The book present to its readers in which ways the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland dealt within their national legislations with demand of European Union to adopt liability of legal entities and whether they choose genuine or false criminal liability of legal entities or they just remained with administrative liability.Uvedená monografie seznamuje své čtenáře, jakým způsobem se Česká republika, Slovensko a Polsko vypořádaly v rámci svých vnitrostátních právních úprav s požadavkem Evropské unie na zavedení odpovědnosti právnických osob a zda se v konečné fázi rozhodly pro zavedení pravé či nepravé trestní odpovědnosti nebo zda nadále setrvaly pouze na odpovědnosti správní.The book present to its readers in which ways the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland dealt within their national legislations with demand of European Union to adopt liability of legal entities and whether they choose genuine or false criminal liability of legal entities or they just remained with administrative liability

Dziembowski Robert

Fryšták Marek

Kalvodová Věra

Kandová Katarína

Kuchta Josef

Mezei Marek

Provazník Jan

Szczechowicz Jarosław

Szczechowicz Krystyna

Čentéš Jozef

Čep David

Ľorko Jakub

English

Univerzitní repozitář Masarykovy univerzity

PUBLICATIONS OF THE MASARYK UNIVERSITY theoretical series, edition Scientia File No. 566 CORPORATE CRlMINAL LIABILITY (in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland) Marek Fryšták, Jozef Čentéš, Jaroslaw Szczechowicz et al. Masaryk University Brno 2016 Vzor citace: FRYŠTÁK, Marek; ČENTÉŠ, Jozef; SZCZECHQWICZ, Jarosfaw let aL). Corporate crimina/liobility: (in the Czech Republic, S/ovakia and Pa/and).lst edition. Brno; Masaryk University, 2016. 255 p. PubHcations ofthe Masaryk University, theoretica! series, edition Scientia, File No. 566. ISBN 978-80-210-8382-0. CIP - Katalogizace v knize Fryšták, Marek Corporate criminalliability : {in the Czech Republlc, Slovakia and Poland) / Marek Fryšták, Jozef Čentéš, Jarosfaw Szczechowicz et aL -1st edition. -- Brno: Masaryk University, 2016. 255 stran. - Publications ofthe Masaryk U n'lversity, theoretical series, edition Scientla; Rle. No. 566. ISBN 978-80-210-8382-0 (brož.) 343.222* 347.19* {437.3)* (437.6)* (438)* {048.8)* - trestní odpovědnost - právnické osoby - Česko - Slovensko - Polsko - monografie 343 - Trestní právo [16j Trus pubJication was supported by tbe The Ministry of Education, Youtb and Sports - Institutiona! Support for Longterm Development of Research Organization - Masaryk University, Faculty of Law. Trus monograph was not subjected to language revision. Reviewers: Prof. JUDr. Jaroslav Fenyk, Ph.D., DSc., Univ. Priv. Prof. Prof. JUDr. ]ozef Záhora, PhD. © 2016 Masaryk University ISBN 978-80-210-8382-0 --- ___ o ______ _ TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................ . . ................................................ 9 CZECH REPUBLlC I Fundaments oť Corporate Criminal Liability ........................... 15 Ll Introduction ......................................................................................... 15 L2 Excluded Jiability of some lega! entities for a crimina! offence ... 20 L3 Range of crimina! offences ................................................................ 22 L4 Cornrnittiv.g of crimina! offence by lega! entity .............................. 24 L5 Offender, accompJice and participant .............................................. 29 L6 Crimina!liability of a lega! successor of lega! entity ...................... 30 L 7 Effective remorse ................................................................................ 31 L8 Limitation of crimina! Jiability ........................................................... 32 L9 Exceptions from limitation ................................................................ 33 II System oť Crinůna1 Sanctions ................................................... 35 ILl Characteristics of tbe system of sanctions ...................................... 35 II.2 Fundarnenta! principles of sanctioning of lega! entities ............... 36 IL3 Types of punishments and protective measures for lega! entities41 II.4 Summary ............................................................................................... 49 III Specifics oť Criminal Proceedings Against Lega1 Entities ....... 51 IILl Fundarnenta! Rights of Lega! Entity in Crimina! Proceedings .... 51 IIl.1.1 Right to a fair tria] (Due Process) ............................................................. 51 III.2 Stages of Crimina! Proceedings ........................................................ 52 III.2.! Pre-trial Proceedings ................................................................................... 52 III.2.2 Summary Prelirninary Proceedings .......................................................... 55 1II.2.3 Institutes of Impoundage .......................................................................... 56 IIL3 PreJiminary Hearing of Indictrnent .................................................. 59 III.4 Main Tria!.. ............................................................................................ 