1 General Criminal Law Enforcement

1.1 What authorities can prosecute business crimes, and are there different enforcement authorities at the national and regional levels?

There are no different national and regional enforcement levels in the Czech Republic. The criminal law enforcement authorities in the Czech Republic are the court, the public prosecutor and the police.

The public prosecutor coordinates the investigation work of the police and decides on the relevant investigation methods. The utilisation of certain investigative measures can, however, only be authorised by the court.

The police have a special division for investigating corruption and financial crimes. There are also special divisions for serious economic and financial crimes at the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office. In all cases, the public prosecutor prosecutes business crimes like any other crime.

1.2 If there are more than one set of enforcement agencies, please describe how decisions on which body will investigate and prosecute a matter are made.

The police are obliged to conduct all necessary investigations and measures to reveal the facts indicating that a criminal offence was committed. The police decide to initiate criminal prosecution and conduct the investigation. The public prosecutor directs and supervises the police. The public prosecutor is entitled in particular to decide on the termination, conditional suspension or suspension of the criminal prosecution and referral of the case to another authority, to conclude an agreement on guilt and punishment with the accused and to file a petition for the approval thereof at the court, etc. Only the public prosecutor can submit an indictment. The organisation of the public prosecutor corresponds to the organisation of the court (see question 2.1). Common business crimes are prosecuted by the competent local or regional public prosecutor according to the criminal act being adjudicated. The public prosecutor must prove the guilt of the accused before the court.

Only the court can decide on guilt and on the punishment for crimes. The court also decides on certain serious measures, such as remanding of the accused into custody. Decisions in criminal proceedings before the court are made by the court or a sole judge.

1.3 Is there any civil or administrative enforcement against business crimes? If so, what agencies enforce the laws civilly and which crimes do they combat?

If the business crime caused damages, the injured party may ask for remedy within the criminal proceedings or may initiate separate civil proceeding (for details see question 8.4). The surrender of the unjust enrichment may also be required.

Generally all public authorities are obliged to immediately notify the public prosecutor or the police of facts indicating that a criminal offence has been committed. For example, financial operations and money laundering issues are monitored by the Ministry of Finance in cooperation with the Czech National Bank. Tax crimes shall be notified by the relevant tax authority. The Office for the Protection of Competition is responsible for compliance with competition law.

2 Organisation of the Courts

2.1 How are the criminal courts in the Czech Republic structured? Are there specialised criminal courts for particular crimes?

The structure of criminal courts in the Czech Republic consists of District Courts, Regional Courts, High Courts and the Supreme Court. Although, there are no separate criminal courts in the Czech Republic for particular crimes, criminal cases are decided by specialised judges and panels.

2.2 Is there a right to a jury in business-crime trials?

Czech law does not recognise a jury in criminal trials. Before the District Court a sole professional judge decides in simple cases and one professional judge and two lay judges decide in difficult cases. The Regional Court is represented by a sole professional judge and two lay judges. Three professional judges represent the High Court and the Supreme Court.

3 Particular Statutes and Crimes

3.1 Please describe any statutes that are commonly used in the Czech Republic to prosecute business crimes, including the elements of the crimes and the requisite mental state of the accused:

The general principles of criminal law are that an individual or an entity may be prosecuted only for legitimate reasons. Generally, wilful intent is necessary for the criminal liability of a criminal offence, unless criminal law expressly stipulates that the fault of negligence is sufficient.

  • Fraud and misrepresentation in connection with sales of securities

Fraud is committed by anyone who enriches themselves or someone else by misleading another person, using one's error or by concealing material facts, thus causing significant damage to another person's property (damage of at least approx. EUR 200).

  • Accounting fraud

Anyone who commits the crime of misrepresentation of data on the state of economy and assets is punishable. This crime is committed by anyone who does not keep accounting books, records or other documents used to report the status of property management, despite being obliged to do so by law, who provides false or grossly distorted information in such accounting books, records or other documents, or who alters, destroys, damages, renders unusable or conceals such accounting books, records or other documents and thus endangers the property rights of another person or timely and proper tax assessment. Tax crimes can also be considered (for details see below).

