Problematic aspects of the consequences of infringement in criminal procedure

Abstract

Straipsnyje analizuojamos baudžiamojo proceso pažeidimo teisinės pasekmės, jų rūšys, bei kai kurios tokių pasekmių teorinės ir praktinės problemos. Kadangi baudžiamojo proceso įstatyme minėtųjų pasekmių reglamentavimas yra tik fragmentinis, Autorius, remdamasis sistemine procesinių ir kitų teisės aktų analize, išskiria teisinių pasekmių, kurios kyla baudžiamąjį procesą vykdantiems subjektams padarius pažeidimus, rūšis. Straipsnyje ypatingas dėmesys skiriamas žalos, atsiradusios dėl neteisėtų ikiteisminio tyrimo pareigūnų, prokurorų ar teismo veiksmų, atlyginimo, kaip vienai iš procesinio pažeidimo pasekmių rūšių, analizei. Autorius pastebi, kad šiuo metu galiojantis tokios žalos atlyginimo teisinis reguliavimas yra nesuderinamas su Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucija ir tarptautinėmis sutartimis ir turėtų būti keičiamas, atsisakant baigtinio baudžiamojo proceso veiksmų, kuriuos pažeidus asmuo įgyja teisę kreiptis į teismą dėl žalos atlyginimo, sąrašoWhen the criminal procedure ends, pretrail investigators, prosecutors and judges usually don’t excite about the consequences of the proceedings, which they made in the finished case. Usually officers associate such consequences only with their own disciplinary responsibility. But disciplinary responsibility of the concrete officer is not the only consequences of illegal proceedings. Systemic analysis of the procedural and other legal acts lets to the Author to distinguish four main groups of the consequences of illegal proceedings: 1) criminal or disciplinary responsibility of the officer; 2) data, collected in the pretrail investigation, will not be admitted as evidence; 3) consequences which eliminate infringement from the further criminal procedure; 4) duty of the state to compensate person’s harm, which he experienced by illegal proceedings. In the article Author notes that investigators and other officers usually are not informed about the court’s decisions, which are related with the concrete procedural infringement. Such situation doesn’t let to improve officers qualification and also let’s to reiterate the same procedural infringements. Another problem of the analyzed theme is related with the legal regulation of the compensation to the person for the harm, which he experienced by illegal proceedings. According to the Lithuanian laws, person acquires the right to require such compensation only if he experienced the harm by the illegal temporary detention, arrest, other procedural coercive measures, or by the illegal conviction. Such situation is contrary to the international treaties and general principles of the law. That’s why Author suggests to consider possibility to change such present legal regulation, refusing an exhaustive list of procedural infringements and providing person’s right to require compensation in all cases if he experienced harm by illegal proceedingsMykolo Romerio universiteta