59 I1J.4.! Joint Proceedings ........................................................................................ 61 1II.4.2 Interruption of crirninal prosecution ...................................................... 62 III.4.3 Diversions during criminal proceeclings against lega1 entities .............. 63 IIL5 Correcnve Proceedings ....................................................................... 63 5 CORPORATE CRIMINAL UABILlTY (in the Czech Republic, S!ovakia and Poland) lII.6 Enforcement Proceedi.ngs .................................................................. 64 III.6.1 Execution of punishment of dissolution of legal entity ...................... 64 III.6.2 Execution of purushment of forbiddance of filling public contracts, participation in concessional proccedings or in public tender ....................................................................................... 65 III.6.3 Execution of punishment of forbiddance of acceptance of subsidies and subventions .................................................................... 65 II1.6.4 Punishment of publication of judgment and its execution ................. 65 IV Defence oť Lega! Entity .......................................... :; ................ 67 IV. I lntroduction "'"'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 67 Iv.Z Rights of the accused lega1 entity ..................................................... 68 IV2.1 Compounds of right to defence ............................................................... 68 rV:2.2 Right of legal entity to remain silent and its collision with right to defence of other individual .................................................................. 69 IV2.3 Strategy of Defence of Legal Entity ....................................................... 73 Iv.3 Individua1s Entided to Act on Beha1f of Lega1 Entity .................. 76 IV3.1 Defence Council .......................................................................................... 79 IV3.2 Curator .......................................................................................................... 82 Iv.3.3 Practical issues of natural persons entitled to act on behalf of legal entity ............................................................................................... 84 IV. 4 Conclusion ............................................................................................ 93 S LOVAKIA V Fundaments of Corporate Crimina! Liability """,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 97 V.l Developrnent of Corporate Crimina1 Liability in Slovak Repu blic ................................................................................................ 97 V.1.1 Proposals to Introducc So-called Gcnuine Corporate Criminal Liability ......................................................................................................... 99 Vl.2 Introduct:ion of Non-genuine Corporate Criminal Liability .............. 102 \Z1.3 Introduction of Genuine Corporate Criminal Liability ...................... 106 V.Z Selected Substmtia1 Aspects of Corporate Crimina1 Liability in the Slovak Republic ....................................................... 107 V2.1 Modificat:ion of Bask Criminal Law Princip les as Consequence of Introducing Genuine Corporate Criminal Liability ....................................................................................................... 110 V.2.2 Conditions Giving Rise to Corporate Crirninal Liability .................... 115 Table of Contents VI System oť Criminal Sanctions .................................................. 125 VI.I Basic Principles Applied in Irnposing Punishments on Lega1 Entities ................................................................................ 128 VI.2 Types of Punishments ...................................................................... 130 VI.2.1 The Punishmem of Winding-up of the Legal Entity ......................... 132 VI.2.2 The Purushment of Forfeiture of Property ......................................... 133 VI,2.3 The Punishment of Forfciture of a Thing ........................................... 135 VI.2.4 The Pecuniary Punishment ...................................................................... 136 VI.2.S The Punishment of Prohibition to Perform Certain Activity ........... 138 V1.2.6 Thc Punishment of Prohibition to Receive Grants a"nd Subsidies ... 140 VI.2.7 The Punishrncnt of Prohibit:ion to Receive Aid and Support from EU Funds ......................................................................................... 141 VI.2.8 The Purushment of Prohibition to Participate in Public Procurement .............................................................................................. 142 V1.2.9 Thc Punishment of Publicat:ion of Convict:ion ................................... 143 VII Specifics of Crimina! Proceedings Against Lega! Entities ...... 145 VILI Procedura1 Steps Taken by Law Enforcement Authorities md Courts .......................................................................................... 145 VILZ Relationship between Crimina1 Proceedings md Administrative Proceedi.ngs ............................................................. 