Certain Features and Principles of the Lithuanian Law Enforcement Institutions
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Abstract
The article focuses on topical notions of the Lithuanian law enforcement institutions, their distinctive features and principles.
Analysis of the notion of law enforcement institutions focuses on the legislation of the Republic of Lithuania that regulates establishment and performance thereof. The article attaches certain importance to the semantics behind the notion of law enforcement itself. It is then concluded that in terms of its function the notion of law and order is wider therefore it includes the notion of law enforcement. The semantics of law enforcement indicates protection of law against an adverse action. Therefore state institutions that are assigned this function have wider remits in order to ensure legal order in the state and to protect it (hence many of institutions are referred to as law enforcement institutions in the legislation that regulates their establishment and performance). It is suggested that law enforcement institutions should be distinguished among others in terms of their functions, legal status of their employees and their place in the system of state institutions. It is concluded that the law enforcement is an undisputed function, while institutions that perform it are institutions that ensure (protect) the law and order, i.e. the law enforcement institutions.
The article discusses issues relating to attribution or nonattribution of institutions that exercise judicial authority (courts and prosecutor offices) to law enforcement institutions and legal regulation of their performance. Enforcement of justice is considered to be an intrinsic part of law enforcement while the idea (principle) of justice itself is considered to be one of the goals of law enforcement. However, enforcement of justice is a very specific function of the state relating to the judicial (enforcement of justice) principles embedded in the Constitution. On the other hand, court decision is a logical conclusion (result) of legal processes that take place while ensuring law and order. Judicial authority is not an active upholder of law enforcement in a sense that it cannot usurp authority and functions from other branches of government in the sphere of law enforcement.
The article states that principles behind law enforcement institutions are such that have been formulated and sanctioned by the legislator on the moment of adopting laws that regulate establishment and performance of such institutions. Their mere existence in legislation regulating establishment and performance indicates an attempt to define the hierarchical dependence of said principle, link with the Constitutional principles and an attempt to define the systemic dependence, of the law enforcement institution, its specific attribution and the system of legal safety clauses within that institution. Such legal safety clauses are aimed at ensuring basic values of humanity, public ethics, use of proportional violence and only if necessary, respect to human rights. These values represent the basis for civic society and the rule of law, being its goal and means at the same time, enabling the right to demand the state institutions with wide remits to respect such a system of values.
On the other hand, certain principles are intended to protect law enforcement institutions from political influence.
Analysis of the notion of law enforcement institutions focuses on the legislation of the Republic of Lithuania that regulates establishment and performance thereof. The article attaches certain importance to the semantics behind the notion of law enforcement itself. It is then concluded that in terms of its function the notion of law and order is wider therefore it includes the notion of law enforcement. The semantics of law enforcement indicates protection of law against an adverse action. Therefore state institutions that are assigned this function have wider remits in order to ensure legal order in the state and to protect it (hence many of institutions are referred to as law enforcement institutions in the legislation that regulates their establishment and performance). It is suggested that law enforcement institutions should be distinguished among others in terms of their functions, legal status of their employees and their place in the system of state institutions. It is concluded that the law enforcement is an undisputed function, while institutions that perform it are institutions that ensure (protect) the law and order, i.e. the law enforcement institutions.
The article discusses issues relating to attribution or nonattribution of institutions that exercise judicial authority (courts and prosecutor offices) to law enforcement institutions and legal regulation of their performance. Enforcement of justice is considered to be an intrinsic part of law enforcement while the idea (principle) of justice itself is considered to be one of the goals of law enforcement. However, enforcement of justice is a very specific function of the state relating to the judicial (enforcement of justice) principles embedded in the Constitution. On the other hand, court decision is a logical conclusion (result) of legal processes that take place while ensuring law and order. Judicial authority is not an active upholder of law enforcement in a sense that it cannot usurp authority and functions from other branches of government in the sphere of law enforcement.
The article states that principles behind law enforcement institutions are such that have been formulated and sanctioned by the legislator on the moment of adopting laws that regulate establishment and performance of such institutions. Their mere existence in legislation regulating establishment and performance indicates an attempt to define the hierarchical dependence of said principle, link with the Constitutional principles and an attempt to define the systemic dependence, of the law enforcement institution, its specific attribution and the system of legal safety clauses within that institution. Such legal safety clauses are aimed at ensuring basic values of humanity, public ethics, use of proportional violence and only if necessary, respect to human rights. These values represent the basis for civic society and the rule of law, being its goal and means at the same time, enabling the right to demand the state institutions with wide remits to respect such a system of values.
On the other hand, certain principles are intended to protect law enforcement institutions from political influence.
##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.
