페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

15

committed by such a person, the court may order, in addition to the penalty, also.. compulsory medical measures. If the imposed penalty is not a deprivation of liberty (imprisonment), the compulsory medical treatment is given in a medical institution under a special cure and labor regime. The compulsory cure of a criminal condemned to imprisonment is carried out during the serving of the penalty ; but the term of compulsory cure is deducted from the term of deprivation of liberty. The court may order the continuation of this treatment even. after the release of the criminal and only the court may interrupt this measure.

No provision is contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the problem of defense of an alcoholic defendant; nor are there any discussions in legal writings.

Question 1. The Bulgarian Criminal Code and doctrine distinguish two general standards or situations in which an act is considered “not socially dangerous," and consequently not punishable, namely, in the case of “self-defense” (Sec. 12) and in the case of "state of distress" (Sec. 13).

In the first instance, a person is acting in self-defense when he is trying “to protect state or public interest from an immediate illegal attack (as well as), the person or rights of the one who is defending himself or another (person].” This is excusable, however, up to certain "limits.” Any act which is in excess of the use of self-defense is punishable. Again, the law excuses and does not punish any excess of self-defense if the latter was a result of “fright" or "confusion".

In interpreting Section 12 of the Code, the Supreme Court defines "fright" or "confusion" as "that mental condition of the perpetrator in which his mental disturbance is so strong that it restricted to a considerable degree his capacity to control his actions and to motivate his conduct within the limits of selfdefense".

The second possibility of an excusable act is when a person is acting in a state of distress, e.g., "in order to save state or public interests as well as his own or somebody else's personal or property rights from an immediate danger, which the perpetrator could not avoid in any other manner, [and] if the damage caused by the act is less significant than that of the averted [damage]". Howerer, the law excludes the existence of a state of distress "if the avoidance itself of the danger constitutes a crime”.

Question 8. The Bulgarian Criminal Code does not classify criminal acts; the only term known and used is prestúplenie (crime, offense). Professor Ivan Nenov states that the basic “twofold or threefold division of criminal acts as practiced in bourgeois legislations has no essential importance in the Bulgarian legal system.” 18

Depending on the seriousness of the crime, however, the penalty may range from public reprimand to death. There are eleven different types of penalties, which may be imposed in combination (Sec. 37, par. 1). For the most serious crimes "which jeopardize the foundations of the People's Republic” the Code provides the death penalty executed by a firing squad “as a temporary and an exceptional measure" (Sec. 37, par. 2).

Question 9. Sentencing. In accordance with the Criminal Code provisions the trial court determines the penalty within the limits prescribed by law for the committed crime after taking into consideration the provisions of the General Part of the Code as well as (a) the degree of social danger of the act and its perpetrator; (b) the motives for the commission of the crime; and (c) all other circumstances aggravating or mitigating the guilt (Sec. 54). If the mitigating circumstances are so exclusive and numerous, and if the penalty provided by law appears to be still too harsh, the court may change the type of penalty accordingly (Sec. 55).

If the Code prescribes the choice of one or two types of penalties the court may select the most appropriate in kind and term; if the law provides the imposition of two or more penalties the court may determine the term of each penalty so that they may in their combined form fit the purposes of the penalty (Sec. 57).

Special rules are applicable in regard to the determination of the penalty for juvenile delinquents (Secs. 60-65).

Reasons in Writing Sentences. Each sentence must contain, in addition to several other items of information, as listed in the Code of Criminal Procedure,

15 12., decision No 236 of 1969. I crim. div. 1* Xenov, op cit., p. 369.

57-868—72-pt. 3-6-26

10

Thus, if the defendant is found insane, he is criminally irresponsible; if he is found guilty but prior to the pronouncement of the sentence becomes insane, no penalty is imposed. The trial court, as explained in a decision of the Supreme Court, is under the duty to examine the mental condition of the defendant by appointing an expertise of medical doctor-psychiatrists. As a rule, the appointment of experts may be made upon the request of the interested parties in the trial or upon the initiative of the organs of the pareliminary proceedings and the court. However, it is within the authority of the court and the organs of the preliminary proceedings to evaluate the need of an expert in the specific case. A rejection of such a request must be justified by the respective organ."

In the above-described cases the Code prescribes the application of appropriate compulsory medical measures (Sec. 34), discussed in a special Chapter 14 of the General Part of the Code (Secs. 89–92). Thus, in regard to a person who has committed a socially dangerous act in a condition of irresponsibility or who fell into such a condition prior to the pronouncement of the sentence or during the time of serving the penalty, the court may (a) surrender him to his relatives if they will assume the obligation for his cure under the care of a psycho-neurologist despensary; (b) order compulsory treatment in a regular psycho-neurological institution; or (c) decree compulsory treatment in a special mental institution or in a special department of a regular mental neurological institution.

