Decision of the Constitutional Court of the
U.br.297/95 off 03.07.1996
Headnotes:
The Constitution does not draw any
distinction between penal offenses based upon the level of their social danger,
and has not established different types of penal offenses. Therefore, the
principles of criminal procedure are applicable to all penal offenses in
general, including misdemeanors.
Guilt in respect of a penal offense may
be established only by a court decision.
The State administrative bodies are not
authorized to conduct any type of penal proceedings against citizens, nor to pronounce sentences following conviction for criminal
or other offenses.
Summary:
The case was initiated by a legal person
challenging the constitutionality and legality of the provision contained in
the Rules on the Government, which authorized the government and other bodies
of the State administration to conduct penal proceedings against natural and
legal persons and to pronounce sentences in some cases of minor non-criminal
(administrative) offenses.
The Constitutional Curt repealed the
challenged provision on the grounds that, according to the Constitution, guilt
in respect of a penal offense may be established only by a Court decision. The
Constitution does not distinguish among penal offenses on the basis of the
level of their social danger nor in regard to the establishment of different
types of penal offenses, which means that only courts are authorized to conduct
penal proceedings. Under the Constitution, the legislative, executive and
judicial power are strictly divided and their
competence may not be mixed. Therefore the State administrative bodies may not
be authorized to conduct any type of penal proceedings.
Supplementary information:
In the same period of reference the