Coherence in Criminal Policy for Offenses Against Justice That Obstruct the Investigation of a Case

Abstract

The third chapter (“Coherence in Criminal Policy for Offenses Against Justice That Obstruct the Investigation of a Case”) analyzes the law and sentencing practice of Lithuania and other countries regarding offenses against justice. This analysis shows that Lithuanian criminal policy in the fight against offenses against justice, where the investigation is obstructed or the participants in the case are influenced, is much more lenient than the criminal policy of the UK or the USA in this respect, both at the level of legislation and case law. It should be noted that the provisions of the Lithuanian Criminal Code on criminal liability for the obstruction of justice are not coherent with other special and general provisions. In addition, the penalties for the above-mentioned offenses against justice are not coherent and are too lenient in relation to other provisions of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, which provide for liability for similar offenses. Moreover, the rules on the aggregation of penalties provided for in the General Part of the Criminal Code are inconsistent with the objectives of these penalties, and unduly broaden the scope of application of the aggregation of penalties. This leads to a situation in which serious or very serious offenses against justice effectively go unpunished.