According to Section 90, the court decides what type of treatment is necessary in each individual case. Also, the court must decide after a period of six monthis whether the compulsory medical measures should be discontinued or changed.

In instances of compulsory medical treatment this Code does not expressly specify whether the judge should select the psychiatrist who is to examine the defendant. The Code of Criminal Procedure, however, provides that a defense counsel be appointed ex officio if the defendant himself cannot realize his rights of defense because of physical or mental deficiencies (Sec. 175, par. 2). Furthermore, the Code states that upon the recommendation of the district government attorney and on the basis of investigation and expertise the district court may, in a public hearing, order that the accused be sent to a medical institution for compulsory treatment (Sec. 124, par. 2). Another provision in Section 128 provides for the possibility that the trial be stopped if the accused, after the commission of the criminal act, falls into a disturbed state of mind, which excludes his guilt. After his recovery the trial is to be reopened; if the defendant is incurably ill, the preceedings are to be closed by the government attorney.

Question 6. As explained elsewhere [Answer to Question No. 5], under the provisions of the Bulgarian Criminal Code guilt may be excluded in the following three situations: namely, when there is (a) mental retardation; (b) permanent mental disturbance; and (c) temporary mental disturbance, and as a result thereof, the perpetrator was in such a mental condition that he could not comprehend the criminality of his conduct or conduct himself in conformity with the requirements of law. The last category of temporary mental disturbance may be the result also of alcoholic or other drug intoxication, i.e., a case of a pathological alcoholic intoxication. However, the doctrine excludes "normal drinking (getting drunk) of alcohol" as a defense. Thus, the Code accepts the principle that voluntary intoxication does not in itself relieve the perpetrator of criminal responsibility.

The 1968 Code contains a special provision in Section 92 which deals exclusive. ly with the compulsory medical measures applicable to criminals suffering from alcoholism or drug intoxication." According to this provision, if the crime was committed by such a person, the court may order, in addition to the penalty, also compulsory medical measures. If the imposed penalty is not a deprivation of liberty (imprisonment), the compulsory medical treatment is given in a medical institution under a special cure and labor regime. The compulsory cure of a criminal condemned to imprisonment is carried out during the serving of the penalty ; but the term of compulsory cure is deducted from the term of deprivation of liberty. The court may order the continuation of this treatment even. after the release of the criminal and only the court may interrupt this measure.

& Decision No. 824 of 1963, II crim. div of the Supreme Court, as cited by Pavlov, op. cit., infra note 9.

Stefan Parlor, Nakazatelen protses na Narodna Republika Búlgariia (Criminal Procedure of the People's Republic of Bulgaria). Sofia, 1971. p. 423.

10 Decision No. 822 of 1953, II crim, div. of the Supreme Court, as cited by Pavlov, op. cit., p. 423.

11 Pavlov, op cit., p. 423. 12 Nenov, op. cit., p. 163. 1. II. p. 167.

14 Sådeona Praktika na Vůrkhouniio Súd na NR Búlgariia. Nakazatelna Kolegiia (Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the PR of Bulgaria. Criminal Division). Sofia, 1970. p. 41: Court decision No. 133 of March 7, 1969. I crim. div.

No provision is contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the problem of defense of an alcoholic defendant; nor are there any discussions in legal writings.

Question 7. The Bulgarian Criminal Code and doctrine distinguish two general standards or situations in which an act is considered “not socially dangerous," and consequently not punishable, namely, in the case of “self-defense" (Sec. 12) and in the case of "state of distress” (Sec. 13).

In the first instance, a person is acting in self-defense when he is trying “to. protect state or public interest from an immediate illegal attack (as well as), the person or rights of the one who is defending himself or another (person]." This is excusable, however, up to certain "limits.” Any act which is in excess of the use of self-defense is punishable. Again, the law excuses and does not punish any excess of self-defense if the latter was a result of "fright" or "confusion".

In interpreting Section 12 of the Code, the Supreme Court defines "fright" or “confusion” as that mental condition of the perpetrator in which his mental disturbance is so strong that it restricted to a considerable degree his capacity to control his actions and to motivate his conduct within the limits of selfdefense". 15

The second possibility of an excusable act is when a person is acting in a state of distress, e.g., "in order to save state or public interests as well as his own or somebody else's personal or property rights from an immediate danger, which the perpetrator could not avoid in any other manner, [and] if the damage caused by the act is less significant than that of the averted [damage]”. However, the law excludes the existence of a state of distress "if the avoidance itself of the danger constitutes a crime”.

