Konstytucyjność przepisu prawa karnego dotyczącego odpowiedzialności za wejście w porozumienie z inną osobą podczas przetargu publicznego w celu osiągnięcia korzyści majątkowej
Constitutionality of a criminal law provision concerning liability for entering into an agreement with another person during a public tender in order to obtain a financial benefit

Summary/Abstract: The constitutional complainant challenged the constitutionality of a part of a Criminal Code provision that states: “anyone who, in order to achieve a material benefit, prevents or obstructs a public tender, or acts in concert with another entity to the detriment of the owner of property or an entity or institution for which the tender is to be held is liable to imprisonment for up to 3 years”, insofar as it provides for criminal liability for entering into an agreement with another person. The author of the opinion concludes that the statutory regulation challenged by the applicant does not violate the principle of specificity of criminal law provisions. Although the regulation raises certain doubts regarding its interpretation, they do not render the addressees of this provision unable to carry out a rational test of the foreseeability of criminal law consequences of their conduct. The challenged provision is in compliance with the Constitution.

• Details
• Contents