دور السلطة التنفيذية في تحديد المسؤولية الجزائية
Date
2024-09-15
Authors
جبريل شوقي أبو فارة
Jibreel Shawqi Abufara
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Al-Quds University
Abstract
الأصل وفقاً لمبدأ الفصل بين السلطات، أن السلطة التشريعية تتولى سلطة التشريع، والسلطة القضائية تتولى سلطة تطبيق القانون، والسلطة التنفيذية تتولى تنفيذ القانون والأحكام القضائية، بما معناه أن السلطة التنفيذية لا دور لها في التشريع ولا في التجريم ولا في العقاب، باعتبار أن هذا الدور حكراً على السلطة التشريعية، إلا أنه ولاعتبارات الضرورة من ناحية، ولاعتبارات عملية من ناحية أخرى، فقد منحت السلطة التنفيذية دوراً محدوداً في التجريم والعقاب، ولكون هذا الدور استثنائياً، فقد وجدت مجموعة من الضوابط الدستورية والتشريعية، التي تكفلت بوضعه في نطاق معقول، وبحيث لا ينطوي على إخلال بحقوق الأفراد وحرياتهم.
هَدَفَتْ هذه الدراسةُ إلى التعرُّفِ على دور السلطة التنفيذية في تحديد المسؤولية الجزائية، بالوقوف عند حدود هذا الدور في إطار التشريع الجنائي الفلسطيني. واستخدَمَ الباحثُ فيها المنهج الوصفي التحليلي من خلال استعراض القوانين النافذة في فلسطين، إضافةً إلى الآراء الفقهية والأحكام القضائية التي تناولت دور السلطة التنفيذية في تحديد المسؤولية الجزائية.
وخِتاماً تَوَصَّلَتِ الدراسةُ للعديد من النتائجَ أهمُّها: إن المشرع الدستوري الفلسطيني فضل عدم الأخذ بالتفويض التشريعي، رغم أنه يعترف بمبدأ الفصل المرن بين السلطات، والذي يعني التعاون بين السلطتين التنفيذية والتشريعية والقائم على تدخل كل سلطة في أعمال واختصاصات الأخرى، وهو ما يؤكده العمل بالقوانين المؤقتة والأنظمة المستقلة وفي وقت واحد، الذي ترتب عنه توزيع مكنة التشريع بين السلطتين التشريعية والتنفيذية في الدولة. كذلك فقد ظهرت في التشريع الفلسطيني أساليب جديدة للتجريم تشترك السلطة التنفيذية ببعض الصلاحيات فيها إلى جانب السلطة التشريعية، وهو ما يعرف بأسلوب التفويض التشريعي، من خلال استعمال المشرع لنصوص التجريم أو كما يُطلق عليها بالنصوص على بياض، أو من خلال تبني سياسات تشريعية مرنة في سن النصوص التجريمية، وهو ما يطلق عليه باسم النصوص المفتوحة أو المتسعة أو النصوص المرنة.
كذلك أَوْصَتِ الدراسةُ بِعِدَّةِ توصياتٍ أهمُّها: أن تكون القرارات بقانون والتي يصدرها رئيس السلطة الوطنية في حالة الضرورة مرتبطة بشكل وثيق بحالة الضرورة المعلنة ومتصلة بها بشكل مباشر، وبغير ذلك تعتبر تعدي على اختصاص السلطة التشريعية من قبل السلطة التنفيذية. وكذلك إعادة النظر بكل الإجراءات القانونية التي اتخذت خلال فترة تعطل المجلس التشريعي بما فيها حالات الضرورة والطوارئ، وهذا ما يلزم إعادة تشكيل المجلس التشريعي الفلسطيني عن طريق عمل انتخابات تشريعية قانونية. وأن يقوم الرئيس قبل إصدار العفو الخاص بأخذ رأي السلطة القضائية بشأن الأشخاص الذين قاموا بجرائم ومدى خطورتهم على المجتمع. كذلك على المشرع الفلسطيني أن يحظر التفويض التشريعي في الجنايات استناداً إلى مبدأ لا جريمة ولا عقوبة إلا بنص، وحصره في عدد محدود من الجنح، وإباحته في المخالفات. وختاماً يتوجب العمل على الحد من التفويضات الممنوحة للسلطة التنفيذية فيما يتعلق تحديد المسؤولية الجنائية في التجريم والعقاب، وفي أضيق الحدود، لكي تبقى منوطة بالسلطة التشريعية صاحبة الاختصاص الأصيل بالتشريع، وبما يحفظ احترام كل سلطة من السلطات لمهامها ويعزز احترام مبدأ الفصل بين السلطات.
The principle of separation of powers is that the legislative authority assumes the authority to legislate, the judicial authority assumes the authority to implement the law, and the executive authority assumes the implementation of the law and judicial rulings, which means that the executive authority has no role in legislation, criminalization, or punishment, considering that this role is the exclusive preserve of the legislative authority. However, due to considerations of necessity on the one hand, and practical considerations on the other hand, the executive authority has been granted a limited role in criminalization and punishment. Since this role is exceptional, a set of constitutional and legislative controls have been found that ensure that it is placed within a reasonable range, so that it does not involve a violation of the rights and freedoms of individuals. This study aims to identify the role of the executive authority in determining criminal liability, by standing at the limits of this role within the framework of Palestinian criminal legislation. The researcher used the descriptive analytical approach by reviewing the laws in force in Palestine, in addition to the jurisprudential opinions and judicial rulings that addressed the role of the executive authority in determining criminal liability. Finally, the study reached many results, the most important of which are: The Palestinian constitutional legislator preferred not to adopt legislative delegation, although it recognizes the principle of flexible separation of powers, which means cooperation between the executive and legislative authorities and is based on the intervention of each authority in the work and jurisdictions of the other, which is confirmed by the work of temporary laws and independent systems at the same time, which resulted in the distribution of the legislative mechanism between the legislative and executive authorities in the state. Also, new methods of criminalization have appeared in Palestinian legislation in which the executive authority shares some powers alongside the legislative authority, which is known as the method of legislative delegation, through the legislator's use of criminalization texts or as they are called blank texts, or through the adoption of flexible legislative policies in enacting criminal texts, which is called open or broad texts or flexible texts. The study also recommended several recommendations, the most important of which are: that the decrees issued by the President of the Palestinian National Authority in a state of necessity be closely linked to the declared state of necessity and directly connected to it; otherwise, it is considered an infringement on the jurisdiction of the legislative authority by the executive authority. Also, reviewing all legal measures taken during the period of the suspension of the Legislative Council, including cases of necessity and emergency, which requires the reconstitution of the Palestinian Legislative Council through legal legislative elections. And that the President, before issuing a special pardon, take the opinion of the judiciary regarding persons who committed crimes and the extent of their danger to society. Also, the Palestinian legislator must prohibit legislative delegation in felonies based on the principle of no crime or punishment without a text, and limit it to a limited number of misdemeanors, and permit it in violations. Finally, it is necessary to work on limiting the mandates granted to the executive authority with regard to determining criminal responsibility in criminalization and punishment, and within the narrowest limits, so that it remains entrusted to the legislative authority, which has the original jurisdiction to legislate, and in a manner that preserves the respect of each authority for its duties and enhances respect for the principle of separation of powers.
The principle of separation of powers is that the legislative authority assumes the authority to legislate, the judicial authority assumes the authority to implement the law, and the executive authority assumes the implementation of the law and judicial rulings, which means that the executive authority has no role in legislation, criminalization, or punishment, considering that this role is the exclusive preserve of the legislative authority. However, due to considerations of necessity on the one hand, and practical considerations on the other hand, the executive authority has been granted a limited role in criminalization and punishment. Since this role is exceptional, a set of constitutional and legislative controls have been found that ensure that it is placed within a reasonable range, so that it does not involve a violation of the rights and freedoms of individuals. This study aims to identify the role of the executive authority in determining criminal liability, by standing at the limits of this role within the framework of Palestinian criminal legislation. The researcher used the descriptive analytical approach by reviewing the laws in force in Palestine, in addition to the jurisprudential opinions and judicial rulings that addressed the role of the executive authority in determining criminal liability. Finally, the study reached many results, the most important of which are: The Palestinian constitutional legislator preferred not to adopt legislative delegation, although it recognizes the principle of flexible separation of powers, which means cooperation between the executive and legislative authorities and is based on the intervention of each authority in the work and jurisdictions of the other, which is confirmed by the work of temporary laws and independent systems at the same time, which resulted in the distribution of the legislative mechanism between the legislative and executive authorities in the state. Also, new methods of criminalization have appeared in Palestinian legislation in which the executive authority shares some powers alongside the legislative authority, which is known as the method of legislative delegation, through the legislator's use of criminalization texts or as they are called blank texts, or through the adoption of flexible legislative policies in enacting criminal texts, which is called open or broad texts or flexible texts. The study also recommended several recommendations, the most important of which are: that the decrees issued by the President of the Palestinian National Authority in a state of necessity be closely linked to the declared state of necessity and directly connected to it; otherwise, it is considered an infringement on the jurisdiction of the legislative authority by the executive authority. Also, reviewing all legal measures taken during the period of the suspension of the Legislative Council, including cases of necessity and emergency, which requires the reconstitution of the Palestinian Legislative Council through legal legislative elections. And that the President, before issuing a special pardon, take the opinion of the judiciary regarding persons who committed crimes and the extent of their danger to society. Also, the Palestinian legislator must prohibit legislative delegation in felonies based on the principle of no crime or punishment without a text, and limit it to a limited number of misdemeanors, and permit it in violations. Finally, it is necessary to work on limiting the mandates granted to the executive authority with regard to determining criminal responsibility in criminalization and punishment, and within the narrowest limits, so that it remains entrusted to the legislative authority, which has the original jurisdiction to legislate, and in a manner that preserves the respect of each authority for its duties and enhances respect for the principle of separation of powers.
Description
Keywords
Citation
أبو فارة، جبريل شوقي. (2024). دور السلطة التنفيذية في تحديد المسؤولية الجزائية [رسالة ماجستير منشورة، جامعة القدس، فلسطين]. المستودع الرقمي لجامعة القدس.