Question 8. The Bulgarian Criminal Code does not classify criminal acts; the ouly term known and used is prestů plenie (crime, offense). Professor Ivan Nenov states that the basic "twofold or threefold division of criminal acts as practiced in bourgeois legislations has no essential importance in the Bulgarian legal system.” 14

Depending on the seriousness of the crime, however, the penalty may range from public reprimand to death. There are eleven different types of penalties, which may be imposed in combination (Sec. 37, par. 1). For the most serious crimes "which jeopardize the foundations of the People's Republic" the Code provides the death penalty executed by a firing squad “as a temporary and an exceptional measure" (Sec. 37, par. 2).

Question 9. Sentencing. In accordance with the Criminal Code provisions the trial court determines the penalty within the limits prescribed by law for the committed crime after taking into consideration the provisions of the General Part of the Code as well as (a) the degree of social danger of the act and its perpetrator; (b) the motives for the commission of the crime; and (c) all other circumstances aggravating or mitigating the guilt (Sec. 54). If the mitigating circumstances are so exclusive and numerous, and if the penalty provided by law appears to be still too harsh, the court may change the type of penalty accordingly (Sec. 55).

If the Code prescribes the choice of one or two types of penalties the court may select the most appropriate in kind and term ; if the law provides the imposition of two or more penalties the court may determine the term of each Denalty so that they may in their combined form fit the purposes of the penalty (Sec. 57).

Special rules are applicable in regard to the determination of the penalty for juvenile delinquents (Secs. 60-65).

Reasons in Writing Sentences. Each sentence must contain, in addition to Several other items of information, as listed in the Code of Criminal Procedure,

[blocks in formation]

written information on the reasons for the sentences imposed, as well as on the kind of appeal allowed, before which court, and within what period of time (Sec. 213).

Appeal. Sentences of the people's court as a first instance are appealed to the district court and sentences of the district courts are reviewed by the Supreme Court (Sec. 220, Crim. Proc.); both sides in the trial, defendant and the government, may appeal (Sec. 221, Crim. Proc.).

Suspension. Under the present Criminal Code probation is a form of suspension of sentence which may be realized in one of the following manners: (a) full suspension of the execution of a sentence; (b) partial suspension of the execution of the sentence; (c) conditional suspension of the imposition of the sentence; and (d) suspension of criminal responsibility by imposition of nonpenal measures.

(a) When the court imposes the penalty of deprivation of liberty of up to 3 years, it may suspend its execution for 2 to 5 years, if the defendant has never been deprived of his liberty for a crime of a generally dangerous nature and the court is inclined to believe that this would be in the interest of the case (Sec. 66).

Whenever a sentence is suspended, the court may authorize a public organization or a labor collective to exercise “educational care” during the determined period. General supervision of the educational care and conduct of the convicted on probation is placed in the hands of the people's court within that jurisdiction. There is a special regulation regarding the implementation of these provisions (Sec. 67).

(b) The court may release a convicted person on probation before the full serving of his penalty e.g. (Sec. 70–73).

(c) The Criminal Code also provides for the possibility of suspending the imposition of a sentence when, upon the recommendation of a public organization or the labor collective, the court decrees his reeducation by this organization or collective if the crime is punishable by deprivation of liberty for up to one year, there is no great social danger, the defendant admits his guilt and regrets the act and if the purpose of the penalty is better realized in this manner.

(d) Suspension of criminal responsibility may be achieved by the imposition of measures involving public influence by the comrade's court in cases of a certain type of criminal act as listed in the Criminal Code (Sec. 77). In its decision No. 37 of January 20, 1969, the Supreme Court stated that the comrade's court is an organ of society which makes use of measures of public influence not only in cases that are transferred to it by the trial court, but also in cases within its jurisdiction."

Minimum Prison Sentence. The mandatory minimum prison sentence is one month and every sentence of imprisonment is always a determinate one ; furthermore, it is always a joint sentence rather than a concurrent or consecutive one (Sec. 57). The court determines the term of each penalty in cases of several crimes and combines them.

Fine. A fine is imposed in accordance with the financial situation as well as the income and family obligations of the convicted defendant. It may be less than 10 leva (official rate of one leva equals $1.17).18 The fine is collected from his property. However, properties which are not subject to confiscation, as specified and listed in a special law, may not be sold for the compulsory collection of the fine.

"Day Fine". The Code is silent on the problem of the "day fine" system.

