Ar LR BK 199 straipsnio 4 dalis, asmeniui gabenant per valstybės sieną nedidelį kiekį narkotinių ar psichotropinių medžiagų, atitinka proporcingumo principą?

Šiomis dienomis galiojanti LR BK 199 straipsnio 4 dalies dispozicija už narkotinių ar psichotropinių medžiagų kontrabandą nenumato jokių alternatyvių bausmių, o tik realią laisvės atėmimo bausmę nuo trejų iki dešimties metų. Nusikalstamos veikos taikymui neturi reikšmės medžiagos kiekio ar rūšies nustatymo kriterijus, todėl nepriklausomai nuo to, ar asmenys gabens per valstybės sieną nedidelį, didelį ar labai didelį narkotinės medžiagos kiekį, turės būti baudžiami ne mažesne kaip trejų metų laisvės atėmimo bausme. Sunku patikėti, tačiau net ir mikroskopinio dydžio narkotinių medžiagų gabenimas per valstybės sieną sudaro šio nusikaltimo sudėtį, o asmenys privalo būti traukiami baudžiamojon atsakomybėn ir kaltinami sunkaus nusikaltimo įvykdymu, kas kelia pagrįstų abejonių dėl LR BK 199 straipsnio 4 dalies atitikties proporcingumo principo reikalavimams. Šio baigiamojo darbo tikslas yra ištirti, ar esamas teisinis reguliavimas, nustatantis baudžiamąją atsakomybę už nedidelio kiekio narkotinių ar psichotropinių medžiagų gabenimą per valstybės sieną, atitinka proporcingumo principą. Pirmoje darbo dalyje atskleidžiama LR BK 199 straipsnio 4 dalyje įtvirtintos nusikalstamos veikos istorinė raida ir turinys, analizuojama aktuali LR teismų praktika šių bylų kategorijoje bei šios normos sudėties ir vietos baudžiamajame kodekse nustatymo trūkumai. Siekiant išsamiai ištirti LR BK 199 straipsnio 4 dalyje įtvirtintos nusikalstamos veikos atitiktį proporcingumo principo reikalavimams, antroje darbo dalyje analizuojama proporcingumo principo samprata ir turinys bei reikšmė Lietuvos baudžiamosios teisės sistemoje. Trečiame darbo skyriuje lyginamuoju aspektu analizuojami Europos Sąjungos valstybių baudžiamieji įstatymai ir jose numatomi bausmių dydžiai už nedidelio kiekio narkotinių medžiagų gabenimą per valstybės sieną, skirtingas teisinis reglamentavimas Europos Sąjungos valstybėse ir Lietuvoje baigiamojo darbo autoriui suteikė pagrindą abejonėms, ar baudžiamosios atsakomybės taikymas už nedidelio kiekio narkotinių medžiagų kontrabandą yra proporcinga priemonė padarytos veikos pavojingumui ir kaltininkui sukeliamoms neigiamoms pasekmėms. Tuo tikslu baigiamojo darbo autorius atliko EŽTT ir ESTT jurisprudencijoje susiformavusį ir Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinio Teismo naudojamą proporcingumo testą, kuriuo buvo nustatyta, kad baudžiamosios atsakomybės taikymas Lietuvoje už nedidelio narkotinių medžiagų kiekio gabenimą per valstybės sieną yra neproporcinga priemonė, lyginant su realiu šios nusikalstamos veikos pavojingumu ir iš to kylančiomis neigiamos pasekmėmis kaltininkui.

The purpose of this final Master's thesis is to investigate whether the existing legal regulation in Lithuania establishing criminal liability for transportation of a small quantities of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances across the border complies with the principle of proportionality. The subject of the study is compliance of criminalisation of transportation of narcotic substances across the border with the requirements of the principle of proportionality. The final thesis raises the hypothesis that the criminalisation of Article 199 (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania when an individual transports a small amount of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances across the border of the state does not comply with the requirements of the principle of proportionality. The objective of the study shall be achieved through the following tasks: 1. The legal acts and doctrine of Lithuania and the European Union shall be analysed, revealing the historical development and content of the criminal offence provided for in Article 199 (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania; 2. The relevant case - law of the Republic of Lithuania for smuggling of a small amount of narcotic substances is analysed; 3. The concept, content and significance of the principle of proportionality in criminal law is disclosed; 4. The criminal liability arising in Lithuania for transportation of a small amount of narcotic substances across the border of the state and in selected countries of the European Union is examined and compared. 5. In the context of the principle of proportionality, it is assessed whether criminalisation of the criminal activity provided for in Article 199 (4) of the Republic of Lithuania complies with the requirements of the principle of proportionality. The study is also problematic in the amendments to the Criminal Code adopted in Lithuania, which during recent years have strengthened sentences for disposition of narcotic and psychotropic substances or narcotic or psychotropic substances precursors, and smuggling of these substances. All of this has led to a media debate among state politicians, lawyers with a high level of competence, and researchers about differentiation of criminal offences related to smuggling of narcotic substances, depending on the narcotic substances smuggled across the border: (1) quantity; (2) type; (3) complicity in persons who have agreed in advance and other aggravating circumstances. These days, the current operative position of Article 199 (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania for smuggling of narcotic or psychotropic substances does not provide for any alternative punishments, but only a real custodial sentence of three to ten years. According to the letter of the law, individuals may not be exempted from criminal liability, and postponement of execution of the sentence can also not be applied for the execution of this crime. The criterion for determining the quantity or type of substance is irrelevant for the application of the criminal offence and, irrespective of whether individuals will cross the border transporting a small, large or very large quantity of a narcotic substance, persons will be punishable by a minimum of a three years' imprisonment. It is difficult to believe, but even the transportation of narcotic substances of microscopic size across the border of the state constitutes the composition of this crime, and individuals must be prosecuted and charged with committing a serious crime. All this raises reasonable doubts as to the compliance of Article 199 (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania with the requirements of the principle of proportionality. The final thesis consists of three chapters, each analysing the different stages of the study. The first part of the thesis reveals the historical development and content of the criminal offences entrenched in Article 199 (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania, and the relevant case-law of the Republic of Lithuania in the category of these cases as well as the determination of the composition and location of this norm in the Criminal Code are analysed. In order to investigate in detail the compliance of the criminal offences established in Article 199 (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania with the requirements of the principle of proportionality, the second chapter of the thesis analyses the concept and content of the principle of proportionality and its significance in the system of the Lithuanian criminal law. The third chapter of the thesis analyses, from a comparative aspect, the criminal laws of the countries of the European Union and the amount of the sentence for a cross-border transportation of a small amount of narcotic substances, the different legal regulations in the countries of the European Union and Lithuania, and gives the author of the final thesis a basis for doubts as to whether the application of criminal liability for smuggling of a small amount of narcotic substances is a proportionate measure to the dangerousness of the act committed and the negative consequences for the perpetrator. To this end, the author of the final thesis carried out a proportionality test settled in the case - law of the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice and used by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, which established that the application of criminal liability in Lithuania for transportation of a small amount of narcotic substances across the border is a disproportionate measure in relation to the real danger of this act and the negative consequences arising therefrom for the perpetrator.