Juridinių asmenų baudžiamosios atsakomybės ištakos.

Criminal liability of legal entities was legitimized in the Republic of Lithuania eight years ago, and in the ruling of the Constitutional Court of 8 June 2009, a conclusive confirmation on its accordance with the Constitution was made. It should be noted that the extension of the concept of criminal offense subject has received considerable attention of Lithuanian scientists. It was obvious that this penal law novel would cause many problems and, surely, it has become a reason of many doubts in the judicial practice. However, despite the fact that a fairly broad scientific analysis of the topic under consideration has been made, none of the Lithuanian authors has ever addressed the issue regarding the sources of the criminal liability of legal entities. This article deals with the origin of the criminal liability of legal entities. The author of this article analyses the following main origin theories (mentioned in the literature on criminal law) in detail: 1. The theory indicating frankpledge as the source of the criminal liability of legal entities; 2. The theory indicating deodand law as the source of the criminal liability of legal entities. The author also demonstrates why the attempt to treat frankpledge as the source of the criminal liability of legal entities is justified neither by the legal theory, nor the legal practice or the logical point of view. Finally, having applied the postulates of the reality theory, the author concludes that a legal entity possesses all the features of the deodand and answers why the origin of criminal liability of the analysed criminal law institute can be derived exactly from the deodand law.Straipsnyje kritiškai nagrinėjamos atskiros juridinių asmenų baudžiamosios atsakomybės kilmės teorijos. Analizuojami argumentai, kildinantys juridinių asmenų baudžiamąją atsakomybę iš Franklinų priesaikos (kolektyvinės atsakomybės) bei deodandų teisės. Straipsnio autorius konstatuoja, kad bandymas juridinių asmenų baudžiamąją atsakomybę kildinti iš Franklinų priesaikos yra nepagrįstas nei teisės teorijos, nei teisinės praktikos, nei logikos požiūriu. Daroma išvada, kad juridinių asmenų baudžiamosios atsakomybės šaltinis glūdi deodandų teisėje