Prehliadanie podľa Autor "Klimek, Libor"
Teraz sa zobrazuje 1 - 4 z 4
Výsledky na stránku
Možnosti zoradenia
Položka Artificial intelligence in European criminal law perspective(Universum Press : Priština, 2024) Klimek, Libor; Babony, DeanMany official documents on artificial intelligence (AI) have been adopted by the European Union. The contribution deals with AI in European criminal law perspective. It focuses on the most important steps of the European Union in this field, namely the Directive 2016/680 on Protection of Personal Data Used by Police and Criminal Justice Authorities of 2016, the European Ethical Charter on the Use of AI in Judicial Systems of 2018, the Resolution on AI in Criminal Law and its Use in Criminal Matters of 2021 and the Proposal for a Regulation on Harmonised Rules on AI (AI Act) of 2021.Položka Dual sanctioning of hate crimes and hate speech as part of extremism in the Slovak Republic: conceptual, legislative and practical issues(Publishing House VD "Dakor" : Kyjev, 2024) Romža, Sergej; Ferenčíková, Simona; Klimek, LiborBackground: Extremism poses a cross-border social problem, lacking a universally accepted definition. In principle, so-called hate crimes are specific types of criminal offences that cut across all types of extremism. We can even talk about their conceptual overlap. A special category of hate crimes is represented by so-called verbal attacks, known as hate speech, which are considered an abuse of freedom of expression from an international perspective as well as in jurisprudence of the European Court on Human Rights. As a result of such a perception, their criminal sanction comes into consideration. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity of criminal law repression, another method of sanctioning hate crimes and hate speech is also possible, namely by administrative law. The existence of “multiple legal regulations” on extremism as delict caused a dual sanctioning system of extremism. It leads to application problems in legal practice, for example, an unclear understanding of offences from criminal and administrative perspectives or even the weak possibility of investigating such acts by State power. The main objective of the contribution is to point out the dual legal regulation (criminal and administrative) of the sanctioning of extremism, in particular its special category – hate crimes and hate speech. Moreover, the objective of the contribution is to assess its unclear issues in legal understanding and to identify specific application problems caused by its dual system (criminal and administrative). Special attention is focused on applicable sanctions in both the criminal law area and administrative law areas. At the end, suggestions on how to solve indicated problems are introduced. RESEARCH ARTICLE Access to Justice in Eastern Europe ISSN 2663-0575 (Print) ISSN 2663-0583 (Online) Journal homepage http://ajee-journal.com Methods: The primary sources used for the elaboration of the contribution are scholarly sources (books, studies, scientific papers, etc.), legislative instruments (national and international legislation) and case law (of Slovak national courts and the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union). The authors use traditional methods of legal scientific (jurisprudential) research – general scientific methods and special methods of legal science (jurisprudence). The general scientific methods used in the paper are predominantly logical methods, namely, the method of analysis, the method of synthesis, the method of analogy, and the descriptive method. The descriptive method has been used to familiarise the reader with the current legal regulation of extremism. The method of analysis has been used regarding relevant legal provisions and case-laws of courts. The method of synthesis has also been used. The special methods of legal science used here predominantly include methods belonging to a group of interpretative methods, namely, the teleological method, the systematic method and the comparative method. The teleological method has been used to explain the purpose of legislative instruments. The systematic method has been used to classify the relevant applicable law. The comparative method has been used to examine the relationship between legislative perspectives – criminal and administrative. Results and Conclusions: Regarding extremism offences committed in the Slovak Republic, in specific cases, the decision making whether the committed offence is criminal or of an administrative nature depends on the attitude of the person who committed it. In the Slovak Republic, legislative amendments are intended to address the area of extremism offences, but they have not been introduced as final. A new legal regulation of the administrative offences of extremism is envisaged in terms of their definition. A new sanctioning policy of extremism administrative offences by juvenile offenders is also expected. Moreover, the application of probation in case of offences committed by juvenile delinquents in the area of extremism is recommended and preferred. It would highlight the importance of restorative justice, including its strengthening. Probation would allow the court, when sanctioning extremism in the criminal law area, to create a so-called tailor-made sanction, which would strengthen the individualisation of the sanction, the educational purpose of the sanction and the achievement of both the purpose of the sanction and the purpose of the Criminal Code, which is to protect society from criminal offences and their perpetrators. Even the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic partially examined the modification of the elements of criminal offences of extremism.Položka Implementing EU sanctions through criminal law: Serious negligence as a new form of culpability in the Slovak Republic(Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute : Basel, 2026) Klimek, LiborThe enforcement of European Union restrictive measures increasingly relies on criminal law at national level, particularly in response to serious and systematic violations that cannot be effectively addressed through administrative sanctions alone. Directive (EU) 2024/1226 requires Member States to ensure effective, proportionate, and dissuasive criminal penalties for breaches of EU sanctions, including, in defined cases, conduct committed with serious negligence. This article examines the introduction of serious negligence as a new statutory form of culpability in the Slovak Republic, adopted through Act No. 157/2025 Coll. as part of the transposition of Union law. The analysis is based on a doctrinal examination of Slovak criminal law, legislative materials, and relevant EU legal instruments, complemented by a comparative overview of selected Member States. The article demonstrates that the Slovak legislator introduced serious negligence (Slovak: hrubá nedbanlivosť) as a qualified form of negligence in a cautious and narrowly circumscribed manner, limiting its application to a specific offence relating to the breach of a restrictive measure. While this approach strengthens the effectiveness of EU sanction enforcement, it also raises interpretative and practical challenges, particularly in distinguishing serious negligence from ordinary negligence and indirect intent. The article concludes that the Slovak model reflects a balanced attempt to comply with Union obligations while preserving the internal coherence and fundamental principles of national criminal law, with its long-term impact depending on consistent judicial interpretation and restrained application in practice.Položka Special prosecutor's offices and their position in a state governed by the rule of law: Is the abolition of office of special prosecution in Slovakia unconstitutional?(Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute : Basel, 2025) Klimek, Libor; Šramel, BystríkThe specialization of public prosecution offices has been a growing international trend, particularly in addressing complex forms of crime such as corruption, economic crime, and organized crime. Many countries have established specialized prosecution bodies to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of law enforcement in these areas. However, Slovakia has recently taken a different approach by abolishing its Office of the Special Prosecution, a decision that contrasts sharply with prevailing global tendencies. This paper explores the reasons behind this shift, analyzing the political and legal arguments presented by both proponents and opponents of the abolition. The paper examines whether this move aligns with the rule of law and international legal obligations and considers its potential consequences for the effectiveness of criminal justice in Slovakia. While the paper is based on legal principles and comparative methods, it acknowledges the inherently political nature of decisions concerning the structure of prosecution services.