The work analyses the principle of publicity of judicial proceedings as established in both international and national legislation.The content of the principle of publicity is defined and its components are identified,i.e.the open hearing,the pasing and pronouncing of a sentence at the hearing,the publicity and accessibility of a case file,and the publication of the court decisions.The exceptions from the principle of publicity related to the criminal acts committed by minors,protection of private life of the participants in the proceedings,and witnesses or suffered parties to whom anonymity is applied, are examined in greater detail.

The Article 176 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania provides the criminal liability for employers or responsible persons who infringed the labour safety rules and regulations in case of the accident, emergency that had or could have serious consequences. Much more fatal accidents at work and particularly at the construction industry, transport, wood manufacturing happen in Lithuania than in other states of the European Union. The main reasons for the accidents are “the human factor” and poor discharge of the duties fulfilled by employers and employees. The criminal cases regarding the Article 176 of the Criminal Code mentioned above are tried in the district courts as in the first instance courts. One may submit a petition for appeal to the appeal and cassation courts due to the judgments made by the courts of first instance. There were penalties from 4 to 50 minimum standards of living imposed on the persons who committed the mentioned criminal offences by the court practice and they were analysed in the Master Thesis. These penalties are very inadequate for the suffered conseguences grievous bodily harm. The European Union and other states criminal law provide stricter and more various kinds of penalties for the criminal offences listed in the area of infringement of labour safety regulations. There is no a right and unanimous criminal policy structured in Lithuania in the respect of the criminal offences provided in the Article 176 of the Criminal Code of... [to full text]

The graduating paper focuses on the digital image capture method in criminalistic and also on its legal regulation and practical resort in the law enforcement institutions‘ investigations of criminal acts. The digital image capture is one of the methods of digital image capture in criminalistic. Its structure contains digital photography and digital video recording. The digital photography is used for strategical and investigative photography. The usage of the digital image capture method investigating the criminal acts is not against the provision of the Criminal Procedure Code. This method is not regulated by any other legal instrument. It often happens that the media captured by the digital camera under investigation is not attached to the criminal case. It is the violation of the Criminal Procedure Code. The digital photography is used in the pretrial investigation institutions‘ work but the traditional photography is used as well. There are no anticipated procedures how to protect the digital photography and files from the substitution, forgery and erasure. The digital information can be protected by establishing the procedures of the standard operations. One of the ways to protect it is electronic signature.

