Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/32445
Type of publication: Straipsnis kitose duomenų bazėse / Article in other databases (S4)
Field of Science: Teisė / Law (S001)
Author(s): Šalčius, Marijus;Bilius, Mindaugas
Title: Baudžiamojo proceso pažeidimu padarytos žalos atlyginimo teisinis reguliavimas ir vertinimo teismų praktikoje problematika
Other Title: Problems of legal regulation and court practice evaluation when compensating the damage which resulted from the violation of the criminal procedure
Is part of: Teisės apžvalga [elektroninis išteklius] = Law review. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas, 2016, nr. 2(14)
Extent: p. 360-376
Date: 2016
Note: Straipsnis buvo publikuotas recenzuojamame mokslinių straipsnių rinkinyje „Baudžiamoji justicija ir verslas“
Keywords: Baudžiamasis procesas;Baudžiamojo proceso pažeidimas;Žalos atlyginimas;Pareigūnų neteisėti veiksmai;Criminal process;Violation of criminal process;Compensation of damages;Unlawful actions
Abstract: Straipsnyje, analizuojant Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinio Teismo bei Lietuvos Aukščiausiojo Teismo priimtus sprendimus, identifikuojamos pagrindinės žalos, atsiradusios dėl ikiteisminio tyrimo pareigūnų, prokuroro, teisėjo ir teismo neteisėtų veiksmų, atlyginimo teisinio reguliavimo spragos ir pasiūlomi galimi jų sprendimo būdai
When the criminal procedure ends, pretrial investigators, prosecutors and judges usually don’t care about the consequences of the proceedings, which were announced by the court as done violating the Code. Usually such violations officers associate only with their own disciplinary responsibility. But the disciplinary responsibility of the officer who was performing such actions is not the only consequence of the proceedings done when violating the Code. Based on the systemic analysis of the procedural and other legal acts, Authors distinguishes four main groups of the consequences of the proceedings, done when violating the Code: 1) criminal or disciplinary responsibility of the officer; 2) data, collected in the pretrial investigation, will not be admitted as evidence; 3) consequences, which eliminate unlawfully collected evidences, from the further criminal procedure; 4) duty of the state to compensate the damage to the person, who suffered from the actions, announced by the court as unlawful in the proceedings. According to legal acts, person acquires the right to require the compensation only if he experienced the harm by the illegal temporary detention, arrest, other procedural coercive measures, or by the illegal conviction. Analysis of the court‘s cases, done in this article, allows to state that existing legal regulation is contrary to the international treaties and general principles of the law. For that reason Authors suggest to consider possibility to change such existing legal regulation, removing an exhaustive list of procedural infringements from the law and providing to the person right to require compensation in all cases if the damage to him was done when violating the Code
Internet: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/32445
https://www.vdu.lt/cris/bitstream/20.500.12259/32445/1/ISSN2029-4239_2016_N_2_14.PG_360-376.pdf
https://eltalpykla.vdu.lt/1/32445
http://dx.doi.org/10.7220/2029-4239.14.21
Affiliation(s): Teisės fakultetas
Viešosios teisės katedra
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:Teisės apžvalga / Law Review 2016, nr. 2(14)
Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml11.17 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record

Page view(s)

126
checked on Aug 17, 2019

Download(s)

92
checked on Aug 17, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.