  • Insider trading

Misuse of information and status in commerce is committed by anyone who intends to obtain an advantage or benefit for themselves or another person and uses information not yet publicly available without authorisation, which they acquired during the course of their employment, profession, position or function and the disclosure of which substantially affects decision-making in commerce and concludes, or gives rise to the conclusion of, an agreement or transactions on a regulated market with investment instruments, or on an organised market for goods.

  • Embezzlement

Embezzlement is committed by anyone who appropriates another person's items or other assets entrusted to them and thus causes significant damage to this person's property (damage of at least approx. EUR 200).

  • Bribery of government officials

Bribery is committed by anyone who provides, offers or promises a bribe to another person in connection with the procurement of goods of general interest or in connection with an enterprise of their own. The punishment is higher if the crime involves a public official.

Acceptance of a bribe is committed by anyone who by himself or through another person accepts, or accepts the promise of a bribe in connection with the procurement of goods of general interest or in connection with an enterprise of their own for themselves or for another person. The punishment will be higher if the crime is committed by a public official.

A person who requests or accepts a bribe in order to affect a public official's exercise of power by their influence or through the influence of a third party commits the crime of indirect bribery.

  • Criminal anti-competition

Anyone who violates regulations on rules of unfair competition by misleading advertising, misleading labelling of goods and services, causing the likelihood of confusion, taking advantage of another company's reputation or products or services, bribery, discrediting, comparative advertising, violation of trade secrets or endangering the health of consumers and the environment, and thus causes significant damage to other competitors or consumers (a minimum of approx. EUR 2,000), or obtains a substantial unauthorised benefit for themselves or another person, commits the crime of violating the competition rules.

  • Tax crimes

A tax crime is committed by anyone who evades taxes, customs duties, social security payments, health insurance fees or other mandatory payments, or elicits a significant advantage from some of these mandatory payments (minimum approx. EUR 2,000). The crime of evasion of tax, social security or other mandatory payments is committed by anyone who as an employer or payer does not meet their legal obligation to pay tax, social security or health insurance for an employee or other person, or as an employer, does not pay accident insurance. These tax crimes are the most common. Another tax crime is the failure to comply with reporting obligations in tax proceedings, which is committed by anyone who fails to comply with their statutory reporting obligation towards the tax authorities, thus endangering the proper and timely tax assessment of another person on a large scale, or its enforcement by another person.

  • Government-contracting fraud

There is no specific provision in the Czech Criminal Code for this; however, the crime of Negotiating Advantages during Public Procurement, Tender and Auction is stipulated. This crime is committed by anyone who, in connection with a public procurement, tender or auction, negotiates priority for any of the suppliers, competitors or participants in the auction, or more favourable conditions to the detriment of other suppliers or competitors with the intention of causing another person damage or to obtain other benefits for themselves or someone else. Furthermore, the crime of intrigue during public procurement and tenders is stipulated. The crime of intrigue is committed by anyone who, in relation to a public procurement or tender, causes another person to refrain from participation in the public procurement proceedings or tender by deception or the threat of violence or other severe harm or by providing, offering or promising another person property or other benefits to refrain from participation in the public procurement proceedings or tender, or by requesting or accepting property or other benefit to refrain from the public procurement proceedings or tender, or by exerting activity towards public procurement at a disproportionately high or unfavourable price based on an agreement with another applicant or interested party.

  • Environmental crimes

The crime of damage to and endangering of the environment is committed by anyone who, contrary to another legal regulation, intentionally damages or endangers the soil, water, air or any other component of the environment to a significant extent or in a large area or in such a manner that they may cause grievous bodily harm or death, or if the removal of the consequences of such conduct requires substantial expenses, or anyone who intentionally increases such damage to, or endangerment of, the component of the environment or renders difficult the prevention or mitigation of such damage or endangerment. The Czech Criminal Code stipulates further environmental crimes, such as damage to and endangering of the environment out of negligence, damage to a water source, damage to forests, unauthorised release of pollutants, unauthorised waste disposal, unauthorised production and other handling of substances damaging the ozone layer, unauthorised handling of protected wild fauna and flora, damage to protected natural parks, animal cruelty, etc.

