Dokumentų suklastojimo koncepcija naujame Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamajame kodekse

LTStraipsnyje nagrinėjama dokumentų suklastojimo koncepcija, kuri de jure ir de facto buvo įtvirtinta naujajame 2000 m. redakcijos Lietuvos Respublikos baudžiamajame kodekse. 2003 m. gegužės 1 d. įsigaliojęs Baudžiamasis kodeksas iš esmės pakeitė seną dokumentų suklastojimo koncepciją, nes buvo atsisakyta pareiginio dokumento suklastojimo sudėties, o sukurta nauja dokumentų suklastojimo sudėtis, kuri apima, galima sakyti, visas baudžiamosios teisės mokslui žinomas dokumentų suklastojimo sudėtis. Autorius išdėsto naują požiūrį į nagrinėjamos sudėties objektą, kuriuo jis laiko teisinę apyvartą. Straipsnyje taip pat pabrėžiamas dokumento sąvokos ribų išplėtimas. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Atsakomybė; Baudžiamoji teisė; Dokumento suklastojimas; Dokumentų suklastojimas; Criminal law; Falsification of document; Falsification of documents; Responsibility.

ENThe article deals with the concept of falsification of documents, which was de jure and de facto established in the new edition Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania (2000). The Criminal Code which came in to effect in 1 May 2003 in fact changed the old concept of document falsification, because it discarded corpus delicti of official duty documents and established a new corpus delicti which encompasses all forms of corpus delicti as far as falsification of document goes. While analyzing the subject of document falsification the author emphasizes the fact that management order, which was understood as action of subjects of normal particular management order, in the Criminal Code of 1961 edition had been defined as the subject of document falsification. In the new Criminal Code edition, in the author’s opinion, the subject of the crimes becomes the functionality and dependability of legal turnover and this value and its substance are universal as well as protection of the interests of all participants of legal turnover. The second important point accentuated in the article is the definition of object–document of the crime. The author states that it is evident that a classic definition of official document that has been confirmed with law and dominated in the doctrine for a long time is incomplete today, since it does not correspond the current situation.The author proposes the following to consider as falsification of a document: each written act or other object of material world, containing the information with legal meaning that according its nature and meaning is the prove of right or duty or origin, modification or termination of legal actions. The author also proposes the following to consider as the subject of document falsification and to consider as document falsification the unlawful modification of the following: computer data, that is held as a document according to its nature and legal meaning and provisions of the Law on Electronic Signature of the Republic of Lithuania and the purpose of which is to prove the conditions and facts having legal meaning and to record origin, modification and termination of various rights and duties. The author states that all other computer data that cannot be referred as document according to its nature, is the subject of data modification and modification of such data cannot be referred as document falsification. While analyzing the document as the subject of document falsification separately from the stock as the subject of stock falsification, the author proposed to follow the stock emission approach. According to the author, serial stock emission which is performed en masse cannot be referred to as the subject of document falsification, while so called casual stock that have one time emission must be referred to as the subject of document falsification. Actus reus of document falsification that is fraud, intellectual and material ways of document falsification are further analyzed in the article. […]. [text from author]