Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/36398
Type of publication: Magistro darbas / Master thesis
Field of Science: Teisė / Law
Author(s): Vasiliauskaitė, Agnė
Title: Ar nedidelės vertės atsidėkojimo dovanos medikui pripažinimas kyšiu nepažeidžia ultima ratio principo?
Other Title: Does acknowledgement of a small value gratuity gift for a medic as a bribe not infringe ultima ratio principle
Extent: 49 p.
Date: 7-Jun-2018
Event: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas. Teisės fakultetas
Keywords: Dovana;Kyšis;Sveikatos apsauga;Ultima ratio principas;Gift;Bribe;Health care;Ultima ratio principle
Abstract: Lietuvos sveikatos apsaugos sritis - viena korumpuočiausių Europos Sąjungoje. Kas trečias Lietuvos gyventojas linkęs atsilyginti medikui neoficialiai, dažniausiai simbolinės (iki 38 eurų dydžio) vertės atsiskaitymais. Žvelgiant į korupcijos mastą, akivaizdu, smulkioji korupcija sveikatos apsaugos srityje - opi Lietuvos problema, tačiau labai mažai nagrinėta tiek teisės moksle, tiek teismų praktikoje (iki pat 2017 m. gruodžio Lietuvoje nebuvo nuteisto nei vieno paciento už papirkimą, medikas kaltinamas kyšininkavimu taip pat vos keliose bylose), kas sąlygojo šios magistro temos pasirinkimą. Ilgą laiką LR CK 6.470 str. 4 d. įtvirtinta norma leido medikams priimti simbolines dovanas. 2002 m. LR BK išplečiama valstybės tarnautojo sąvoka, į ją įtraukiant valstybės tarnautojams prilyginamo asmens sąvoką. Medikui esant valstybės tarnautojui prilyginamam asmeniui, atsiranda LR BK ir LR CK teisės normų kolizija - LR BK draudžia medikui priimti bet kokias dovanas. Reaguojant į tarptautines rekomendacijas 2006 m. panaikinama LR CK norma leidžianti medikams priimti dovanas, tai pripažįstant kaip korupcijos skatinimą teisės aktais. Nuo šio momento bet koks simbolinis atsidėkojimas medikui, laikytinas baudžiamuoju nusižengimu numatant baudžiamąją atsakomybę tiek medikui pagal LR BK 225 str., tiek pacientui pagal LR BK 227 str. Šiame darbe siekta atsakyti į klausimą ar nedidelės vertės atsidėkojimo dovanos medikui pripažinimas kyšiu nepažeidžia ultima ratio principo? Atlikta mokslinių darbų, teisės aktų ir dokumentų, teismų praktikos bei empirinių tyrimų analizė leido nustatyti, kad kriminalizuojant simbolinį atsidėkojimą neįrodytas veikos pavojingumas, siekiantis baudžiamąją atsakomybę, neįvertinta ar kitos atsakomybės formos, o ne tik pati griežčiausia – baudžiamoji atsakomybė gali sumažinti smulkųjį kyšininkavimą sveikatos apsaugos srityje, neatsižvelgta į veikos masišką paplitimą pacientų tarpe, itin menka teismų praktika, susijusi su smulkiuoju kyšininkavimu, šiai veikai esant masiškai paplitusiai, taip pat rodo labai mažą galimybę, baudžiamojo proceso tvarka, nustatyti smulkaus kyšininkavimo veikos padarymą sveikatos apsaugos srityje. Taigi, savaime simbolinis neoficialus atsiskaitymas su mediku laikytinas teisei priešinga veika, tačiau už jį turėtų kilti ne baudžiamoji, o drausminė, civilinė ar administracinė teisinė atsakomybė. Raktiniai žodžiai: dovana, kyšis, korupcija, medikas, sveikatos apsauga, pacientas, papirkimas, ultima ratio principas.
Lithuania is considered to be one of the most corrupted states in the sphere of health care in the European Union. Every third inhabitant of Lithuania is inclinable to pay medic off the record. Most often payments are symbolic ones (amounting to €38). Obviously, the extent of corruption in the sphere of health care is a tender question in Lithuania that is rarely investigated both in jurisprudence and in judiciary practice (considering health care as the most corrupted sphere, it is paradoxical that any patient was not sentenced for bribery till December 2017; there are only a few cases where medics are criminated with bribery); that is why I have chosen this subject for my Master’s work. With intend to safeguard clearness and reduced corruption in the sphere of health care, the standard of Art.6.470 part 4 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania allowed medics to take symbolic gifts with value that does not exceed the sum of one minimal life level. Therefore, such symbolic gratuity was criminalised and criminal liability was determined to both a