As stated in the Article 343a of the proposed law:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Whoever, through online technology or otherwise, makes available any material containing information that gives advice on how to commit a criminal offense shall be punished with imprisonment with a sentence ranging from three months to three years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2. The same punishment from paragraph 1 of this article shall apply to anyone who engages in making accessible the material described in paragraph 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
3. Whoever, using online technology, knowingly accesses the material described in paragraph 1, shall be punished with a fine or imprisonment for up to one year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4. The material described in paragraph 1 of this article includes any material that audibly or visually contains instructions or advice on methods to commit a criminal offense or evidence associated with committing a criminal offense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
5. The material described in paragraph 1 of this article shall be confiscated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So, what does this mean in layman\u2019s terms? Will organizing and calling for protest blockades now be punishable by imprisonment? What does \u201cknowingly accessing the material described in paragraph 1\u201d concretely mean?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Perhaps even more concerning is that Article 136 \u2013 coercion of statements \u2013 is being completely removed. Previously, it stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. An official who, while on duty, uses force, threats, or other unauthorized means or methods to coerce a statement or another declaration from a suspect, witness, expert, or other person, shall be punished with imprisonment ranging from three months to five years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2. If the coercion of a statement or declaration is accompanied by severe violence or results in particularly severe consequences for the suspect in the criminal proceedings, the perpetrator shall be punished with imprisonment ranging from two to ten years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Does this now mean that officials will be free to use force while interrogating people about whether they \u201cknowingly accessed\u201d some \u201ccontroversial material?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
How concerned should the public be about changes to articles defining espionage and the disclosure of state secrets? The proposed changes to the Criminal Code include making the disclosure of secret data that is labeled \u201cinternal\u201d or \u201cstrictly confidential\u201d a criminal offense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Article 316, Disclosure of State Secrets, is being completely removed from the Criminal Code. Paragraph 6 of Article 315, Espionage, which defines secret data as: \u201cMilitary, economic, or official data or documents declared secret by law, other regulation, or decision of a responsible authority made based on the law, and whose disclosure would or could cause harm to the country\u2019s security and defense or political, military, or economic interests,\u201d is also being deleted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The draft amendments also include Article 316, Disclosure of Secret Data, which states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Whoever without authorization communicates or makes available data or documents entrusted to them or obtained in any other way, or acquires data or documents that constitute secret data marked as \u201cinternal\u201d or \u201cconfidential,\u201d shall be sentenced to imprisonment ranging from three months to three years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2. If the offense from paragraph 1 of this article is committed concerning data labeled \u201cstrictly confidential,\u201d the perpetrator shall be punished with imprisonment ranging from six months to five years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
3. If the offense from paragraph 1 of this article is committed concerning data labeled \u201cstate secret,\u201d the perpetrator shall be punished with imprisonment ranging from one to ten years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
4. If the offenses from paragraphs 1 to 3 of this article are committed for gain, with the intention of publishing or using secret data abroad, during wartime or a state of emergency, the perpetrator shall be punished for the offense in paragraph 1 with imprisonment ranging from six months to five years, for the offense in paragraph 2 with imprisonment ranging from one to eight years, and for the offense in paragraph 3 with imprisonment ranging from five to fifteen years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
5. If the offenses from paragraphs 1 to 3 of this article are committed through negligence, the perpetrator shall be punished for the offense in paragraph 1 with imprisonment of up to two years, for the offense in paragraph 2 with imprisonment from three months to three years, and for the offense in paragraph 3 with imprisonment from six months to five years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given how difficult it already is for citizens to obtain information about the operations of legal entities, even when such information may concern public health and business dealings, the public has reason to question what \u201cinternal\u201d data may be. Especially because the disclosure of such information carries a punishment from three months to three years of imprisonment, even if the information is not considered a state secret. Who, then, has the right to declare that data is \u201cinternal\u201d if they will no longer be \u201cdeclared secret by law, other regulation, or decision of a responsible authority made based on the law?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lawyers we contacted told us that the proposed amendments are so extensive that they are not yet able to comment on it. Still, a law should be at least somewhat understandable to citizens if its aim is for them to act in accordance with the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A public debate on the proposed amendments and supplements to the Criminal Code will take place from October 1 to November 1, 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I.K.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The proposed law on amendments and supplements to the Criminal Code, available on the Ministry of Justice’s website, proposes a punishment of up to three years imprisonment for \u201cpublishing material that encourages committing a criminal offense,\u201d or even for \u201cknowingly accessing\u201d such material.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1050,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[303],"form":[71],"concept":[188],"contents":[156],"coauthors":[5],"class_list":["post-20070","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-criminal-code","form-news","concept-society","contents-politics","infinite-scroll-item","generate-columns","tablet-grid-50","mobile-grid-100","grid-parent","grid-25"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n