declarations in insurance contracts, in tax returns; of false testimonies or defamatory denunciations, whether made in anonymous form or not.
Recourse to falsehood, in all these cases and others possible, is not only condemned as a grave or light sin, according to the gravity of the matter or its repercussions, but at times also produces the rescindability of the contract or the duty of reparation.
Some more grave forms of falsification take on the character of crimes in canon and civil law.
II. THE CRIME OF FALSE IN THE CIC
The CIC, leaving to civil law the punishment of falsifications of coins, weights, and merchandise, deals only with the falsification of sacred relics, of ecclesiastical documents, and with the false denunciation of solicitation to indecent acts.
1. Falsification of Holy Relics for use as false relics
Whoever makes false relics or knowingly sells, distributes, or exposes them for public veneration is struck instantly (ipso facto) with excommunication reserved to the Ordinary (can. 2326). He is said to expose them to public veneration who has some authority in the matter either by office (e.g., the sacristan) or by the sacred order he has received (e.g., the parish priest, the cleric, etc.).
Furthermore, to sell holy relics is an act of simony (can. 1280 § 1), and therefore the guilty party is also subject to the penalties proper to this crime.
2. Fabrication or falsification of Apostolic Letters
Against this species of the crime of f. there is a whole flowering of penal laws in the ancient canon law (2, 34, X, II, 19). In present-day law, all those who fabricate or falsify letters, decrees, or rescripts of the Apostolic See, or those who knowingly use such letters, decrees, or rescripts, incur instantly (ipso facto) excommunication reserved in a special manner to the Holy See (can. 2360 § 1).
Clerics, moreover, who stain themselves with this crime are further punished with other penalties that may extend as far as deprivation of benefice, office, dignity, or ecclesiastical pension. Religious, finally, must be deprived of all the offices they held in the religious order and of active and passive voice, in addition to the penalties established in their own constitutions (can. 2360 § 2).
Punished with excommunication are the fabrication or the entire compilation of letters, their falsification, or any adulteration in a substantial part; their use or their presentation to obtain the effect, even if in reality, once discovered, e.g., the falsification, they do not obtain the desired effect. By the name of letter, decree, or rescript of the Apostolic See are understood for this purpose all individual public acts, in the form of a letter, decree, or rescript, dispatched by the Holy See, whether by the Roman pontiff or by the Roman dicasteries. It is necessary, however, that they be used knowingly.
Falsifiers, moreover, who use these false or falsified documents incur these censures on two counts.
3. Obreption or subreption in petitions for rescripts
If anyone, in the petition forwarded to the Holy See or to the local Ordinary to obtain a rescript, with fraud or deceit does not tell the truth or sets forth what is false, he can be punished by his own Ordinary according to the gravity of the fault (can. 2361). However, the rescript, if the obreption or subreption is not manifest, can be revalidated, if it is in the hands of a necessary executor, while it is left entirely to the prudence of the executor, if the latter is voluntary (can. 54). In impediments of minor degree (can. 1042 § 2), moreover, the dispensation with regard to Matrimony is valid notwithstanding any obreption or subreption (can. 1054).
4. The falsification of other ecclesiastical documents
Those who fabricate or falsify ecclesiastical letters or acts, whether public or private, or those who knowingly make use of such documents can be punished according to the gravity of the crime (can. 2502). If the forger is moreover someone assigned to the compilation, writing, or preservation of the documents and books in question, he must be deprived of office and other penalties may be added (can. 2406 § 1). If the crime of f. is perpetrated to the detriment of the diocesan Curia in documents of notable interest and it is a case of substantial f., the forger is struck with excommunication simply reserved to the Holy See, not excluding the vicar capitular and the canons, in addition to other penalties applicable by the Ordinary (can. 2405).
These canons include the acts of any ecclesiastical authority inferior to the Apostolic See, such as the acts of bishops, parochial documents, etc.
5. The false denunciation of solicitation
If anyone, by himself or through others, falsely denounces to superiors a confessor for the crime of solicitation (v.), he incurs instantly (ipso facto) excommunication reserved in a special manner to the Apostolic See, from which in no case can he be absolved, unless he has formally retracted the false denunciation, and has repaired the damages, according to his abilities (pro viribus), if there have been any, and has had inflicted upon him a grave and long penance (can. 2503).
Furthermore, here not only is the censure reserved, but the sin itself is by its nature (ratione sui) reserved to the Holy See: indeed it is the only one of its kind in the present legislation (can. 894). And this is well understood, given the gravity of the act that the legislator intends to strike.
As regards the penalties against false witnesses and the crime of collusion, v. TESTI.
III. FALSE IN ITALIAN LAW
The State too must protect itself against the consequences of f., which shakes the foundations of public faith, that is, of that certain juridical [order] in which organized society, for its very existence, needs to believe.
The Italian Penal Code establishes the penalties for f. in Title VII of Book II, under the heading of crimes against public faith. It represses the various forms that f. can assume and distinguishes them into four fundamental categories: 1) falsification of coins, of public credit notes and of revenue stamps, comprising the falsification, alteration and passing of falsified coins and revenue stamps, the counterfeiting of watermarked paper and the manufacture and possession of instruments intended for the falsification of coins and revenue stamps, the falsification of tickets of public transport undertakings and their use, etc. (arts. 453-66); 2) falsity in seals or instruments or marks of authentication, certification or recognition, comprising the counterfeiting of the seal of the State or of other marks of public authentication and the use of such counterfeit seals, the abusive use of genuine seals, the use or possession of measures or weights with a false imprint, the counterfeiting and use of distinctive marks of works of the intellect or of industrial products, the introduction into the territory of the State of products with false marks (arts. 467-75); 3) falsity in documents, comprising the cases of material and ideological f. committed by a public official and by a person charged with a public service, the falsities, material and ideological, committed by private individuals, the use of false documents, the suppression and concealment of genuine documents (arts. 476-93); 4) personal falsity, comprising the substitution of person, the false attestation or declaration concerning one's own or another's identity and personal qualities, the fraud of having certificates of the judicial record issued to oneself and the improper use of such certificates, the usurpation of titles or honors (arts. 494-98).
BBL.: G. Maggiore, Principi di diritto penale, II, Bologna 1934, p. 237 ff.; Womz-Vidal, VII, nos. 496-500; V. Manzini, Trattato di diritto penale italiano, VI, Turin 1946, p. 431 ff.; J. Brys, Juris Canon. compendium, Bruges 1949, pp. 520-30.
Pietro Palazzini-Rodolfo Danieli