medic and a patient. In 2002 the conception of a state officer was extended. Since a medic has been equated to a state officer, the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania prohibits to take any kind of presents, whereas the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania allow to take symbolic presents the value of which is amounting to 1 MLL (€38). According to international recommendations presented to GRECO, the standard of Art.6.470 part 4 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania was defeated in 2006. Since that moment any gift presented to a medic is considered as a criminal deed prevising criminal responsibility according to the Criminal Code of the republic of Lithuania both to a medic (art.225 – bribery) and a patient (art.227 – bribe). However, during a period of 12 years (since the criminalisation of bribery) there are only a few cases where medics or patients are criminated with corruption in the sphere of health care; what concerns crime doing, i.e. minor corruption – the only one case. Meanwhile, other state officers (for example, police officers) are penalized more often even though corruption is less. The question can be raised on the oneness of the relations between medics and patients. It seems that the Criminal Code is not valid for them and criminal law is not a means to solve a problem, i.e. acknowledgement of a small value gratuity gift for a medic as a bribe does not infringe ultima ratio principle? This Master‘s work deals with legal regulations, i.e. acknowledgement of a small value gratuity gift for a medic as a bribe does not infringe ultima ratio principle (inevitability of criminal law failing alternative means of responsibility). On purpose to answer this legal question, it is established that it is necessary to follow certain criminalized activities. It means that it is necessary to ground such deed as criminalization of cultural common gratuity to a medic with a symbolic gift (amounting to €38) according to criminal law due to its level of insecurity to main goods of the state and declare if such gratuity gift for a medic as a bribe does not infringe ultima ratio principle. It is discovered when a medic is a special subject of XXXIII chapter of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania, i.e. equated to a state officer. It is necessary to clear what a non-official gratuity to a medic is – a bribery or a gift? The dichotomy of a bribe and a gift as well as the historical development of a gift / bribery taking is disputed. It is necessary to answer the question if acknowledgement of a small value gratuity gift (amounting to €38) for a medic as a bribe does not infringe ultima ratio principle The fulfilled analysis of scientific papers, empiric investigation, legal deeds and documents allow to state that insecurity of symbolic gratuity criminalization is not proven. Not only criminal responsibility but also other forms of responsibility can reduce minor bribery in the sphere of health care. It can be concluded that even though symbolic non-official payment is considered to be a criminal activity; however, its implementation has to be secured by means of demerit, civil and administrative law. In conclusion, it can be stated that alternative means are not debated, it is unclear how such criminalization influences on the reduction of corruption in the sphere of health care, how it is implemented in a criminal process, etc. The hypothesis that gratuity to a medic with a symbolic gift (amounting to €38) can not be called bribery was proved. As a result, one of the main criminalization criteria – ultima ratio principle is infringed. Keywords: gift, bribe, corruption, medic, health care, patient, bribery, ultima ratio principle.
Internet: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/36398
Appears in Collections:2018 m. (TF mag.)

Files in This Item:
agne_vasiliauskaite_md.pdf907.15 kBAdobe PDF   Restricted AccessView/Open   Request a copy

Show full item record

Page view(s)

68
checked on Oct 13, 2019

Download(s)

24
checked on Oct 13, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check


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