Problematic aspects of criminal liability for illegal enrichment

In order to fight against corruption and various economic crimes, which make significant damage to the state, Lithuanian parliament in December 2010 endorsed amendments to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania for the criminalization of illicit enrichment, which were initiated by Dalia Grybauskaitė, the President. It should be noted that some doubts were expressed concerning the compliance of the criminalization of illicit enrichment with the principle of ultima ratio. Despite the fact that these amendments are valid for four years, it must be recognized that the lawsuits on illicit enrichment are the bottleneck in law enforcement. According to the author, such a situation could be determined by the substandard criminalization quality of the legislature and poor legal technique. The wording of the Article 1891 of the Criminal Code, as well as the guilt form of this activities and aspects of the period of validity of the crime are of great concern. Unsuccessful outcomes of unjust enrichment investigation is conditioned, among other things, by heavy burden of cumulative evidence and absence of effective measures, how all personal assets, income and expenses should be checked. According to the Lithuanian Supreme Court’s constant practice, if a person is accused of committing this crime, it is important don’t violate the presumption of innocence; the state must unconditionally prove person’s guilt and the fact that the person’s property can’t be based on his legitimate income. Although great expectations were associated with the acceptance of these amendments in the hope to solve deep-seated problems, the desired result of the amendments to the Law has not yet been received.