  • Campaign finance/election law

The crime of hindering the preparation and course of elections and referenda is committed by: 1) anyone who hinders another person from exercising their right to vote in an election or referendum by means of violence or the threat of violence or deceit, or forces another person to exercise their right to vote in an election or referendum; 2) anyone who in connection with exercising a right to vote in an election or referendum provides, offers or promises a financial, material or any other similar benefit to another person so that such a person votes contrary to the independent expression of their will; 3) anyone who counterfeits data in a document on the number of members of a political party or a petition for electoral purposes, or in any other document relating to an election or referendum, or knowingly uses such document as authentic; 4) anyone who knowingly counts the votes incorrectly and violates the secrecy of the vote; and 5) anyone who otherwise grossly hinders the preparation or course of an election of the legislative assembly or council of a local government body or the preparation or the course of a referendum, until the release of its results.

  • Any other crime of particular interest in the Czech Republic

Damage to the Financial Interests of the European Union is committed by anyone who issues, uses or submits false, inaccurate or incomplete documents or states false or grossly misleading information relating to the revenue and expenditure of the summary budget of the European Union or budgets managed by the European Union in such documents, or conceals such information or documents on their behalf and thereby enables the misuse or withholding of funds from any such budgets or the reduction of resources.

Unauthorised Entrepreneurial Activities is committed by anyone who provides services or operates a production, commercial or other entrepreneurial activity on a large scale without authorisation.

3.2 Is there liability for inchoate crimes in the Czech Republic? Can a person be liable for attempting to commit a crime, whether or not the attempted crime is completed?

Generally the attempt to commit an offence is punishable. The preparation of a crime is punishable only in the case of crimes where the law stipulates imprisonment of at least ten years for such crime and it is stipulated that the preparation is punishable.

4 Corporate Criminal Liability

4.1 Is there entity liability for criminal offences? If so, under what circumstances will an employee's conduct be imputed to the entity?

In January 2012 the Czech Republic introduced criminal liability of legal entities, which is regulated in a separate Code on Corporate Criminal Liability. Legal entities are criminally liable only for the crimes listed therein, such as bribery, fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, etc.

A legal entity is deemed to have committed a crime if the crime is committed in its name or in its interest or as part of its activities by its statutory body or its member or by anyone who performs an executive or controlling function in the legal entity or an employee in the performance of their work tasks.

4.2 Is there personal liability for managers, officers, and directors if the entity becomes liable for a crime?

The Code on Corporate Criminal Liability does not provide any guidelines whether managers, officers and directors are personally liable if the entity becomes liable for a crime. In our opinion, only the acting person is liable for a crime under Czech law. As a result, the manager, officer and director are not liable for a crime if they fulfilled their obligations and they did not actively commit the crime or they did not participate in it.

4.3 Where there is entity liability and personal liability, do the authorities have a policy or preference as to when to pursue an entity, when to pursue an individual, or both?

The authorities have no preference how to pursue an entity or an individual. The public prosecutor is obliged to prosecute all criminal offences that he learns about. The criminal liability of an entity does not override the criminal liability of an individual. For this purpose, the authorities are obliged to indict the legal entity together with the individual in one joint proceeding.

5 Statutes of Limitations

5.1 How are enforcement-limitations periods calculated, and when does a limitations period begin running?

Czech criminal law differentiates between the statutory bar on criminal liability and the statutory bar on the execution of a punishment.

Generally, the statute of limitations for criminal liability shall start to run upon the completion of the criminal act. The prescription period on the execution of a punishment comes into full force and effect with the judgment.