145 VII.3 Crimina1 Prosecution against Lega1 Entities .................................. 147 VIlA Territoria1 Jurisdiction ... ""'"'''''' ....................................................... 149 VIL5 Joint Proceedi.ngs ............................................................................... 150 VII.6 Restrictive md Securing Measures .................................................. 151 VIL7 Acting on Beha1f of Lega1 Entity ................................................... 154 VIL8 Right of Defence (Defence Counsel) ............................................ 157 VII,9 Examination, Closing Arguments md Fina1 Word ...................... 157 VII.10 Enforcement of Punishments ......................................................... 158 POLAND VIII Fundaments of Corporate Crimina! Liability .......................... 163 IX System oť Crimina! Sanctions .................................................. 181 X Specifics oť Crimina! Proceedings Against Lega! Entities ...... 207 XI Experience oť Application Practice ......................................... 227 , 671 CORPORATE CRIMINAL UABIUTY (in the Czech Republic, 810vakia and Poland) ---------Final Comparison ..................... . . .................... 233 Bibliography.................................. . .................................................................................. 243 XLl Monographies and cornmentaries ................................................... 243 Xl.2 Articles ................................................................................................ 247 XI.3 Conference Proceedings ................................................................... 251 XI.4 Electronic resources .......................................................................... 254 List oť Authors ..................................................................................................................... .255 8 INTRODUCTION "Lega! entities are not made of flesh and bones, yet they have organs. They do not have any fee!ings, stili they have a will. They seem invisible, neverthe-less they act and can be summoned to be held liable for their actions. They do not have a domicile but stili they have a place of business. For over a cen-tury other branches of law except crimina!law acknowledge lega! existence of these individuals that are not human beings. Crimina!law reacted hesi-tandy and once it accepted crimina!liability of legal entities it did so only in restricted range and under condition of meeting spedal requirements."1 New soda! and economic changes that struck Europe during 20"' century and escalated in its last decade and at turn of the century inconspicuously started to brush away and undermine exclusiveness of priuciple of individ-ua! crimina!liability of natural persons. Discussions and considerations over this topic spared none of the conrinental states. It was so because present legal instruments used to protect sodety ftom malicious and illicit actions of lega! entities became ineffective and did not comply with its repressive and preventive purpose. Each of the states thus had to decide whether to desert old and established system of priuciples connected with individ-ua! crimina! liability of natural persons (that continenta! crimina!law was built upon) and present genuine ar pseudo crimina!liability of lega! entities' ar to chaose other approach (for instance strengthening of administrative liability of lega! entities). Frequendy there were - and stili are - many argu-ments for and against each of both ways. From what was said above it is more than evident that introduction of cor-porate crimina! liability is very contestable, complicated and a!so con-troversia! issue. And path of genuine crimina! liability of lega! entities is the most of all. It is because that adoption of genuine cruuinal liabil-ity undermines priuciple of individual crimina! liability of natura! person 2 DRJ?YER, E. Dmi! péna! généraL Champs Université: Flammariofl, 2002, p. 78. In: JELINEK, J. Criminal Liabili!J' tf Legal Elltities. Prague: Linde, 2007, p. 28. KRATOCHVÍL, V Trestrú o?povědnost právnických osob a jednáni za jiného (Stav de lege lata, de lege fegenda v Ceské republice a Slovenské republice). Prám!)' ohzor. 2002, issue 4, p. 366. CORPORATE CRIMINAL LlABILlTY (in the Czech Republic, Slavakia and Paland) which was the foundation stone of continentol criminollaw for many cen-turies. Continenta! criminollaw worked with concept of offender/human being', as it was said before - an individuol who ciUnks, feels, an individual who has its own will - not immaterial or invisible being. Corporate crin1inal liability (or the criminal fubility of legal entities if you please) represents a step away from the principle of individual criminolliability. As indicated before an adoption of genuine criminal fubility of legal entities is in direct contradiction ,,~th the very foundations of criminal fubility in continental legal system and thus represents a breach of integrity of stable dassical sys-tem of criminalliability. As any other substanrial interference to any system it may cause its weakening, instability or even