The amendment of the Criminal Code to the Constitutional Court regulates the institution of the so-called continuous act, i.e. a prohibited act, which is done as a ‘per instalment’. Unfortunately, this is a regulation contrary to common sense and to legal order.
Day 14 June 2019 transferred to the President for signature of the Act of 13 June 2019 amending the Act – Criminal Code and some other laws, which the President referred to the Constitutional Court on 28 June 2019. A provision has been added in the abovementioned law Article 57 b concerning the increase of criminal liability for the offence referred to in Article 12(1) a criminal code whereby the court will be able to punish the offender for a crime above the lower limit of the statutory threat to the double height of the upper limit of the statutory threat.
This is another amendment to the Criminal Code, which does not entirely deserve approval
Provision Article 12(1) The penal code is standardized by the institution of the so-called continuous act, i.e. the prohibited act, which is, as it were, "per instalment". With regard to the continuous action, we are dealing with one prohibited act and one crime.
An example of such a crime is seven times stealing from the store's cash register a sum 100 PLN whether the appropriation of items of a value not exceeding 500 PLN, which would qualify this behaviour as a crime, as the total value of the stolen property exceeds the limit of the prohibited act.
The passed provision will cause the person committing the act under conditions with Article 12(1) The penal code will be treated worse than the person who steals a single amount 700 PLN, i.e. including first the case could include a maximum sentence, which would increase until 10 years of imprisonment, and in the second case the maximum risk would be 5 years.
In addition, it should be weighed that the person who commits the act under conditions with Article 12(1) the penal code will be subject to more severe punishment than the so-called mulitirocidivist from Article 64(2) a criminal code which has not committed an act under the conditions laid down in Article 12(1). (the penalty for the so-called multi-recidist under the new law would be imposed within the limits of the double lower limit of the statutory threat to the upper limit of the statutory threat increased by half).
This regulation is not justified because it denies the institution of a continuous action which is still one in an act, exactly as a one-time act. Such a standard will lead to unequal treatment of perpetrators who commit criminal offences with the same degree of social harm. This is another amendment to the Criminal Code, which does not entirely deserve approval.