Suchergebnisse

[full article and abstract in Lithuanian; abstract in English] In the process of criminalisation of certain offences, the relevant requirements for legislature must be raised, which limit discretion of legislature and do not allow distorting the essence of criminal law. The theory of criminalisation determines these requirements and one of them is the ultima ratio (latin last, final argument, last resort) principle.This principle means that criminal liability, being the most restricting measure in terms of rights and freedoms of persons, must be applied in exceptional cases only, when other legal or non-legal means are not sufficient in order to stop criminality.The content of the ultima ratio principle includes: 1) serious violation of individual, social and state legal interests;2) absence of alternative influence means for this violation in other legal branches. The content of the ultima ratioprinciple also encompasses inner (consistency of criminal law system) and outer (the means of criminal law is exceptional when compared with the means of other legal branches) aspects as well as aspects of legislature and implementation of law.The ultima ratio principle is given a different meaning: from the scientific recommendation for legislature to the obligatory constitutional principle. Due to the relation with the defence of fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality, which makes ultima ratio peremptory, the ultima ratio principle is considered as the regulatory provision of law – the legal principle which is related to criminal justice. Since the ultima ratio principle functions, first of all, in legislature, i.e. in the process of criminalization, it must be considered as the substantive special principle of criminal policy. ; [straipsnis ir santrauka lietuvių kalba; santrauka anglų kalba] Straipsnyje siekiama pagrįsti, kad ultima ratio išreiškia baudžiamosios atsakomybės, kaip paskutinės teisinių gėrių apsaugos priemonės, idėją; ultima ratio nėra tik rekomendacija ar įstatymų leidybos etikos principas, tačiau turėtų būti laikomas savarankišku normatyviniu teisės principu; atsižvelgiant į tai, kad ultima ratio pirmiausia veikia kriminalizuojant atitinkamas veikas, jis laikomas specialiuoju baudžiamosios politikos principu.

While the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania guarantee the right to the defence of personal honour and dignity, it does not specify in which ways and means this right can be exercised. Therefore, the states themselves can choose appropriate remedies in the light of the moral rules established in the society on this matter, the defence priorities, economic conditions, the position of the legislature, and other factors.The choice of the Lithuanian state to defend a person's honour and dignity in both civil and administrative and criminal legal remedies raises doubts as to its compatibility with the nature and purpose of the criminal law, as well as the principle of criminal liability, as the last resort (ultima ratio), and international commitments.The above doubts are primarily reflected by the absence of the unified conception of the offense of defamation, i.e. the abstract nature, relativity and subjectivity of personal legal goods such as honour and dignity, as well as mismatch between the objective features of the corpus delicti of defamation to the requirements of legal technique, i.e. their evaluative nature. The relation between the personal honour and dignity and freedom of expression too. This complicates the application of criminal liability (criminal law) and poses a threat of unjust prosecution and punishment. Therefore, the criminal law being the strongest remedy of the state, the defence of a person's honour and dignity in criminal legal means becomes questionable and dangerous both for the individual to whom this remedy is applied, and the general public. ; Straipsnyje, siekiant nustatyti šmeižimo kriminalizacijos Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamajame kodekse pagrįstumą ir tikslingumą (ultima ratio principo kontekste), analizuojama šmeižimo nusikalstamos veikos sudėties objektyviųjų požymių – objekto, dalyko, veikos padarymo būdo samprata, apibrėžimas įstatymo tekste, aiškinimas ir taikymas.

In the process of criminalisation of certain offences, the relevant requirements for legislature must be raised, which limit discretion of legislature and do not allow distorting the essence of criminal law. The theory of criminalisation determines these requirements and one of them is the ultima ratio (latin last, final argument, last resort) principle. This principle means that criminal liability, being the most restricting measure in terms of rights and freedoms of persons, must be applied in exceptional cases only, when other legal or non-legal means are not sufficient in order to stop criminality. The content of the ultima ratio principle includes: 1) serious violation of individual, social and state legal interests; 2) absence of alternative influence means for this violation in other legal branches. The content of the ultima ratio 134 principle also encompasses inner (consistency of criminal law system) and outer (the means of criminal law is exceptional when compared with the means of other legal branches) aspects as well as aspects of legislature and implementation of law. The ultima ratio principle is given a different meaning: from the scientific recommendation for legislature to the obligatory constitutional principle. Due to the relation with the defence of fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality, which makes ultima ratio peremptory, the ultima ratio principle is considered as the regulatory provision of law – the legal principle which is related to criminal justice. Since the ultima ratio principle functions, first of all, in legislature, i.e. in the process of criminalization, it must be considered as the substantive special principle of criminal policy.

In the process of criminalisation of certain offences, the relevant requirements for legislature must be raised, which limit discretion of legislature and do not allow distorting the essence of criminal law. The theory of criminalisation determines these requirements and one of them is the ultima ratio (latin last, final argument, last resort) principle. This principle means that criminal liability, being the most restricting measure in terms of rights and freedoms of persons, must be applied in exceptional cases only, when other legal or non-legal means are not sufficient in order to stop criminality. The content of the ultima ratio principle includes: 1) serious violation of individual, social and state legal interests; 2) absence of alternative influence means for this violation in other legal branches. The content of the ultima ratio 134 principle also encompasses inner (consistency of criminal law system) and outer (the means of criminal law is exceptional when compared with the means of other legal branches) aspects as well as aspects of legislature and implementation of law. The ultima ratio principle is given a different meaning: from the scientific recommendation for legislature to the obligatory constitutional principle. Due to the relation with the defence of fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality, which makes ultima ratio peremptory, the ultima ratio principle is considered as the regulatory provision of law – the legal principle which is related to criminal justice. Since the ultima ratio principle functions, first of all, in legislature, i.e. in the process of criminalization, it must be considered as the substantive special principle of criminal policy.