Major Harm to the State, International Public Organization, Natural or Legal Person as an Attribute of Abuse of Office
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
Abuse of Office is the main and the most characteristic legal norm of the XXXIII chapter, dedicated to criminal offences against public service and execution of public interests.
According to the statistics of IT and Communications Department under supervision of Ministry of the Interior, made in year 2005, 64% of all registered criminal offences committed against public service and execution of public interests were abuse of office. Considering that major harm is the main attribute leading us to delimitate abuse of office as a criminal offence from other similar non-criminal offences, it is essential to understand the meaning of this attribute, especially when the attributes of abuse of office are not strictly defined nor in the Criminal Code nor in the practice of Lithuanian courts. So the article deals with the major harm to the state, international public organization, natural or legal person as an attribute of abuse of office according to the Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania.
Major harm as an attribute of abuse of power is described by subjects who sustain the harm, the varieties of harm and the magnitude of harm. The author defines the subjects who can sustain the harm – the state, international public organization, natural or legal person, criticizes the need of such a casuistic description of subjects who can suffer the harm made by the abuse of office and makes a suggestion of refinement of legal norm of abuse of office in the Criminal Code. In the article it is also discussed about the variety of major harm caused by the abuse of office. The author concludes that the harm caused by the abuse of office may occur as property harm, non-property harm and as physical harm. The magnitude of harm is an attribute that should be valuated by the law enforcement agencies and by the court in each case separately.
Making reference to different Lithuanian and Russian authors also to Lithuanian court practice (especially to the practice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania), the author formulates touchstones when the harm made by the abuse of office is considered major. The attribute of major harm enables law enforcement agencies and courts to delimitate abuse of office as a criminal offence according to Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania from other similar noncriminal offences when abuse of office takes place. In these cases when abuse of office makes no harm or the harm is not considered as major, such an abuse of office should be prosecuted as a disciplinary offence or in some particular cases as administrative offence. The author presents his own opinion on all the issues related to major harm as an attribute of an abuse of office as a criminal offence.
According to the statistics of IT and Communications Department under supervision of Ministry of the Interior, made in year 2005, 64% of all registered criminal offences committed against public service and execution of public interests were abuse of office. Considering that major harm is the main attribute leading us to delimitate abuse of office as a criminal offence from other similar non-criminal offences, it is essential to understand the meaning of this attribute, especially when the attributes of abuse of office are not strictly defined nor in the Criminal Code nor in the practice of Lithuanian courts. So the article deals with the major harm to the state, international public organization, natural or legal person as an attribute of abuse of office according to the Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania.
Major harm as an attribute of abuse of power is described by subjects who sustain the harm, the varieties of harm and the magnitude of harm. The author defines the subjects who can sustain the harm – the state, international public organization, natural or legal person, criticizes the need of such a casuistic description of subjects who can suffer the harm made by the abuse of office and makes a suggestion of refinement of legal norm of abuse of office in the Criminal Code. In the article it is also discussed about the variety of major harm caused by the abuse of office. The author concludes that the harm caused by the abuse of office may occur as property harm, non-property harm and as physical harm. The magnitude of harm is an attribute that should be valuated by the law enforcement agencies and by the court in each case separately.
Making reference to different Lithuanian and Russian authors also to Lithuanian court practice (especially to the practice of the Supreme Court of Lithuania), the author formulates touchstones when the harm made by the abuse of office is considered major. The attribute of major harm enables law enforcement agencies and courts to delimitate abuse of office as a criminal offence according to Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania from other similar noncriminal offences when abuse of office takes place. In these cases when abuse of office makes no harm or the harm is not considered as major, such an abuse of office should be prosecuted as a disciplinary offence or in some particular cases as administrative offence. The author presents his own opinion on all the issues related to major harm as an attribute of an abuse of office as a criminal offence.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Section
Articles
Authors contributing to Jurisprudence agree to publish their articles under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public (CC BY-NC-ND) License, allowing third parties to share their work (copy, distribute, transmit) and to adapt it, under the condition that the authors are given credit, and that in the event of reuse or distribution, the terms of this licence are made clear.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the Association for Learning Technology.
Please see Copyright and Licence Agreement for further details.
Authors retain copyright of their work, with first publication rights granted to the Association for Learning Technology.
Please see Copyright and Licence Agreement for further details.
