Slovak Bar Association Criticises Amendment to Criminal Code (2)

Bratislava, 12 December (TASR) – The Slovak Bar Association (SAK) voiced its criticism regarding the amendment to the Criminal Code approved by Parliament on Thursday (11 December) and stressed that its statement does not replace comprehensive expert opinions but is limited to reaffirming the association's long-standing principled positions, TASR was told by SAK's press department on Friday. "The Slovak Bar Association, as a rule, does not engage in political debate and fully respects the legislator's right to amend and supplement criminal codes. However, as no public consultation was opened for the discussed amendment, we are exercising our right to communicate our expert position in this way," the association explained. It recalled that at least since the recodification of the criminal codes in 2005, it has repeatedly criticised the frequent practice of legislators creating new criminal offences as a direct reaction to topical social issues. "Criminal law has long been misused as a tool to address matters that should and could be resolved through instruments of other branches of law. This has led to a tendency to overuse criminal law and to distort the principles on which modern criminal law should be built," SAK noted. It stated that it views the proposed changes critically as well, such as the expansion of the offence of obstructing an election campaign or the introduction of criminal liability for denying or questioning the post-war settlement. "In our view, criminal law should never be used to seek answers to open social questions. Misusing these instruments in other areas can not only harm criminal law itself but also create new complications," SAK said. SAK added that it has always viewed attempts at non-systemic amendments to procedural criminal law critically. "In the past, we have had serious objections to the overuse of several criminal law instruments, whether excessive use of custody or the professionally disputed application of provisions concerning cooperating defendants. SAK agrees that procedural criminal law should be the subject of critical expert debate and, where appropriate, suitable changes. However, as with substantive criminal law, amendments to the basic codes should never be an ad hoc response to partial issues of practice but always the result of systematic and expert reform efforts," the association explained. SAK also reiterated its critical stance toward the "no longer acceptable practice" of fast-track legislative procedures. "Just as we have repeatedly pointed this out in the past, we do so now and will continue to do so in future. In this context, we express the expert wish that either the legislative limits of fast-track procedures be clarified or that the Constitutional Court clearly define the constitutional limits of this procedure. Otherwise, even key areas of criminal law will continue to be damaged by non-systemic interventions with negative impacts on fundamental legal certainty," SAK stated. Parliament on Thursday evening approved the amendment to the Criminal Code, which includes several changes added to the draft on Thursday morning during committee discussions. The amendment also adjusts the institution of cooperating defendants. Parliament debated the amendment under a fast-track procedure. NOTE: This story has been extended to include the final three paragraphs mf