Crime Proceeds Value Threshold in Extended Confiscation in the Light of the Principles of Legality and Proportionality and Rational Penal Policy

Skirmantas Bikelis
{"title":"Crime Proceeds Value Threshold in Extended Confiscation in the Light of the Principles of Legality and Proportionality and Rational Penal Policy","authors":"Skirmantas Bikelis","doi":"10.15388/crimlithuan.2022.10.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses the clause provided in the Lithuanian Criminal Code, which limits the court’s extended powers of confiscation in regard of crime proceeds of value less than EUR 12,500. The developing practice of the application of extended powers of confiscation in Lithuania makes this issue not only a matter of principle but also a practical one. The article analyzes to what extent such a precondition is compatible with the principle of legality and in particular the principle that rights do not arise from wrongdoing (Ex iniuria ius non oritur). Further, the author discusses the arguments justifying the discussed limitation to confiscate low-value crime proceeds – rational organisation of law enforcement resources, the principle of proportionality and a requirement of legal systematicity. The article concludes that the latter arguments are not always used accurately. The limitations of law enforcement resources ought to be regarded by providing authorities with discretion, not by limiting confiscation powers. The principle of proportionality and legal systematicity are hardly applicable in the discussion due to the specific legal nature of the confiscation powers. In parallel, the article concludes that the limitation of the minimum value of confiscatable crime proceeds is contrary to the European Union law – Directive 2014/42/EU.","PeriodicalId":52861,"journal":{"name":"Kriminologijos studijos","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kriminologijos studijos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/crimlithuan.2022.10.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article discusses the clause provided in the Lithuanian Criminal Code, which limits the court’s extended powers of confiscation in regard of crime proceeds of value less than EUR 12,500. The developing practice of the application of extended powers of confiscation in Lithuania makes this issue not only a matter of principle but also a practical one. The article analyzes to what extent such a precondition is compatible with the principle of legality and in particular the principle that rights do not arise from wrongdoing (Ex iniuria ius non oritur). Further, the author discusses the arguments justifying the discussed limitation to confiscate low-value crime proceeds – rational organisation of law enforcement resources, the principle of proportionality and a requirement of legal systematicity. The article concludes that the latter arguments are not always used accurately. The limitations of law enforcement resources ought to be regarded by providing authorities with discretion, not by limiting confiscation powers. The principle of proportionality and legal systematicity are hardly applicable in the discussion due to the specific legal nature of the confiscation powers. In parallel, the article concludes that the limitation of the minimum value of confiscatable crime proceeds is contrary to the European Union law – Directive 2014/42/EU.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从合法性、比例性原则和合理的刑事政策看扩大没收的犯罪所得价值界限
该条讨论了立陶宛刑法规定的一项条款,该条款限制了法院对价值低于12,500欧元的犯罪收益的扩大没收权力。立陶宛适用扩大没收权的发展实践使这一问题不仅是一个原则问题,而且是一个实际问题。本文分析了这一前提条件在多大程度上符合合法性原则,特别是符合权利不因不法行为而产生的原则。在此基础上,从执法资源的合理配置、比例原则和法律制度要求三个方面论述了限制没收低价值犯罪所得的正当性。文章的结论是,后一种论点并不总是被准确地使用。执法资源的限制应该通过给予当局自由裁量权而不是通过限制没收权力来看待。由于没收权具有特殊的法律性质,比例原则和法律制度原则在讨论中难以适用。与此同时,文章得出结论,对没收犯罪收益的最低价值的限制违反了欧盟法律-指令2014/42/EU。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
32 weeks
期刊最新文献
Manipulation of sports competitions in the Lithuanian football: empirical research Peculiarities of consolidation of criminal penalties and the justice of the final sentence in the practice of Lithuanian courts Managing the risk of repeated violence against the intimate partner in probation service: Review of the practice in Lithuania and foreign countries Sexual harassment and abuse in sport: some legal and criminological considerations Certain Relevant Issues of Interviewing Minors and Victims in the Practice of Law Enforcement Institutions During Criminal Proceedings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1