Does a violation of obligations related to serving a sentence of imprisonment under the electronic surveillance system constitute a separate crime?

Abstract

Background: The subject of this paper is an attempt to answer the question of whether the elements of a criminal offense are fulfilled by a convict who violates the obligations associated with serving a sentence of imprisonment under an electronic surveillance system. The article focuses on analyzing the elements of the types of criminal acts described in Article 242 § 1 and Article 244 of the Polish Criminal Code.

Research purpose: The aim of the research is to interpret the elements of certain types of criminal offenses and to assess whether there are grounds for assuming criminal liability for a convict who fails to fulfill obligations imposed by the penitentiary court when granted permission to serve a prison sentence under the electronic surveillance system.

Methods: The work uses a dogmatic-legal method involving analysis of the legal norms contained in the Polish Criminal Code, as well as a theoretical-legal method (analysis of commentaries, monographs, articles, case law) and, as necessary, a historical-legal method.

Conclusions: Behaviour involving the violation of an obligation to remain at a location designated by the court or penitentiary commission at the appointed time, by a person serving a prison sentence under electronic surveillance, should not be classified as the offense of self-liberation under Article 242 § 1 of the Polish Criminal Code. Such behavior meets the requirements of the type of criminal act described in Article 244 of the Criminal Code. However, this solution would lead to the assumption that such an act is subject to an even higher criminal sanction than in the case of the offense of self-liberation, which could mean an unjustified differentiation of the criminal sanction from that provided for in Article 244a § 2 of the Criminal Code.