Diskrecinio baudžiamojo persekiojimo realizavimo kriterijai: reali nuteisimo galimybė ir viešasis interesas (1)

Direct Link:
Collection:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Language:
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Title:
Diskrecinio baudžiamojo persekiojimo realizavimo kriterijai: reali nuteisimo galimybė ir viešasis interesas (1)
Alternative Title:
Criteria of discretional prosecution
In the Journal:
Jurisprudencija [Jurisprudence]. 2003, Nr. 38 (30), p. 20-29
Notes:
LDB Open.
Keywords:
LT
Baudžiamasis persekiojimas; Diskrecinis baudžiamasis persekiojimas; Diskrecinė teisė; Reali nuteisimo galimybė; Viešasis interesas
EN
Discretional prosecution; Discretionary power; Prosecution; Public interest; Realistic prospect of conviction
Summary / Abstract:

LTStraipsnyje analizuojami kriterijai, lemiantys prokuroro sprendimą dėl baudžiamojo persekiojimo. Čia išskiriami ir nagrinėjami: procesinis kriterijus, t. y. vadinamoji reali nuteisimo perspektyva (pakankamai duomenų teisme įrodyti asmens kaltę), ir materialusis kriterijus, t. y. viešojo intereso persekioti kaltininką nustatymas. Pirmas kriterijus, t. y. įrodymų pakankamumas, anglų teisėje vadinamas „realistic prospect of conviction“ (reali nuteisimo galimybė), Vokietijoje – „hinreichen der Tatverdacht“ (pakankamas įtarimas). Lietuvoje mokslininkai, kalbėdami apie atleidimą nuo baudžiamosios atsakomybės, teigia, kad turi būti nustatyta nusikaltimo sudėtis. Antrajam kriterijui skiriama daugiau dėmesio, nes iki šiol Lietuvos teisės literatūroje vis dažniau vartojamas terminas „viešasis interesas“ tik pradedamas tyrinėti įvairiais aspektais [Iš leidinio]

ENThe article deals with theoretical and practical problems of discretionary power - what are the main factors that are likely to influence the decision-making process of the procesution offices. Two criteria that influence the dismissals of the cases on policy ground are analysed: 1. realistic prospect of conviction or the principle of evidential sufficiency (hinreichen der Tatverdacht) and 2. public interest (interet public; öffentliches Interesse). It is wrong for a person to be prosecuted if the evidence is insufficient. The essence of the wrongness lies in the protection of the innocent: if this principle is taken seriously, it should mean not only that innocent people are not convicted, but also that innocent people should not be prosecuted. The reason for this may be found in the dictum that "the process is the punishment". A further factor is the policy of diversion. Thus, even if a case satisfies the test of evidential sufficiency, there may be strong reasons of public policy or, as it is termed in many countries "public interest" in favour of dealing with the case by means other than prosecution. In practice, questions of evidential sufficiency and public interest often interact, but for clarity of exposition one part of the article is devoted to evidential sufficiency, and the other part of the article - to the issue of "public interest" [From the publication]

ISSN:
1392-6195, 2029-2058
Subject Area:
Related Publications:
Permalink:
https://www.lituanistika.lt/content/35591
Updated:
2018-12-17 11:14:13
Metrics:
Views: 10
Export: