The Administrative Violations and Sanctions Act (AVSA) outlines the framework for administrative-criminal responsibility, including statutes of limitations. These statutes consist of an extinguishment statute, which bars authorities from exercising powers after expiration (Article 34), and an executive statute, which prevents authorities from imposing penalties after expiration (Article 82). The enforcement statute can be categorized as either ordinary (Article 82, paragraph 1) or absolute (Article 82, paragraph 3) according to AVSA.
Cases not explicitly addressed by AVSA are governed by the Criminal Code. In light of the SAC’s 2015 interpretative decision, we’ll delve into the interpretation and practical implications of these terms.
Statues of limitations
Under Article 34 of the AVSA, statute-barred terms are akin to those in criminal law. Once the statutes of limitations under Article 34 of the AVSA expire, the authority’s power to act is nullified.
The statutes of limitations prevent the realization of responsibility, thereby precluding any material sanction in the legal relationship. It commences upon the drafting of an act to establish a violation, initiating administrative criminal proceedings upon either discovery of the offender or commission of the violation.
In general cases, if an act establishing an administrative violation isn’t drafted within three months of discovering the offender or one year after the offense, proceedings cannot be initiated. Furthermore, if no penal order is issued within six months of drafting the act, proceedings are terminated. Special terms extend to two years and apply to customs, tax, and other specified violations.
More stringent regulations are imposed for violations related to gambling, measures against money laundering and terrorism financing, energy sector activities, and breaches of laws such as the Law on Independent Financial Audit, the Law on Payment Services and Payment Systems, and the Law on corporate income taxation regarding hidden profit distribution. In these instances, administrative criminal proceedings aren’t pursued if an act establishing the violation isn’t drafted within six months of discovering the offender or if more than five years have elapsed since the violation occurred. These measures reflect the heightened public significance of these sectors and associated laws.
The absolute statute of limitations
The absolute statute of limitations presents a notable gap in the AVSA, lacking explicit legal regulation. Unlike the Criminal Code, which addresses this concept, the AVSA does not provide a similar provision. However, this void is addressed through the application of Article 81, paragraph 3, in connection with Article 80, paragraph 1, item 5 of the Criminal Code, alongside Article 11 of the AVSA.
According to the Criminal Code, criminal prosecution is barred when the statutory statute of limitations expires. Specifically, under Article 80, paragraph 1, item 5 of the Criminal Code, in conjunction with Article 11 of the AVSA, administrative criminal prosecution is precluded by statute of limitations if not initiated within three years. Furthermore, irrespective of any suspension or interruption, criminal prosecution is excluded if the duration surpasses that stipulated in Article 80 of the Civil Code.
For the absolute statute of limitations to apply in cases of administrative violations, a period of 4 years and 6 months must elapse. This means that if an individual contests a penal order and court proceedings on their appeal remain unresolved after this time frame, they can invoke the absolute statute of limitations. Instances of this nature are observed across various realms of public interest, including the notable 2019 case involving the NRA and CPPD concerning the imposition of sanctions for the unauthorized disclosure of citizens’ personal data.
Understanding the interplay between these legal frameworks is crucial for navigating administrative criminal proceedings effectively. Therefore subjects involved in administrative law matters must remain vigilant about statutory time constraints to safeguard their rights and interests effectively.
