[ad_1]
Liability for offenses related to transport and road management is provided for in the Code of Administrative Offenses (ANC) of the Republic of Lithuania and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania (CCP).
2020 640 cases of administrative offenses were investigated in Lithuanian courts, when the vehicle was driven by people intoxicated or intoxicated with narcotics, psychotropics or other psychoactive substances (741 in 2019, 708 in 2018). The same number of cases in which a vehicle was driven not only by intoxicated people but also by people who did not yet have the right to drive in 2020. 909 were examined (1,612 in 2019, 960 in 2018).
The number of these types of criminal cases has only increased every year since drunk driving was criminalized in 2017. 2020 the number of criminal cases related to the driving of a road vehicle or the practical instruction of driving under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content greater than 1.5 per thousand was 4,063 (3,927 in 2019 and 4,253 in 2018).
In which cases do traffic offense cases go to court?
Speaking about when such cases come to court, Judge A. Meilutis pointed out that in cases of administrative offenses, the court hears cases as a court of first instance when the crimes for which a special fine in excess of the amount of 1,500 of the ANC euros.
“The court also hears cases in which the question of the confiscation of property can be decided or when a minor assumes administrative responsibility or the victim is a minor.
The courts also hear cases of administrative offenses against out-of-court agreements. It can already be any case related to transport and road traffic ”, explained the judge.
Referring to criminal cases, A. Meilutis pointed out that the courts consider as criminal cases those in which the health of a person is altered or a person is killed due to violations of the rules of road safety or vehicle operation, thus such as vehicle driving cases. drunk., for which a drunkenness of more than 1.5 parts per thousand has been established.
Mitigating and aggravating circumstances, penalties
Both the ANC and the CCP provide categories in which liability is aggravated or mitigated by certain circumstances. Judge A. Meilutis highlighted the confession after the commission of a crime and the damages as extenuating circumstances, and indicated the commission of a crime while intoxicated as an aggravating factor.
Referring to the different penalties applied by the courts, A. Meilutis emphasized the individuality of each case: that the burden on the person is not disproportionate to the disproportionate punishment “.
The judge pointed out that an administrative offense involving expulsion from the scene and damages of more than 750 euros could result in a fine of up to 2,600 euros. The confiscation of the vehicle or the deprivation of the right to drive the vehicle may also be applied for up to 5 years.
The judge noted that when applying criminal responsibility, alternative punishments can be imposed: fine, arrest, imprisonment. In some cases, the prison term can be up to 10 years, for example, if the driver caused a fatal accident while intoxicated. The responsibility for driving while intoxicated generally extends up to one year in prison.
When can a traffic violation become a murder case?
“There are cases in jurisprudence in which a person caused a traffic accident while intoxicated, a person died during that accident and the person was found guilty of intentionally committing a very serious crime: murder. It is true that there are few cases of Although the court evaluates all the circumstances, one of the essential ones is whether the person, when committing the crime, foresaw that their actions would have the consequences provided for in criminal law and if they intended to do so. that they deliberately allowed them to happen, ”noted A. Meilutis.
The judge emphasized that the intensity, the nature, the reasons for a person’s behavior, the causes, the degree of intoxication of a person, the driving speed, the technical state of the vehicle, the weather conditions, the visibility can be evaluated. It is, therefore, a set of circumstances that would allow a specific case to be considered as manifestly intentional, in serious violation of traffic regulations. The judge explained that if it could be established that the defendant was indifferent to the negative consequences, then he could be charged with a very serious intentional crime: homicide.
“It must be recognized that it is quite difficult to prove such circumstances in each case. That practice is still developing, but relevant cases and precedents already exist,” said A. Meilutis.
Practice from different countries
In reviewing the practice of different states, the judge first distinguished the different thresholds above which a driver is considered intoxicated by alcohol. The Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania and China have a zero alcohol level (0.0 ppm), that is, the driver must be completely sober when driving a vehicle. Neighboring Belarus also has a limit close to zero at 0.04 per thousand.
In most European countries, this limit is 0.5 per thousand. Probably the highest concentration of alcohol in the blood is tolerated in the United States, Great Britain and France: 0.8 per thousand.
A. Meilutis pointed out that the penalties for drunk driving are quite different in different countries: “In Germany, as in Lithuania, the maximum penalty is one year in prison. In Poland, France and Estonia, the maximum liability is up to 2 years in prison.
In the Czech Republic, up to 3 years in prison. In Spain, up to 5 years in prison. Therefore, in this context, Lithuania does not differ much in its types of penalties or their amounts. “
Public debate on the sentencing policy
The judge noted that public debate on the appropriateness of punishment is common and sometimes even useful, forcing the legislator to pay attention to certain aspects and, at times, encouraging a review of the legislation.
A. Meilutis noted that recently the bail institute has received a lot of attention in society when it comes to criminal liability: “A bail can be enforced by releasing a person from criminal liability.
This is a type of compromise between the state and the perpetrator. The bailout actually optimizes and reduces the workload of law enforcement institutions, uses state budget funds more rationally, and shortens the terms of pretrial investigation and criminal proceedings in court. “
The judge pointed out that the punishment, sanction for a certain crime, offense is a certain coercive measure of state coercion: The law does not give priority to any of these objectives. “