Criminal liability for a criminal offence shall expire upon the lapse of the period of three to 20 years based on the maximum prison term. A punishment may not be imposed after the lapse of five to 30 years based on the imposed punishment.

Criminal liability can also expire due to the application of so-called effective remorse. Effective remorse is given when the offender voluntarily prevents or rectifies the detrimental consequences of a criminal offence, or reports a criminal offence to the public prosecutor or the police at a time when the detrimental effects of the criminal offence could still be prevented.

5.2 Can crimes occurring outside the limitations period be prosecuted if they are part of a pattern or practice, or ongoing conspiracy?

Statute-barred crimes cannot be prosecuted (punished). In the case of continuing crimes (e.g. repeated tax evasion) the prescription period begins to run at the conclusion of the last offence (the completion of the crime).

5.3 Can the limitations period be tolled? If so, how?

The prescription period can be interrupted if the prescription period is suspended, at the commencement of the prosecution of the criminal offence to which the prescription period applies, as well as by remand into custody of the offender, the issuance of an arrest order, an arrest warrant or a European Arrest Warrant, submission of an indictment, petition for approval of the agreement on guilt and punishment, petition for punishment, pronouncement of the convicting judgment for a criminal offence or by serving a criminal warrant for such criminal offence to the accused, or if the offender has committed a new criminal offence at some point during the prescription period for which criminal law sets out the same or a more severe punishment.

The suspension of the prescription period causes the beginning of a new prescription period.

6 Initiation of Investigations

6.1 How are investigations initiated? Are there any rules or guidelines governing the government's initiation of any investigation? If so, please describe them.

The police are obliged, based on their own findings, criminal reports and instigations by other persons and authorities, on the basis of which conclusions can be made on the suspicion of a criminal offence, to undertake all necessary investigations and measures to reveal the facts indicating that a criminal offence was committed.

The police shall draw up a record of the commencement of the criminal proceeding to clarify and verify the facts reasonably suggesting that a criminal offence was committed, stating the facts based on which the proceeding is being commenced, and how they learned about them. They shall send a copy of the record to the public prosecutor within 48 hours after the initiation of the criminal proceedings. The police can also decide to initiate the criminal prosecution of this person (for more details see question 8.1).

6.2 Do the criminal authorities have formal and/or informal mechanisms for cooperating with foreign prosecutors? Do they cooperate with foreign prosecutors?

The Czech criminal authorities cooperate with foreign prosecutors based on international treaties and the Czech Code of Criminal Procedure, where the mechanisms are described in detail. As a member of the European Union the Czech Republic has implemented the relevant measures with regard to criminal law (such as application of a European arrest warrant).

7 Procedures for Gathering Information from a Company

7.1 What powers does the government have generally to gather information when investigating business crimes?

The police, public prosecutor and the court act in the criminal proceeding to duly establish the facts of the case of which no reasonable doubt exists, and to the extent that is necessary for their decisions. There are many instruments stipulated in the Czech Code of Criminal Procedure to achieve this goal. They are entitled in particular to require an explanation from natural persons, legal entities and public authorities, require professional statements from the competent authorities (also expert opinions), secure the necessary documents, conduct an examination of the items and crime scene, and remand the accused into custody, issue and seize property, real estate and other assets, etc.

Document Gathering:

7.2 Under what circumstances can the government demand that a company under investigation produce documents to the government, and under what circumstances can the government raid a company under investigation and seize documents?

Legal entities, as well as natural persons, are generally required to comply with letters of request from criminal law enforcement authorities for the performance of their actions without undue delay. The authorities may require the submission of documents important to the criminal proceedings and if the purpose of the criminal proceedings requires its securing, to releasing the property, otherwise the document may be seized from them. The document can also be seized if other premises and land are searched or in the case of personal searches. Searches must be ordered by the court.

