CZY NARUSZENIE OBOWIĄZKÓW ZWIĄZANYCH Z ODBYWANIEM KARY POZBAWIENIA WOLNOŚCI W SYSTEMIE DOZORU ELEKTRONICZNEGO STANOWI ODRĘBNE PRZESTĘPSTWO?
DOES A VIOLATION OF OBLIGATIONS RELATED TO SERVING A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT UNDER THE ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM CONSTITUTE A SEPARATE CRIME?

Summary/Abstract: Background: The subject of the research of this paper is an attempt to answer the question of therealization of the criminal act typeʼs elements by a convict who violates the obligations associatedwith serving a sentence of imprisonment under the electronic surveillance system. The articlefocuses on the analysis of the elements of the types of criminal acts described in Article 242 § 1and Article 244 of the Polish Criminal Code.Research purpose: The purpose of the research is to interpret the elements of certain typesof criminal acts and to determine whether there are grounds for assuming criminal liability of a convict who does not fulfill the obligations imposed on him by the penitentiary court, in thecase of granting permission to serve a sentence of imprisonment under the electronic surveillancesystem.Methods: The work uses a dogmatic-legal method involving analysis of the legal norms containedin the Polish Criminal Code, as well as a theoretical-legal method (analysis of commentaries,monographs, articles, case law) and, to the extent necessary, a historical-legal method.Conclusions: The behavior involving the violation of the obligation to remain in the placeindicated by the court or the penitentiary commission at the appointed time by a person servinga sentence of imprisonment under the electronic surveillance system should not be qualified asthe realization of the offense of self-liberation under Article 242 § 1 of the Polish Criminal Code.Such behavior meets the requirements of the type of criminal act described in Article 244 of theCriminal Code. However, this solution would lead to the assumption that such an act is subjectto an even higher criminal sanction than in the case of the offense of self-liberation, which couldmean an unjustified differentiation of the criminal sanction from that provided for in Article 244a§ 2 of the Criminal Code.

• Details
• Contents