Whether criminal liability for breaches of private life application agrees with principle of ultima ratio?

Lietuvoje privatų gyvenimą gina ne tik baudžiamoji teisė, numatanti griežčiausią atsakomybės rūšį, bet taip pat kitos teisės šakos (civilinės, administracinės ir kt.) numatančios švelnesnes poveikio priemones. Tačiau teisės mokslininkai pastebi, kad vyrauja perteklinis penalizavimo procesas. Baudžiamoji atsakomybė yra taikoma ne kaip paskutinė priemonė - ultima ratio, bet kaip pirmoji – solo ratio. Todėl padarytam teisės pažeidimui sureguliuoti kraštutinė priemonė naudojama kartais neadekvačiai. Tokiu būdu yra pažeidžiamas teisinį statusą turintis ultima ratio principas, kuris reiškia, jog baudžiamoji atsakomybė yra taikoma paskutiniu atveju, kai alternatyviomis poveikio priemonėmis negalima sureguliuoti tam tikro teisės pažeidimo. Taigi, naudoti ir taikyti baudžiamąją atsakomybę reikia tik specialiais atvejais, pirmiausia įsitikinus, ar tam tikro teisės pažeidimo nesureguliuos kitos teisės šakos. Pagrįstai kyla klausimas, kokiais privataus gyvenimo pažeidimų atvejais būtina taikyti baudžiamąją atsakomybę remiantis ultima ratio principu. Darbo objektas - privataus gyvenimo neliečiamumo pažeidimų reglamentavimas Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamajame kodekse. Darbo tikslas – nustatyti baudžiamosios atsakomybės būtinumą privataus gyvenimo neliečiamumo pažeidimams ultima ratio principo kontekste. Todėl darbe išskiriami ultima ratio principą detalizuojantys kriterijai. Jais remiantis įvertinamas privataus gyvenimo pažeidimų pavojingumo pobūdis ir laipsnis bei daroma žala visuomenės interesams. Nustatomi atvejai, kada pažeidus asmens privatų gyvenimą baudžiamoji atsakomybė yra būtina ir neprieštarauja ultima ratio principui. Tyrimas atliekamas naudojantis skirtingais metodais: dokumentų analizės, lyginamuoju, indukciniu, apibendrinamuoju ir sisteminiu, istoriniu, loginiu bei kalbiniu. Išanalizavus mokslinę literatūrą ir teismų praktiką, darbe prieinama prie išvados, kad baudžiamosios atsakomybės taikymas už privataus gyvenimo pažeidimus atitinka ultima ratio principą, kai teisė į privatumą pažeidžiama pavojingais būdais (slapta, atvirai, apgaule, smurtu ir kt.). Tai reiškia, kad švelnesnėmis poveikio priemonėmis, privataus gyvenimo pažeidimo, padaryto slapta, apgaule, smurtu ir kitais pavojingais būdais, neįmanoma sureguliuoti, todėl būtina taikyti baudžiamąją atsakomybę. Griežčiausios poveikio priemonės taikymas, kai padaromas ne tik privataus gyvenimo pažeidimas, bet kartu ir kita baudžiamajame kodekse numatyta veika (nužudymas, išžaginimas ir kt.), kelia didesnį pavojų ir žalą visuomenės vertybėms. Todėl toks baudžiamosios atsakomybės taikymas atitinka ultima ratio principą. Visais atvejais, sprendžiant dėl privataus gyvenimo pažeidimų kriminalizavimo, privalu atsižvelgti į motyvus, nes jie gali rodyti tik formalų teisės pažeidimą, tokiu atveju, taikant baudžiamąją atsakomybę, būtų pažeistas ultima ratio principas.Person’s private life is a valuable property and public welfare. It is validated by legal nonfiction literature and jurisprudence. Immunity of private dwelling, information on private correspondence or conversations, various information on personal facts (like secrets of personal facts, secrets of family members, information on physical state, persons honor and reputation, information on convictions) are included in the term of private life. Commonwealth has to ensure its citizens’ bill of rights and right to privacy, that person’s life stands safe and full of value. Regarding the importance of the private life, this field of law is regulated not only by the national level, but by international level of legislation as well. National and international legislation forbids invading somebody’s privacy without person’s lawful permission. In Lithuania private life is protected not only by the criminal law, which allows for strict treatments, but also by other branches of law (e.g. civil law, administrative law, etc.) with mild penalties if breaches occurs. However academics of law noticed domination of excessive penalization process nowadays. As criminal law is a branch of law which dispose the most strict compulsory measures, most of all restricting person’s rights and sentencing to imprisonment, however nowadays it is used not as last remedy – ultima ratio, but as the first one – solo ratio. Therefore extremity is used inadequate in pursuant of arrangement of the breach of law. As the result, there is a breach of ultima ratio which means that criminal liability is used at the worst when it is impossible to regulate malefaction by mild penalties. Thus criminal liability should be used in exceptional cases only, when it is clear that breach of law is not capable to regulate by other branches of law. According to all mentioned above, a reasonable question arise when there is a necessity to use a criminal liability for the breach of private life pursuant to ultima ratio. Subject of the thesis – regulation of private life breaches in criminal code of Lithuania. Aim of the thesis – after the analysis of crimes to private life, define the necessity to use criminal liability pursuant to ultima ratio. Main assumption – application of criminal liability for breach of private life do not correspond with the principle of ultima ratio. Tasks of the thesis – to define person’s private life and conception of it’s immunity; to prove legal status of ultima ratio that there is duty for legislator to follow the principle while criminalizing acts; to elaborate standards of ultima ratio, which will help to sift insecurity and harm for society of private life; on the ground of elaborated standards, evaluate crimes’ validity to immunity of private life; pursuant to ultima ratio, measure the necessity of criminal liability for breach of private life. In order to achieve these goals that are defined in this paper the following research methods are going to be used: documentary analysis, comparative, inductive, generalization methods and linguistic, historical, logical, systemic methods of law interpretation. After the analysis of scientific works and practice of court’s, the following conclusions were drawn: Breach of private life does not conflict with principle of ultima ratio and application of criminal liability is valid when breach of private life is made in dangerous ways. In that case, when breach of private life is made in dangerous ways – malefaction is not in the field of civil law anymore. It means, that criminal liability should be applied and mild penalties cannot be used when the breach of private life is made by violence, in secret, by deception or without reticence. After analysis of various jurisprudences it was noticed that usually private life is exposed together with the breach of other relevant society’s valuable property, such as health of life. It means that if violation of health or death occurs or other malefaction is made which is described in criminal code, by using mild penalties there would be a breach of ultima ratio and the application of criminal liability it’s a must. There is a violation of ultima ratio when the breach of private life does not cause danger or high degree damage, but the application of criminal liability is used despite purposes and reasons of the malefaction. Considering the given conclusions, this thesis provides recommendations for the reasons of acts which should be recognized as the element of crime because without determination of essential causal relation, the loss of possibility appears to fairly evaluate and qualify act.Teisės fakultetasVytauto Didžiojo universiteta