Which category includes acts illegal solely because a statute prohibits them, not because they are inherently evil?

Which category includes acts illegal solely because a statute prohibits them, not because they are inherently evil?

• A. Mala in se
• B. Mala prohibita
• C. Corpus delicti
• D. Actus reus

Answer: (B)

In criminal law, some acts are considered wrong in themselves (mala in se), while others are illegal mainly because the law says so (mala prohibita). The question points to conduct that is prohibited not for its inherent evil but simply because a statute forbids it. That describes mala prohibita—the acts are criminal due to legal prohibition, not because they are intrinsically harmful or immoral. Examples include things like speeding or certain licensing violations—conduct that’s regulated by law to maintain order or safety, even if the act isn’t morally condemned on its own. Corpus delicti refers to the essential facts proving a crime occurred, not a classification of the conduct. Actus reus refers to the actual physical act or omission that comprises the crime, again a different concept.

In criminal law, some acts are considered wrong in themselves (mala in se), while others are illegal mainly because the law says so (mala prohibita). The question points to conduct that is prohibited not for its inherent evil but simply because a statute forbids it. That describes mala prohibita—the acts are criminal due to legal prohibition, not because they are intrinsically harmful or immoral.

Examples include things like speeding or certain licensing violations—conduct that’s regulated by law to maintain order or safety, even if the act isn’t morally condemned on its own. Corpus delicti refers to the essential facts proving a crime occurred, not a classification of the conduct. Actus reus refers to the actual physical act or omission that comprises the crime, again a different concept.