7.3 Are there any protections against production or seizure that the company can assert for any types of documents? For example, does Czech Republic recognise any privileges protecting documents prepared by attorneys or communications with attorneys? Do Czech Republic's labour laws protect personal documents of employees, even if located in company files?

Companies are not obliged to submit documents whose contents they are required to keep confidential, unless this requirement has been exempted by the competent authority. This is not applicable, however, if there is a notification requirement under the Czech Criminal Code (see question 12.1). There are many professions where Czech law has established mandatory confidentiality (such as attorneys, tax advisers, auditors, etc.).

Generally all information known to an attorney in connection with the provision of legal services is confidential. This also applies for the communication between the attorney and his client. It means that the authorities are not allowed to use against the defendant any information exchanged between the defendant and his attorney. Employers are obliged to protect their employee's personal documents (such as a personal file). For the purposes of criminal proceedings, however, or with the approval of the employee, the required information must be submitted.

7.4 Under what circumstances can the government demand that a company employee produce documents to the government, or raid the home or office of an employee and seize documents?

See question 7.2. There are no special rules for employees.

7.5 Under what circumstances can the government demand that a third person produce documents to the government, or raid the home or office of a third person and seize documents?

See question 7.2. There are no special rules for third persons. Questioning of Individuals:

7.6 Under what circumstances can the government demand that an employee, officer, or director of a company under investigation submit to questioning? In what forum can the questioning take place?

The police are entitled to ask the person to make a statement at a specified time and at a designated location. This location must not be a police station, but this is common. An official record of the statement is made. The official record serves the court in its deliberations about whether to hear the person as a witness. Anyone summoned by the court is obliged to appear as a witness to testify about what they know about the criminal offence and the offender or the circumstances relevant to the criminal proceedings. If a witness fails to appear without sufficient excuse, they may be brought before the court. The questioning of witnesses is more formal and normally takes place at the offices of the law enforcement authorities.

7.7 Under what circumstances can the government demand that a third person submit to questioning? In what forum can the questioning take place?

See question 7.6. There are no special rules for third persons.

7.8 What protections can a person being questioned by the government assert? Is there a right to refuse to answer the government's questions? Is there a right to be represented by an attorney during questioning?

Everyone has the right to the legal aid of an attorney when providing a statement. The accused has the right to choose their defence counsel and may request to be interrogated in the presence of their counsel. They can also confer with their defence counsel during acts undertaken by law enforcement authorities; however, the accused may not consult with their defence counsel on how to respond to an already posed question.

Relatives of the accused have the right to refuse to testify as a witness. A witness is also entitled to refuse to testify if their testimony would cause the possibility of their own criminal prosecution or the criminal prosecution of a relative or similar relation, whose detriment would rightly be felt as their own. The accused person may always refuse to testify.

8 Initiation of Prosecutions / Deferred Prosecution / Civil Dispositions

8.1 How are criminal cases initiated?

The law enforcement authorities act ex officio. The public prosecutor is obliged to prosecute all criminal offences of which they learn. Anyone may file a criminal complaint that a crime has been committed at the Public Prosecutor's Office or the police (for more details see question 6.1).

If the found and justified facts (also from the own findings of the police) suggest that a crime was committed, and if it is adequately concluded that the crime was committed by a specific natural person or legal entity, then the police shall immediately decide to initiate the criminal prosecution of this natural person or legal entity. A copy of the resolution to initiate the criminal prosecution shall be served to the accused no later than at the beginning of the first interrogation and within 48 hours to the public prosecutor and the defence counsel.

For certain crimes against an individual committed by a related person, the criminal proceeding depends on the consent of the injured party. Without the consent of the victim the criminal prosecution cannot start.

8.2 Are there any rules or guidelines governing the government's decision to charge an entity or individual with a crime? If so, please describe them.

Czech law stipulates the general principles for charging someone with a crime.

The prosecution is allowed only for legitimate reasons and in the manner stipulated by the law. Criminal prosecution can be ordered only if there is a justified suspicion that a certain person committed a crime. The statement on initiation of criminal prosecution must contain a description of the crime and the identification of the accused person. In the justification to the resolution it is important to precisely indicate the facts that justify the criminal prosecution.

