AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
announcement also to his superior or service body; the person
serving a custodial sentence or in pretrial detention may notify
the member of the Prison and Judicial Corps. Effective regret
promotes ultima ratio principle of criminal law. The content of
the notification must be specific and complete. In particular, it
has to include circumstances describing the act of giving or
promising a bribe. (Čentéš et al., 2006) The term “voluntary”
was precisely determined by law practice. Voluntary means that
the action was taken based on perpetrator’s own will and free
choice, not under pressure of impending prosecution, or knowing
that the offence committed has been revealed (R 56/1999). In
another case, it was decided that term voluntary refers to action
of perpetrator when he or she acts on his/her own initiative,
before his/her crime has been discovered or announced (R
2/1965). Therefore, “voluntarily” means that the perpetrator was
not forced to announce his/her illegal action, did not announce it
because he or she was afraid of being uncovered, but announced
illegal action freely based on his/her belief, without constraints.
Problematic, in connection to effective regret is the term
“without delay”. There is no jurisprudence defining the exact
time interval, usually it is referred to as immediate action. The
aim of effective regret is to prevent or inhibit the harmful effect
of criminal behavior on society. If bribery was announced, law
enforcement authorities may take action and held person asking
for a bribe criminally responsible.
Another fact observed is that the U.S. Code is very strict in
defining terms. For illustration, title 1, chapter 1, section 8a
reads: “[…] the words “person”, “human being”, “child”,
and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the
species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of
development.” Title 1, chapter 1, section 8b further explains
term “born alive”. For proper understanding of the code and
realization of legality principle, it is necessary to define key
terms in the statute. Nevertheless, we think that not defining
certain terms would not hamper the principle of legality. There is
a lot of topics which are widely debated in the United States of
America and not in the Slovak Republic. One of them is gender
identity and correct reference to singular and plural. Therefore,
title 1, chapter 1, section 1 of the U.S. Code reads: „words
importing the singular include and apply to several persons,
parties, or things; words importing the plural include the
singular; words importing the masculine gender include the
feminine as well“. Statutes have to reflect on history and up-to-
date topics in the respective countries. Yet, we consider some
terms not necessary to be defined. The Slovak criminal code
lacks definition clarifying gender identification or reference to
singular or plural. From our point of view, it is not necessary to
incorporate similar definition into the Slovak criminal code.
It is essential to point out that title 1, chapter 1, section 1 states
that the U.S. Code is also applicable to legal persons as well as
individuals. Title 1, chapter 1, section 1 of U.S. Code reads:
“[…] the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations,
companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint
stock companies, as well as individuals”. On the contrary, in the
Slovak Republic, there is separate law regulating criminal
responsibility of legal entities. Act no. 91/2016 Coll. (“Act on
criminal liability of legal persons”) contains, in its section 3,
exhaustive list of criminal offences for which legal entity may be
held criminally liable. Section 3 of the Act on criminal liability
of legal persons refers to the Slovak criminal code. Only the
Slovak criminal code describes criminal offences. The Slovak
criminal code and the Slovak criminal procedural code act
supplementary to the Act on criminal liability of legal persons.
In connection to corruption, legal entities may be prosecuted for
crimes regulated in sections 328 – 330 and 332 – 334 as well as
indirect corruption under section 336 of the Slovak criminal
code. Legal entities cannot be prosecuted for crimes which are
not listed in section 3 of the Act on criminal liability of legal
persons.
Section 201 of the U.S. Code
Section 201 (b)(1) of the U.S. Code Bribery of public officials
and witnesses describes direct and indirect active corruption,
whereas section 201 (b)(2) of the U.S. Code describes direct and
indirect passive corruption. Section 201 (b)(1) of the U.S. Code
describe action when person directly or indirectly corruptly
gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official
or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers
or promises any public official or any person who has been
selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any
other person or entity. This conduct must be accompanied with
intend to either influence any official act, or to influence such
public official or any person who has been selected to be a
public official to commit or aid in committing, or collude in, or
allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any
fraud, on the United States, or to induce such public official or
any person who has been selected to be a public official to do or
omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official
or person
.
Section 201 (b)(2) of the U.S. Code refers to directly or
indirectly corruptly demanding, seeking, receiving, accepting, or
agreeing to receive or accepting anything of value personally or
for any other person or entity. This section has a specific subject.
Subject to this offence can be only the public official or person
selected to be a public official who fulfil the actus reus.
Perpetrator has to fulfil actus reus in return for either being
influenced in the performance of any official act, or being
influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or
allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any
fraud, on the United States, or being induced to do or omit to do
any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person.
Terms used in this section are explained in detail in section 201
(a) of the U.S. Code.
Section 201 (b)(3) of the U.S. Code refers to direct and indirect
active corruption with intent to influence the testimony under
oath or affirmation of such person as a witness upon a trial,
hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of
either House or both Houses of Congress, or any
agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the
United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or with intent
to influence such person to absent himself therefrom. This
section protects the administration of justice and provides
protection against non-occurrence of witness and false statement
which obstruct the justice. Object of protection under section
201 (b)(3) of the U.S. Code is the witness. In the Slovak criminal
code there is no special provision related to influencing
witnesses by bribery. However, such actus reus could be
subsumed under the criminal offence of Receiving a bribe under
section 328 (1) of the Slovak criminal code or criminal offence
of Bribery under section 332 (1) of the Slovak criminal code.
Section 332 (1) of the Slovak criminal code concern active
corruption and section 328 (1) of the Slovak criminal code
describes passive corruption. We hold this opinion based on the
fact that above-mentioned sections of the Slovak criminal code
are based on giving or receiving a bribe in order to influence the
person to act or omit to act in breach of duties arising from
his/her status. Obligations arising from status are not only
obligations imposed by law, but also those that are based on law,
or employment contract. Thus, violations of obligations also
include violation of obligation
of witness to give true statement.
(Čentéš et al., 2013) Additionally, both jurisdictions, the United
States of America and the Slovak Republic, recognize the crime
of Perjury. According to section 127 (1) of the Slovak criminal
procedure code everyone is obliged to appear at the summons of
law enforcement agencies and court, and to testify as witnesses
about what is known to him/her about the criminal offense,
perpetrator, or circumstances relevant to the criminal
proceedings. Additionally, according to 131 (1) of the Slovak
criminal procedure code the witness must always be instructed
that he or she is obliged to tell the truth, not to conceal anything,
and about the criminal consequences of false testimony. The
exceptions from this obligation are set in section 129 and 130 of
the Slovak criminal procedure code.
Section 201 (b)(4) of the U.S. Code regulates comparable
situations as section 201 (b)(3) of the U.S. Code, except for a
fact that this section refers to passive corruption. Therefore,
- 99 -