The purpose of the article is to analyze a new Criminal code of the Republic of Lithuania (in force from the 1st of May, 2003), with the aim to highlight its differences from the old one, and, thereby, to discern the most important novelties while discussing their advantages and possible difficulties (if any) in applying the new norms in practice.The author chooses to investigate only the general part of the criminal code and to analyze, according to the author's opinion, only the most important developments in it, as due to the extent of the article it is impossible to make a detailed analysis of all the novelties in the new criminal code.The author of the article chooses to analyse classification of offences, diminished responsibility, corporate liability, new factors eliminating criminal liability, reform of penalty system, and extension of possibilities to discharge from criminal liability.The research reveals that not all discerned novelties are functioning properly and that some critical issues may be indicated, but, in general, the new criminal code is valued as a positive achievement and a great move towards the enhancement of Lithuanian criminal law.Conclusions of this work, obtained through scientific research, may be used to improve existing criminal code in practice.
The article presents basic findings about courts of honor in Lithuania. The data about disciplinary violations in five legal professions-judges, lawyers, prosecutors, notaries, and bailiffs-was obtained while implementing a scientific project on certain issues of legal ethics. The article provides data on the following issues: subjects initiating disciplinary cases; the number of cases for each legal profession; decisions taken in cases of disciplinary violations; categories of disciplinary violations; sanctions provided. The article is intended to initiate further discussion about these matters among scientists, practitioners, and the general public, not just in Lithuania but in other countries as well.
In many jurisdictions middle- and low-income individuals obtain only a relatively modest share of lawyers’ services. In a society ruled by law, every person should be able to expect key principles of justice to apply. Among the most important dimensions of a right to a fair trial is the right to equal access to an attorney. After all, the attorney is not merely a commercial actor but also represents the legal system. Access to an attorney is a key step in providing justice in practice. Many states have developed programs of legal aid which aim at providing those who are in need of legal assistance but cannot afford to pay for legal services with a way to receive legal services. Scientific literature distinguishes various forms and instruments of legal aid: the court appointment of lawyers, free or low cost legal aid provided by public agencies and charitable and fraternal organizations, sometimes mixed with legal expenses insurance, contingency fee and the free services of lawyers who are serving probono publico. From the perspective of practicing attorneys, this article presents and compares existing systems of legal assistance in Lithuania and Germany, and their availability and effectiveness, in order to answer the question whether the social responsibility of attorneys and access to justice is obtained.
The collapse of the communist regime at the end of the twentieth century resulted in a wave of democratization in Central and Eastern Europe. While trying to establish democracy, many states in this region had to demonstrate their ability to protect human rights and to deal with the past of the repressive regime. As these states decided to join various human rights instruments they also became subject to certain obligations towards their people. One of these obligations is the requirement to provide remedies in case of human rights abuses, and the right to know the truth is recognized as part of it. Therefore the goal of this article is to identify the abilities of the victim of the communist regime to access the files of former secret services in post-communist countries in the light of the right to know the truth. The answer is provided using an analysis of international documents, historic, comparative and systemic methods, providing and evaluating the practice of different states dealing with the files of former secret services or government files of the repressive past and academic literature.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.