8.3 Can a defendant and the government agree to resolve a criminal investigation through pre-trial diversion or an agreement to defer prosecution? If so, please describe any rules or guidelines governing whether pre-trial diversion or deferred prosecution are available to dispose of criminal investigations.

The court – and in the preliminary proceedings the public prosecutor – may use a diversion in the criminal proceedings. Offences include all negligent criminal offences and intentional criminal offences for which the criminal law sets out a prison sentence with an upper penalty limit of up to five years.

The court or the public prosecutor may conditionally suspend the criminal prosecution or decide on the approval of the settlement and terminate the criminal prosecution in the proceedings on an offence. The Code of Criminal Procedure provides the conditions which should be fulfilled (such as the accused confessing to the act, compensating any damage caused, surrendering unjust enrichment and, in the case of settlement, the accused depositing a monetary sum into the court's account, etc.). The diversion should be made only if the method of dealing with the matter is deemed sufficient, given the nature and seriousness of the act committed, to the degree to which the offence affected public interest.

Only the public prosecutor in the preliminary proceeding can decide to conditionally suspend the submission of the petition for the punishment.

An agreement on guilt and punishment between the accused and the public prosecutor can be concluded starting in September 2012. A precondition for the conclusion of an agreement on guilt and punishment is the declaration of the accused that they committed the act for which they are being prosecuted. The agreement on guilt and punishment must also contain the execution of punishment or waiver of punishment and compensation for damage or nonmaterial damage, or the surrender of unjust enrichment, if agreed.

An agreement on guilt and punishment may not be concluded in proceedings on a particularly serious crime (intentional criminal offences for which criminal law sets out a prison sentence with an upper penalty limit of at least ten years) and in proceedings against a fugitive.

8.4 In addition to or instead of any criminal disposition to an investigation, can a defendant be subject to any civil penalties or remedies? If so, please describe the circumstances under which civil penalties or remedies are appropriate.

If the crime caused damages it can be subject to civil proceedings by the injured party. The injured party may also seek compensation for the damages in criminal proceedings. Civil and criminal proceedings may run parallel. The court in the civil proceedings is bound by the verdict of the criminal court (the civil court suspends the civil proceedings).

9 Burden of Proof

9.1 For each element of the business crimes identified above, which party has the burden of proof? Which party has the burden of proof with respect to any affirmative defences?

The law enforcement authorities (i.e. the prosecutor) have the burden to prove all elements of the crime. The public prosecutor must prove the guilt of the defendant. The principle of in dubio pro reo applies – if the authorities cannot sufficiently prove the facts it should be assumed that the facts are not proven. The accused has the right, but not the obligation, to prove his innocence.

9.2 What is the standard of proof that the party with the burden must satisfy?

The law enforcement authorities have to prove the facts of the case, that there is no reasonable doubt and in the extent necessary for the decisions.

9.3 In a criminal trial, who is the arbiter of fact? Who determines whether the party has satisfied its burden of proof?

The law enforcement authorities shall review the evidence separately and as a whole according to their conviction based on careful consideration of all the circumstances of the case. In the preparatory proceedings the public prosecutor determines if the facts have been proven. In criminal proceedings before the court this determination is made by the judge.

10 Conspiracy / Aiding and Abetting

10.1 Can a person who conspires with or assists another to commit a crime be liable? If so, what is the nature of the liability and what are the elements of the offence?

A person who intentionally plotted or managed the commission of a criminal offence (organiser), instigated the commission of a criminal offence by another person (instigator) or allowed or facilitated the commission of a criminal offence by another person (assistant), is an accessory to the crime. The accessory bears the same criminal liability as the committer of the crime.

11 Common Defences

11.1 Is it a defence to a criminal charge that the defendant did not have the requisite intent to commit the crime? If so, who has the burden of proof with respect to intent?

