You are here:

Artikkel 50 - Mitmekordse kohtumõistmise ja karistamise keeld

Artikkel 50 - Mitmekordse kohtumõistmise ja karistamise keeld

Kedagi ei tohi uuesti kohtu alla anda ega karistada kuriteo eest, milles ta on liidu territooriumil seaduse järgi juba lõplikult õigeks või süüdi mõistetud.

    Text:

    Euroopa inimõiguste ja põhivabaduste kaitse konventsiooni protokolli nr 7 artikli 4 sõnastus on järgmine:

     `1. Mitte kellegi üle ei või sama riigi jurisdiktsiooni alusel teistkordselt kohut mõista ning kedagi ei või kriminaalkorras karistada teo eest, mille eest ta on juba selle riigi seaduse alusel ja kriminaalprotsessuaalses korras lõplikult õigeks või süüdi mõistetud.

    2. Eelmise lõike sätted ei takista menetluse taasalustamist kooskõlas asjassepuutuva riigi seaduse ja kriminaalprotsessiga, kui on tõendeid uutest või äsjailmnenud faktidest või kui varasemas menetluses on olnud oluline puudujääk, mis võis asja lahendit mõjustada.

    3. Käesolevast artiklist ei või taganeda konventsiooni artikli 15 järgi.`

    Liidu õiguses kohaldatakse non bis in idem põhimõtet (vt paljude pretsedentide hulgas 5. mai 1996. aasta otsust ühendatud kohtuasjades C-18/65 ja C-35/65: Gutmann v. komisjon, EKL 1966, lk I-150 ning hilisemat pretsedenti, esimese astme kohtu 20. aprilli 1999. aasta otsust ühendatud

    Source:
    Euroopa Liidu Teataja C 303/17 - 14.12.2007

    Preamble - Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights:
    Käesolevad selgitused valmistati algselt ette Euroopa Liidu põhiõiguste harta koostanud konvendi presiidiumi juhtimisel. Selgitusi ajakohastati Euroopa Konvendi presiidiumi vastutusel, pidades silmas nimetatud konvendi poolt harta tekstis (eelkõige artiklites 51 ja 52) tehtud kohandusi ning liidu õiguse arengut. Kuigi selgitustel endil pole õigusjõudu, on nad harta tõlgendamisel väärtuslikuks vahendiks, mille eesmärk on selgitada harta sätteid.

21 results found

0 results found

3 results found

  • Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law
    URL:
    (Directive on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law)

    Preamble: (21) Given the possibility of multiple jurisdictions for cross-border criminal offences falling under the scope of this Directive, the Member States should ensure that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected in full in the application of national law transposing this Directive ... (28) The intended dissuasive effect of the application of criminal law sanctions requires particular caution with regard to fundamental rights. This Directive respects fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and in particular the right to liberty and security, the protection of personal data, the freedom to choose an occupation and right to engage in work, the freedom to conduct a business, the right to property, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence and the right of defence, the principles of the legality and proportionality of criminal offences and sanctions, as well as the principle of ne bis in idem. This Directive seeks to ensure full respect for those rights and principles and must be implemented accordingly.

  • Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters
    URL:
    Directive on regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters

    Preamble: (17) The principle of ne bis in idem is a fundamental principle of law in the Union, as recognised by the Charter and developed by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Therefore the executing authority should be entitled to refuse the execution of an EIO if its execution would be contrary to that principle. Given the preliminary nature of the proceedings underlying an EIO, its execution should not be subject to refusal where it is aimed to establish whether a possible conflict with the ne bis in idem principle exists, or where the issuing authority has provided assurances that the evidence transferred as a result of the execution of the EIO would not be used to prosecute or impose a sanction on a person whose case has been finally disposed of in another Member State for the same facts. ... Article 11. Grounds for non-recognition or non-execution: 1. Without prejudice to Article 1(4), recognition or execution of an EIO may be refused in the executing State where: ... (d) the execution of the EIO would be contrary to the principle of ne bis in idem

  • Directive 2014/57/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on criminal sanctions for market abuse (market abuse directive)
    URL:
    Directive on criminal sanctions for market abuse (market abuse directive)

    Preamble: (23) The scope of this Directive is determined in such a way as to complement, and ensure the effective implementation of, Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. Whereas offences should be punishable under this Directive when committed intentionally and at least in serious cases, sanctions for breaches of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 do not require that intent is proven or that they are qualified as serious. In the application of national law transposing this Directive, Member States should ensure that the imposition of criminal sanctions for offences in accordance with this Directive and of administrative sanctions in accordance with the Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 does not lead to a breach of the principle of ne bis in idem.