Text file: 2345.txt
author: zelektron
downvotes: 2
end consideration date: 2012-03-20
id: '2345'
number comments: 12
number views: 2718
proposal type: Competent authority response
response: "Response from the Ministry of Justice and Public Administration\nThe Law\
  \ on Misdemeanours (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No 29/11 - official\
  \ consolidated text, hereinafter: ZP-1) already provides for the assessment of fines\
  \ according to the financial situation of the offender, namely the financial situation\
  \ is taken into account: 1) In ordinary court proceedings based on an indictment:\
  \ 26.  Paragraph 3 of the said Article provides, inter alia, that the offender's\
  \ financial situation, the amount of his salary, his other income, his property\
  \ and his family obligations shall also be taken into account in the assessment\
  \ of the fine. 2) The offender's financial situation may also be taken into account\
  \ in the case where the offending authority issues a decision on the offence in\
  \ an expedited offence procedure (56. However, the law allows for the imposition\
  \ of a fine which is higher than the minimum fine prescribed, i.e. within the range\
  \ (Article 52(3) of the Law on Criminal Procedure), since in this case, as in point\
  \ 1) of this letter, Article 26(3) of the Law on Criminal Procedure applies mutatis\
  \ mutandis.  The financial situation of the offender cannot therefore be taken into\
  \ account only in cases where the fine is set at a fixed amount (e.g. municipal\
  \ ordinances) and in cases where the law does not allow for the imposition of a\
  \ fine higher than the minimum prescribed rate (issuance of a payment order under\
  \ Article 57 of the LC-1). The Ministry of Justice and Public Administration sets\
  \ out below the reasons why in certain cases it is not possible to impose a fine\
  \ taking into account the financial situation of the offender:\n the offence authorities\
  \ should have direct (electronic) access to the official records that would keep\
  \ information on the offender's financial situation, which is currently not possible\
  \ due to technical reasons; many offenders hide their assets by having them registered\
  \ in the name of another family member or relative, which also raises the question\
  \ of the authenticity of the information contained in the official records; in the\
  \ substantive rules governing offences, all provisions on fines should be amended\
  \ to provide for a range, as some rules set fines at a fixed amount, noting also\
  \ that municipalities may only set fines at a fixed amount (paragraph 17(7) of Article\
  \ 17(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). Moreover, the Constitution\
  \ of the Republic of Slovenia provides in Article 14(1) that everyone is guaranteed\
  \ equal human rights and fundamental freedoms in Slovenia, regardless of nationality,\
  \ race, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, property, birth, education,\
  \ social status, disability or any other personal circumstance. Article 14(2) of\
  \ the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia provides that everyone is equal before\
  \ the law. This means that all applicable legal provisions must be applied in the\
  \ same way to all persons to whom they apply. At the same time, it means that the\
  \ norm must be drafted in such a way that it treats identical cases in the same\
  \ way.\n Finally, the Ministry of Justice and Public Administration makes a further\
  \ argument: the order for payment is intended to sanction offenders 'on the spot',\
  \ and fines for offences which are detected in person or by technical means or devices\
  \ by authorised officials of the offending authority should therefore be set at\
  \ the appropriate amounts in the rules governing offences (taking into account the\
  \ different socio-economic status of the offenders). The procedure for issuing a\
  \ payment order is intended to be swift, and the offender is therefore allowed to\
  \ pay half of the fine within eight days of the payment order becoming final, provided\
  \ that he or she does not apply for judicial protection. It is precisely the possibility\
  \ to pay half of the fine that is one of the possible ways to take into account\
  \ the fact that some infringers have low incomes. However, pursuant to Article 57(2)\
  \ of the CP-1, the offender also has the option of paying the fine in instalments,\
  \ and this right is expressly indicated in the payment order.  On the basis of the\
  \ above, the Ministry of Justice and Public Administration considers that the implementation\
  \ of the imposition of fines on the basis of economic and social criteria in the\
  \ procedure for issuing a payment order is questionable both from the point of view\
  \ of the efficiency and speed of this procedure and from the point of view of constitutionality."
response date: 2012-04-04
response due date: null
sent date: 2012-02-20
title: Change to the penalty regime
upvotes: 21
url: https://predlagam.vladi.si/predlog/2345
