ZAGREB, Nov 28 (Hina) - Croatia's legal experts express different opinions on whether the Penal Code is an organic law and whether it and its amendments should be adopted by a qualified majority of MPs.
ZAGREB, Nov 28 (Hina) - Croatia's legal experts express different
opinions on whether the Penal Code is an organic law and whether it
and its amendments should be adopted by a qualified majority of MPs.
#L#
On Thursday, the Constitutional Court abolished the Law on
Amendments to the Penal Code, because it was not adopted with the
necessary majority of votes of parliamentary deputies.
The chairman of the expert team for amendments to the Penal Code,
Petar Novoselec, believes that the Penal Code is not an organic law
as it stipulates sentences and fines rather than defining human
rights, and therefore the adoption of its changes does not require
the votes of over half of all MPs.
He warns that yesterday's decision made by the Constitutional Law
could boomerang on the strongest party if it fails to ensure a
stable majority in the next parliament for adopting or amending
laws which would be considered organic.
On the other hand, Davor Krapac, a professor at Zagreb Law School,
and Arsen Bacic and Zvonimir Lauc from law schools in Split and
Osijek respectively, maintain that the Penal Code is an organic
law.
According to minutes from parliamentary sessions, the Penal Code
was adopted by a qualified majority in 1998, and its changes in
1999.
However, the 2001 amendments to the Penal Code were adopted by 72
MPs out of a total of 151 deputies. At the time, nobody raised a
question as to whether those changes were adopted in procedure
which complies with the Constitution.
The 2001 amendments referred only to harsher sentences for the
illegal transfer of migrants across the state border from one to
three years in prison, and they introduced a sentence of 10 years'
imprisonment for crimes committed in a group or by a criminal
organisation.
Amendments which the Constitutional Court abolished on Thursday
covered a third of the Penal Code.
Some of them referred to the introduction of life imprisonment and
the extension of statute of limitations for grave crimes such as
terrorism, war crimes and organised crime.
The annulled changes also treated the possession of small amounts
of illegal drugs as a misdemeanour and not as a serious criminal
offence.
The abolished changes stipulated punishment for the glorification
of fascist, Nazi and other totalitarian ideologies, or for
advocating racism and xenophobia.
They stipulated harsher sentences for child pornography,
international prostitution or failure of employers to pay wages to
workers on time.
(hina) ms