Criminal jurisdiction of the state and recognition of foreign judgement in Lithuania

Įgyvendinant valstybės baudžiamąją jurisdikciją tam tikrais atvejais galima susidurti su problema, kai dėl padarytos nusikalstamos veikos kitos valstybės ar tarptautinis teismas jau priėmė kaltinamąjį arba teisinamąjį nuosprendį. Vertinant šį faktą kyla klausimas, kokią reikšmę priimtas svetur sprendimas turi valstybės siekiui jos baudžiamajame kodekse įtvirtinto principo pagrindu įgyvendinti savo baudžiamąją jurisdikciją? Norint atsakyti į šį klausimą svarbu išnagrinėti užsienio valstybėse bei tarptautiniuose teismuose priimtų nuosprendžių pripažinimo problemą, kuri glaudžiai susijusi su asmens dvigubos atsakomybės problema, dažniausiai apibūdinama principu „non bis in idem“. Straipsnyje, taikydamas dogmatinį, lyginamąjį, loginį, istorinį ir kritikos metodus, autorius siekia išsamiau panagrinėti Lietuvos Konstitucijos ir naujojo Lietuvos baudžiamojo kodekso (toliau – BK) normas dėl dvigubos atsakomybės draudimo. Nagrinėjant Konstitucijos 31 straipsnio 5 dalį ir naujojo BK 2 straipsnio 6 dalį daugiau dėmesio skiriama naujo BK 8 straipsnio 2 daliai, kur įtvirtinta, kad tiek kaltinamojo, tiek teisinamojo nuosprendžio priėmimo ir įsiteisėjimo užsienio valstybėje faktas yra aplinkybė, trukdanti asmeniui atsakyti pagal Lietuvos baudžiamuosius įstatymus už veikas, padarytas už Lietuvos teritorijos ribų. Autoriaus manymu, ši nuostata yra kritikuotina, nes besąlygiškas užsienio valstybėse priimtų nuosprendžių pripažinimas nepadeda siekti teisingumoThe article investigates the problems, related to the implementation of the State’s criminal jurisdiction, after a judgement for a criminal act commitment has already been passed by foreign countries or International Court. In the investigation of the problem, the author of the article aims at answering the question of what is the significance of the court decision adopted outside Lithuania to the implementation of its own criminal jurisdiction based on the principles of Criminal Code? Dogmatic, comparative, logic, historical and critical methods have been used to analyze the norms of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and the new Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania excluding double responsibility. While examining Article 31, part 5 of the Constitution and Article 2, part 6 of the Criminal Code, more attention, however, is paid to Article 8, part 2 of the new Criminal Code, where it is provided that the fact of a judgment and its enforcement in a foreign country is a circumstance, preventing a person to respond to the Lithuanian Criminal Laws for the criminal acts committed outside the territory of Lithuania. According to the author, this position is not well-grounded, because unconditional recognition of the foreign judgements is not the best way to ensure justice. The analysis of both international agreements and criminal laws of a variety of foreign countries show that the position of the Lithuanian legislative body should change on the issue. Referring to the analysis carried out, a conclusion is made, that the application of the principle "non bis in idem" on the international and national levels should be different. Unconditional recognition of the principal on the international level would help a criminal to evade responsibility and deny the State’s right to realize its own criminal jurisdiction. For the reason mentioned it is suggested to define in the Criminal Code, that a court decision carried out in a foreign country can not be an obstacle to prosecute and judge a person in Lithuania for the same criminal act, with the exception of the following cases: a person was extradicted from Lithuania for the criminal act, Lithuania has passed the criminal prosecution for the criminal act; Lithuania has applied to judge a person according to the laws of the state, where the decision had been passed; Lithuania has agreed to carry out a foreign decision. After sentencing a person in Lithuania for the criminal act, for which a foreign judgement had been passed, the court should include the punishment given in a foreign country to the sentence passe