Question 10. As a rule, under Bulgarian criminal law, a generally dangerous act is punishable only if it was committed guiltily, e.g., intentionally (dolus directus and dolus eventualis). or negligently. If the element of guilt in either of its two forms is absent the generally dangerous act does not constitute a crime (see also answers to questions Nos. 5, 6 and 7). There are a few situations in which the Code excludes the presence of the element of guilt: in cases of a mistake as well as in cases of an "accidental act," and in the execution of an illegal official order.

Professor Ivan Nenov, when analyzing mistake as a circumstance which excludes guilt, emphasizes the point that a mistake of law is not known in Bulgarian criminal legislation. "If we refer to a very old division of mistakes," he states, "into a 'mistake of fact' and a 'mistake of law, we have to stress (the

17

17 Súdebna Praktika, op. cit., p. 40. 18 See Pick's Currency Yearbook, 1971. New York, 1971. p. 84.

fact] that under our legal system only the first category--the factual one? is of importance." 19 However, in its decision of May 30, 1.969, the Supreme Court stated that "the mistaken notion of the perpetrator regarding the person whom he intended to kill is irrelevant since the desired result and the one factually attained concerns one and the same object of protection and contains the element of one and the same crime." 20

The pertinent Criminal Code provisions dealing with the circumstances which exclude guilt read as follows:

Sec. 14 (1) Ignorance of the factual circumstances which belong to the elements of the crime, exclude the intent connected with this crime.

(2) This provision also refers to negligently committed acts if the ignorance of the factual circumstances is not due to negligence.

Furthermore, the Code declares the act is committed without guilt in two other instances: (a) if the perpetrator was not under the obligation to or could not foresee the occurrence of the generally dangerous results. (Sec. 15), of the so-called "accidental act” or (b) if he was acting in execution of “an illegal official order" (Sec. 16).

In all these instances, the lack of criminal "guilt" may be used as a defense.

Question 11. There are no analogues to the differentiation between crime and jurisdiction in the Bulgarian Criminal Code.

Question 12. The extraterritorial applicability of he Bulgarian Criminal Code is the subject of separate report, a copy of which is attached.

QUESTION 12

The Communist Government established in Bulgaria after September 9, 1944 introduced a new Criminal Code of February 13, 1951, drafted along the line of Soviet doctrines in this field. This Code was entirely replaced by another on April 2, 1968,a which also incorporated various criminal provisions scattered throughout a number of legislative acts.

The questions of the applicability of the Code regarding crimes committed within and without the territory of the People's Republic of Bulgaria are dealt with in accordance with the traditional principles and Communist teachings related to this area.

The territoriality principle is reflected in Section 3(1) of the Code which prescribes that it applies to all criminal offenses committed within the territorial limits of the country by any person regardless of his citizenship.

Based on the personality principle, the Bulgarian Criminal Code also applies to Bulgarian citizens for their crimes committed abroad, as explicitly stated in Section 4(1); however, a Bulgarian citizen may not be extradited to a foreign state for criminal prosecution or serving of a sentence (Sec. 4(2).

The spokesman of the present government of Bulgaria in the field of criminal law science, Professor Ivan Nenov, explains this provision on the basis of the Communist doctrine that “Bulgarian citizens must, in their behavior, always and everywhere comply with the socialist requirements—with the rules of Communist morals and socialist law.” b In further clarification he states that the nature of the crime and the type of penalty as well as the question whether the crime affects the interests of the Bulgarian state and its citizens or that of a foreign state and its nationals, are irrelevant. Moreover, it is not important, he states, whether the act constitutes a crime under the law of the place where it occurred.c

Based on the protective principle, the Bulgarian Criminal Code is also applicable to foreign nationals for their criminal acts committed outside the jurisdictional territory of Bulgaria, but only if these offenses are of a general nature and affect the interests of the Bulgarian state or its citizens (Sec. 5). The above-mentioned criminal law expert, Ivan Nenov, questions the possibility for the application of this provision in regard to foreign nationals who committed a crime abroad. “This principle," he emphasizes, “has a practical significance when the criminal perpetrator, a foreign national, is found within the

19 Nenov, op cit., p. 344.
30 Decision No. 336 of May 30, 1969, I crim. div., sŭdebna Praktika, op. cit., p. 13.

a Dŭurzhaven Vestnik (Official Law Gazette of Bulgaria). No. 26, April 2, 1968 ; Correction: id. No. 29, April 12, 1968.

Ivan Nenov. Nākszatelno pravo na Narodna Republika Bulgaria (Criminal Law of the People's Republic of Bulgaria). Obschta chast (General Part). Sofia, Nauka i is. kustvo, 1963. p. 126.

« 이전계속 »