ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta ter analiza učinkovitosti kazenskopravnega varstva okolja

magistrska naloga

Karmen Krajnc (Author), Damjan Korošec (Mentor), Rajko Knez (Co-mentor)

Abstract

Varstvo okolja v okviru upravnega prava ni preprečilo škodljivih posegov v okolje in ni prineslo pričakovanih rezultatov v obliki zmanjšanja onesnaževanja okolja. Kot zadnje in skrajno sredstvo za varovanje okolja se tako sprejemamo predpisi, ki težje, za okolje škodljive posege v okolje, opredeljujejo kot kazniva dejanja. Medtem, ko na širši mednarodni ravni (še) ni pravno zavezujočega predpisa, ki bi izrecno narekoval kazenskopravno varstvo okolja, v Evropski uniji (EU) že nekaj let obstajajo pravno zavezujoča pravila, ki državam članicam nalagajo tovrstni način varstva okolja. V okviru Evropske unije (EU) na primarni pravni ravni podlaga za kazenskopravno varstvo okolja izhaja iz drugega odstavka 83. člena Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije (PDEU), na sekundarni ravni pa iz dveh direktiv. Prva direktiva, Direktiva št. 2008/99/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 19.11.2008 o kazenskopravnem varstvu okolja se nanaša na kazenskopravno varstvo zraka, zemlje, vode, živali in rastlin. Druga direktiva, Direktiva 2009/123/ES o spremembah Direktive 2005/35/ES o onesnaževanju morja z ladij in o uvedbi kazni za kršitve državam članicam EU narekuje uvedbo kazenskopravnega varstva morja pred onesnaževanjem z morskih plovil. Obe omenjeni direktivi zahtevata le minimalno harmonizacijo in tako dopuščata določene razlike v kazenskopravnem varstvu okolja med državami članicami. Nobena od omenjenih direktiv tudi ne zahteva uvedbe kazenske odgovornosti pravnih oseb v državah članicah, ki tovrstne odgovornosti pravnih oseb ne poznajo. Ena od značilnosti predvsem Direktive 2008/99/ES je poleg blanketne zakonodajne tehnike tudi vsebnost številnih blanketnih izpolnitvenih pojmov, kar poleg že omenjenih značilnosti direktiv lahko vpliva na učinkovitost kazenskopravnega varstva okolja na ravni celotne EU. V slovenskem Kazenskem zakoniku (KZ-1) je varstvo okolja opredeljeno v 32. poglavju z naslovom »Kazniva dejanja zoper okolje, prostor in naravne dobrine«. Opisi določenih kaznivih dejanj iz tega poglavja so povzeti po že omenjenih direktivah skupaj s posameznimi značilnostmi, ki lahko predstavljajo ovire pri uporabi zakonskih določb. Tako opisi posameznih kaznivih dejanj vsebujejo blanketne izpolnitvene pojme, določeni opisi kaznivih dejanj so zapisani v blanketni zakonski tehniki. Opise kaznivih dejanj v zadnje omenjenih primerih dopolnjujejo blanketne izpolnitvene norme upravnega prava, ki niso zapisane jasno in nedvoumno. Vse te okoliščine in tudi nizke kazni, ki se izrekajo storilcem tovrstnih kaznivih dejanj vplivajo na dejstvo, da je kljub nezadostnemu preventivnemu učinku upravnih sankcij, upravno pravo še vedno vodilno pri varstvu okolja.

Keywords

varstvo okolja;kazensko pravo;pravo EU;magistrske naloge;

Data

Language:	Slovenian
Year of publishing:	2016
Typology:	2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:	UM PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher:	[K. Krajnc]
UDC:	349+343(043.2)
COBISS:	5128235
Views:	794
Downloads:	144
Average score:	0 (0 votes)
Metadata:

Other data

Secondary language:	English
Secondary title:	Protection of the environment through criminal law
Secondary abstract:	Environmental protection in the context of administrative law has not prevented harmful activities affecting the environment and has not brought the expected results in a form of reduced environmental pollution. Thus regulations which define severe harmful activities affecting the environment as criminal offences shall be adopted as the last and extreme measure of environmental protection. While on a broader international level there is (yet) no legally binding regulation that would expressly dictate the environmental protection through criminal law, in the European Union (EU) legally binding rules that impose such type of environmental protection on the Member States already exist for some years now. In the context of the European Union (EU) at the primary legal level the basis for environmental protection through criminal law arises from Article 83(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and on the secondary level of the two directives. The first directive, Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the protection of the environment through criminal law refers to criminal law protection of air, soil, water, animals and plants. The second directive,Directive 2009/123/EC amending Directive 2005/35/EC on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements imposes the introduction of marine protection through criminal law against ship-source pollution on EU Member States. Both mentioned directives require only minimum harmonisation and thus allow specific differences in the environmental protection through criminal law between the Member States. None of the two mentioned directives also require the introduction of criminal liability of legal entities in the Member States which are unfamiliar with this type of liability of legal entities. One of the characteristics, in particular of the Directive 2008/99/EC in addition to blanket legislative technique, is also the content of numerous blanket implementation concepts, which in addition to the already aforementioned characteristics of directive may affect the efficacy of the environmental protection through criminal law at the level of the entire EU. The Slovenian Criminal Code (KZ-1) defines the environmental protection in Chapter 32 titled “Criminal Offences against the Environment, Space and Natural Resources«. The descriptions of specific criminal offences set out in this Chapter are summarized from the above mentioned directives together with individual characteristics that may pose obstacles in applying statutory provisions. Thus, the descriptions of individual criminal offences include blanket implementation concepts, and specific descriptions of criminal offences are written in a blanket statutory technique. The descriptions of criminal offences in the last-mentioned cases are completed with blanket implementation standards of the administrative law which are not written clearly and unambiguously. All these circumstances and also low penalties which are imposed on the perpetrators of such criminal offences have an impact on the fact that despite the insufficient precautionary effect of administrative sanctions, the administrative law still leads in the environmental protection.
Secondary keywords:	environmental law;criminal law;EU law;
URN:	URN:SI:UM:
Type (COBISS):	Master's thesis
Thesis comment:	Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fak.
Pages:	IX, 206 f.
ID:	9140699