collapse.4 When considering whether to adopt genuine or false criminal liability of legal entities we have to take a step back to date 26m July 1995. On this very day a Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests was adopted and signed in Brussels. Among the signing states were all former members of European Communities and also some of candidate countries - especially the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland. This Convention was later amended by fitst and second protocol which were adopted and signed on 27'1, November 1996 in Dublin and on 19m June 1997 in Brussels also by aforementioned candidate countries. Artide 3 of the second proto col to Convention puts an emphasis on obliga-tion of every member state to take the necessary measures to ensure that legal enrity can be held fuble for fraud, active corruprion and money laun-dering committed for their benefit by any person, acting either individu-ally or as part of an organ of the legal person, who has (generally) a lead-ing position ,vithin the legal entity. According to artide 4 of the second protocol the member states shall take necessary measures to ensure that legal entities shall be punishable (for above mentioned actions) by effec-tive, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions, whieb shall inc1ude criminal or non-criminal fines and may include other sanctions such exclusion from At least for last four centunes. See ŠÁMAL, P., DĚDIČ,J., GŘI'VNA, T. et al. Treshlí odpovědnost právnických osob. Komentář. Prague: C. H. Beck, 2012, p. 1-2. 4 JELÍNEK, J. Trest1Ú odpovědnost právnických osob jako předmět zkoumárú [ooline]. Kriminalistika. 2008, issuc 1. lcitcd 26. 8. 2016]. Avai1able at: <http://wW..v.mvcr.cz/ clanek/trestni_odpovednost_pravnickych_osob_jako_predmet_zkoumani.aspx>. 10 Infroduction enticiement to public benefits or aid, temporary or permanent disqualifica-tion from the practice of commercial activities, placing under judicial super-vision or a judiciol winding-up order. 5 Requirement for adoption of criminalliability of legal entities olso appeared (among other documents) in Counci! Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24m February 200S on the application of the principle of mutual recogni-tion to financial penalties and in Counci1 Framework Decision 2006/7S3/ JHA of 6m October 2006 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to contlscation orders. Both of these framewol'k decisions are based on principle of mutual recognition and demand that member states shall recognize and execute orders issued by other member states (and imposed) against legal entity. With adoption of criminol fubility of legal entities is also connectedDirective 200S/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Counci! of 19'1, November 200S on the protection of the environment through criminallaw and Directive 2009/52/ES of the European Parliament and of the Counci! of 1 S", June 2009 on providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals. It is necessary to point out, that nor Convention neither its protocols nor other international documents do not categorically stipulate the necessity of adoption of genuine criminalliability of legal entities. They on1y oblige contracting parties to present liability of legal entities for their malicious actions and leave decision whether character of this fubility will be criminol or administrative, genuine or false strictly -within discretion of each contract-ing state. The foregoing became an impulse to create a monograph - which now lies in your hands - as an Qutcome from cooperation of collectives of authors from the Faculty of Law of Masaryk University in Brno (Czech Republic), the Faculty of Law of Comenius University in Bratislava (Slovakia) and the Faculty of Law and Administration of University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn (poland) which was written in order to present to its FENYK, J., FRYŠTÁK, M. Protection of the finandal interests of the European Communities in the Czech Repub1ic. In: EuropeoJ1 L:iw and Natiúlla! Crimilla/ Legis/atiofl. Prague: Faculty of Law of Charles University, 2007, p. 116-117. 11 CORPORATE CR1M1NAL UABIUTY (in the Czech RepubHc, Slovakia and Poland) readers in wruch ways the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland dea!t within their nationa!legislations with demand of European Umon to adopt liability of lega! entities and whether they choose genuine or fa!se crimina!liability of lega! entities or they just remained with administrative liability. The collective of authors a!so believes that trus monograph will provide enough useful information and ensure basic orientation in this subject-mat-ter not just for theory but a!so for application practice and will become inspttation for further contemplations over this topie. For the collective of authors doc. JUDr. Marek Fryšták, Ph.D. I 12 CZECH REPUBlIC 

Corporate criminal liability (in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland)

https://is.muni.cz/publication/1360636/Corporate_kniha.pdf

Corporate criminal liability (in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Univerzitní repozitář Masarykovy univerzity