Alternative methods of resolving a criminal conflict in judicial proceedings

Straipsnyje analizuojamas baudžiamosios bylos nutraukimas teisme, kuriuo įgyvendinama teismo teisė atleisti asmenį, galimai padariusį nusikalstamą veiką, nuo baudžiamosios atsakomybės. Straipsnyje analizuojami šio baudžiamojo proceso instituto konstituciniai pagrindai. Išanalizavus konstitucinius reikalavimus sąžiningam procesui daroma išvada, kad pats savaime baudžiamosios bylos nutraukimas nuosprendžiu yra galimas. Tačiau teismo sprendimą turi lemti tik bylos duomenimis pagrįstas viešasis interesas nutraukti baudžiamąjį procesą. Priimant sprendimą nutraukti procesą diskreciniais pagrindais taip pat būtina laikytis tinkamos procedūros reikalavimų bei užtikrinti proceso dalyvių teises. Atkreipiamas dėmesys į baudžiamojo poveikio priemonių skyrimo nutraukiant baudžiamąją bylą nuosprendžiu probleminį santykį su baudžiamojo proceso ir baudžiamosios teisės principais.The article analyses the procedure of dismissing a criminal case in court by which a court exercises its right to release a suspected individual from criminal responsibility, i.e. from pronouncing him/her guilty and from imposing a punishment on him/her. It is recognized that modern criminal proceedings embrace a wide range of procedural forms, expanding the opportunities for the application of simplified forms of criminal proceedings. The exercise of the discretionary criminal prosecution as an expression of the principle of opportunity is most effective before the trial. However, even after the case reaches the court, the court should be afforded an opportunity to apply alternative methods of resolving a criminal conflict instead of passing a sentence. However, a question arises as to whether a decision to dismiss a case is in line with the classical principles of criminal proceedings in cases where sufficient evidence is collected to establish that the accused has committed a crime. In view of the constitutional requirements of due process suggests that a decision of a court to dismiss the case may only be guided by the public interest to and should be based on the evidence collected in the case. Exercising its discretion to dismiss the proceedings, the court should ascertain itself that all the grounds prescribed by law have been established, and that a voluntary consent of the accused as well as other participants in the proceedings, where necessary, has been obtained. Since the decision to dismiss the case does not pronounce an individual guilty, it may not contain wording which could raise doubts concerning its compatibility with the presumption of innocence. In order to dispel doubts over the constitutional basis of such a procedural decision and its compliance with the Criminal Code, issues related to the regulation of the procedure for potential imposition of measures of punitive nature upon dismissal of a criminal case must be resolve