Unabhängig von der Rechtstradition stößt man in jedem Rechtssystem auf das strafprozessuale Problem des Verwertungsverbots rechtswidrig erhobener Beweise. Es ist bereits in der Idee des Rechtsstaates selbst verschlüsselt. Einerseits muss der Staat die Gesellschaft und ihre Mitglieder vor straftätlichen Versuchen beschützen, Straftaten aufklären und Personen, die Straftaten begangen haben, bestrafen. Andererseits, der Staat hat gesetzmäßige Maßnahmen anzuwenden und allgemein anerkannte Normen der Menschenrechte und des Schutzes der Freiheiten einzuhalten. In der Praxis gelingt es nicht immer, bei der Aufklärung der Straftaten die Verletzung des Rechtsmäßigkeitsgrundsatzes während der Hauptverfahrenstätigkeit, d. h. der Beweisansammlung zu vermeiden. In derartigen Fällen entsteht meistens die Frage, ob die Ergebnisse, d. h. die Beweise, einer Handlung, die rechtswidrig durchgeführt wurde, bei Begründung der Beteiligung eines Schuldigen an der Straftatbegehung und seines Verschuldens verwertet werden dürfen. Der Gegenstand dieser Dissertationsforschung umfasst gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse, die sich danach gestalten, wenn die Beweise, die für eine gerechte Entscheidung eines Strafverfahrens wichtig sind, rechtswidrig erhoben wurden, und, wenn das Dilemma der Verwertungszulässigkeit bzw. des Verwertungsverbots solcher Beweise entschieden wird. / Disertacijoje tiriama teisės pažeidimo, padaryto gaunant įrodymą, įtaka sprendžiant tokio įrodymo naudojimo leistinumo (neleistinumo) Lietuvos baudžiamajame procese klausimą. Analizuojama įrodymų leistinumo samprata Lietuvos baudžiamojo proceso teisėje, atskleidžiama šio teisinio reiškinio esmė ir procesinė teisinė reikšmė dabartinio baudžiamojo proceso teisinio reguliavimo kontekste, identifikuojami tradicinio mokymo apie įrodymų leistinumą teigiami aspektai ir trūkumai; analizuojami įrodymų, gautų pažeidžiant teisę, naudojimo neleistinumo konstituciniai aspektai, įrodymų, gautų pažeidžiant teisę, naudojimo neleistinumo prasmė ir pateisinimas teisinės valstybės baudžiamajame procese. Atliktos norminės ir specialiosios literatūros analizės, empirinės medžiagos studijos bei lyginamosios informacijos tyrimo pagrindu pasiūloma alternatyvi įrodymų leistinumo samprata, apibrėžiama jos turinį sudarančių teisinių kategorijų įrodymų rinkimo leistinumas ir įrodymų naudojimo neleistinumas esmė ir procesinė teisinė reikšmė, nustatomi konkretūs įrodymų, gautų pažeidžiant teisę, naudojimo neleistinumo Lietuvos baudžiamajame procese pagrindai. / The dissertation investigates an impact of the law infringement made by obtaining evidence, meeting the question of the admissibility (inadmissibility) of evidence in the Lithuanian criminal process. The analysis touches upon the conception of the admissibility of evidence in the Lithuanian criminal process law, uncovering the nature of this juridical topic along with the procedural juridical meaning in the context of the present – day criminal process legal regulation, identifying the positive aspects and weaknesses of traditional teaching on admissibility of evidence; inadmissibility of illegally obtained evidence constitutional aspects, meaning and justification in the criminal process of the state governed by the rule of law are analyzed. On the basis of the accomplished standard and special literature analysis, empirical matter studies and the comparative information research, the alternative admissibility of evidence conception is proposed, defining the nature and procedural legal meaning of the content composing legal categories – evidence collection admissibility and the evidence evaluation inadmissibility. Finally, apparent fundamentals of the illegally obtained evidence inadmissibility in the Lithuanian criminal process are identified.

SUMMARY Extradition is the official process by which one nation or state requests and obtains from another nation or state the surrender of a suspected or convicted criminal. As between nations, extradition is regulated by treaties. As between states or other political subdivisions on a domestic level, extradition is more accurately known as rendition. The master thesis is a research of the concept of extradition in historical perspective, trying to overlook deeper the basics of this legal norm. The research of the concept of extradition in historical perspective, trying to overlook deeper the basics of this legal norm. The research is made by comparing the institute of extradition and institute of fugitives in the context of international law, other legal acts. Fundamental legal acts of extradition are thoroughly discussed in the master thesis. The author presents the analysis of conventions, bilateral, agreements, national laws of extradition, principle of reciprocity and moral human rights. The author presents opinions of various contemporary Lithuanian scientists such as V. Vadapalas, A. Nevera, A. Čepas, J. Žilinskas, G. Goda, M. Kazlauskas, P. Kuconis, G. Švedas, L. Visockienė. Also were used fundamental works about extradition by M. Akehurst, S. Bedi, G. Gilbert, H. Lauterpacht, I. A. Shearer, A. Boicov, R. Valejev, J. Vasiljev, B. Velčev, L. Galenskaja etc. International agreements, national criminal laws and laws of criminal procedure are also analyzed in the study... [to full text]

The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms drawn up in Rome on 4 November 1950, entered into force in September 1953, consolidated the minimal standarts of human rights protection which are equally binding for all democratic Europe countries. Article 6 guarantees the right to a fair trial – one of the favourable condition to realize human rights. It is the fundamental right and the guarantee of other human rights protection. The aim of the master thesis is to scrutinize the conception of the right to a fair trial under the Article 6 of the European Convention, its content and the practice of The European Court of Human Rights on this question. It is considering especially urgent questions of the Article‘s 6 application. On that ground the position of the Court is formed and the analysed regulations becomes the part of theory. The master thesis should create the basis for the further analysis of the Article 6 and promote the publication of the problem on human rights and safeguard them in Lithuania. In the Article 6 there is determined the right that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reaonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. In the Convention sense the right to a fair trial is interpreted widely because of its significance in the democratic society. Otherwise the narrow interpretation of Article 6 would not answer the purpose. The right to a fair trial should be analysed as the whole... [to full text]