Kai kurie neatsargios kaltės reglamentavimo probleminiai aspektai Lietuvos nacionalinėje ir Europos Sąjungos teisėje

Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Knygos dalis / Part of the book
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Kai kurie neatsargios kaltės reglamentavimo probleminiai aspektai Lietuvos nacionalinėje ir Europos Sąjungos teisėje
Alternative Title:
Some problem-causing aspects of careless fault in Lithuanian national law and law of European Union
Baudžiamoji teisė / Criminal law; Nusikalstama veika / Offence; Nusikaltimai / Crimes.
Summary / Abstract:

LTStraipsnyje nagrinėjama baudžiamosios atsakomybės kilimo už dėl neatsargumu padarytas nusikalstamas veikas, Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamajame kodekse (toliau – BK) aprašytas formalia sudėtimi. Tokia galimybė netiesiogiai numatyta BK specialiojoje dalyje, įtvirtinus formalia sudėtimi aprašytas nusikalstamas veikas ir numačius neatsargios kaltės galimybę šias nusikalstamas veikas numatančiuose straipsniuose. Tačiau tokio teisinio reguliavimo pagrindimo nerandant BK bendrojoje dalyje – kaltės formas ir jų turinį reglamentuojančiose normose – sukuriamas BK vidinis prieštaringumas. Taip pat šios problemos aktualumas matyti ir iš straipsnyje pateikiamų Europos Sąjungos teisinių instrumentų, susijusių su materialine baudžiamąja teise, kurių nuostatų įgyvendinamumas, atsižvelgiant į BK 16 straipsnį, kelia nemažai problemų. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Baudžiamoji atsakomybė; Neatsargi kaltė; Neatsargumas; Nusikalstamas nerūpestingumas; Nusikalstamas pasitikėjimas; Nusikaltimo sudėtis; Corpus delicti of crime; Criminal carelessness; Criminal responsibility; Negligence; Recklesness; Recklessness.

ENCarelessness as one of the types of faults is acknowledged and established in punitive legislation of many countries. Lithuania is not an exception. Punitive code of the Republic of Lithuania (below – PC) article 16 establishes careless fault through concepts of criminal trust and criminal carelessness. It is mentioned that definitions are the same both in the old PC (1961) and in contemporary punitive law. The lack of correction (review, improving) of present norms became a reason of deviation from practical needs. Until now science literature has still discussed the problem of careless fault only superficially, limiting itself only with narrow description of its subtypes. An analysis of literature on punitive law leads to grounded conclusion that the work of Lithuanian scientists is orientated toward description of purposeful fault, search for possible resolutions and their evaluation. This situation resulted in provision of only fragmentai, often times non-based, landmarks in the doctrine of punitive law and court practice while solving the problems of matching the law of European Union and our national law. This is very evident in cases when, while trying to fulfill international commitments, it is tried to assume norms in national law which determine legal regulation that is not currently based by PC. One of the most prominent currently rising problems not only on national level but also in European Union is compatibility of careless fault and formal consistency of criminal activity.The appearance of this problem is influenced by legal regulation determined in PC 16 article, according to which, careless fault is only revealed through psychical relationship with activity, development of causal relationship and discovered results. At the same time, some regulation of criminal activity determined in the special part of PC essentially impacts that fact that the special part of PC established and discussed unintentional careless fault in formal consistency. Signs of such regulation can also be seen in various legal acts implemented by European Union, for example, directives related to material punitive law. [From the publication]

Related Publications:
2018-08-01 14:39:29
Views: 44