Bausmės individualizavimas ir teisingumo principo įgyvendinimas skiriant bausmes.
MetadataShow full item record
The article touches upon the problem of individualization of punishment under the Criminal Code and court practice. Society expects that just punishments are imposed on offenders. How could this purpose be reached? This depends on the Criminal Code and the practice of courts. The new Criminal Code of Lithuania establishes sufficient regulation, enabling the courts to impose just and individualized penalties. At first sanctions for less serious crimes consists of several alternative penalties. Apart from imprisonment, sanctions include a fine, restriction of liberty or community works. Moreover, Article 55 provides that if a person appears before the court for the first time, the court should impose on him a different punishment than imprisonment. In case of grave crimes the only punishment the Criminal Code usually provides for is deprivation of liberty. However, in appropriate cases the Criminal Code allows imposing a penalty which has not been included as a sanction in a particular provision proscribing specific conduct. This possibility is laid down in Article 54-3 and 62 of the Criminal Code. The Article 75 of the Criminal Code of Lithuania provides for the possibility to suspend an imposed sentence. However, the problem is that the court is empowered to do so only in cases a person is sentenced to imprisonment. Such a situation leads to a strange practice when a judge initially decides to suspend a sentence and only subsequently decides on the type of punishment to be imposed. Moreover, in several cases suspended sentences were imposed when a person committed a new crime during the period of suspension of a sentence. The Supreme Court usually replaces the sentencing decisions of the lower courts in such circumstances. [...]
- Articles / Straipsniai