Generally, wilful intent is necessary for criminal liability unless criminal law expressly stipulates that the fault of negligence is sufficient for the relevant crime. The negligence can be wilful or caused by ignorance. All facts of the crime (as well as the requisite intent) have to be proved by the law enforcement authorities (i.e. the prosecutor) – see question 9.1 above.

11.2 Is it a defence to a criminal charge that the defendant was ignorant of the law i.e. that he did not know that his conduct was unlawful? If so, what are the elements of this defence, and who has the burden of proof with respect to the defendant's knowledge of the law?

In the Czech Republic it generally applies that ignorance of the law is no excuse (ignoratia legis non excusat). However, the offender may commit a legal mistake if he does not recognise the unlawfulness of his offence, provided that he could not avoid the mistake. In such a case, criminal liability is excluded.

A legal mistake could be avoided, however, if the offender had the obligation to familiarise himself with the relevant legal regulations, official decision or an agreement, from their employment, occupation, position or function, or if the offender could identify the act as illegal without any major difficulties. This situation shall be considered as a mitigating circumstance when imposing punishment.

The accused does not bear the burden of proof, but will normally try to prove his innocence.

11.3 Is it a defence to a criminal charge that the defendant was ignorant of the facts i.e. that he did not know that he had engaged in conduct that he knew was unlawful? If so, what are the elements of this defence, and who has the burden of proof with respect to the defendant's knowledge of the facts?

There is an error in fact when a person neither knows nor presupposes any potential factual circumstances having the character of a criminal offence during the commission of an act. As a result the person does not act intentionally and there is no criminal liability for intentional crimes; however, the liability for a criminal offence committed by negligence remains. The accused does not bear the burden of proof, but will normally try to prove his innocence.

12 Voluntary Disclosure Obligations

12.1 If a person becomes aware that a crime has been committed, must the person report the crime to the government? Can the person be liable for failing to report the crime to the government?

Generally, all public authorities are obliged to immediately notify the public prosecutor or the police of facts indicating that a criminal offence has been committed. The Czech Criminal Code includes the crime of failure to prevent a criminal offence and the failure to report a criminal offence among serious crimes which shall be punished. As a result, anyone who has credible knowledge that another person is preparing or committing a criminal offence must try to obstruct the commission or completion of the criminal offence. In addition, anyone who learns in any credible way that another person has committed a criminal offence must report the criminal offence to the public prosecutor or the police without delay. However, the reporting obligation does not apply to an attorney or their employee who learns of a criminal offence in connection with the performance of their legal profession.

13 Cooperation Provisions / Leniency

13.1 If a person voluntarily discloses criminal conduct to the government or cooperates in a government criminal investigation of the person, can the person request leniency from the government? If so, what rules or guidelines govern the government's ability to offer leniency in exchange for voluntary disclosures or cooperation?

Generally, if the offender has reported their own criminal offence to the authorities, or has contributed to the clarification of their own criminal activity or significantly contributed to the clarification of a criminal offence committed by another offender, or has contributed, in particular, as a cooperating accused in clarifying the criminal activity committed by members of an organised group, in association with an organised group, or in favour of an organised criminal group, the court shall consider this as mitigating circumstances when imposing punishment.

Czech criminal law recognises the term "Cooperating Accused", but this term can be used only in connection with crimes committed by an organised group. The Cooperating Accused may seek reduced or mitigated punishment in the criminal proceedings. The public prosecutor may indicate in the indictment that the accused is a cooperating person pursuant to the fulfilment of defined conditions (such as that the accused notifies the public prosecutor of facts that are capable of significantly contributing to the clarification of a crime committed by members of an organised group, in conjunction with an organised group, or in favour of an organised criminal group, confesses to the crime, or declares that they agree to be designated as a cooperating accused).

13.2 Describe the extent of cooperation, including the steps that an entity would take, that is generally required of entities seeking leniency in the Czech Republic, and describe the favourable treatment generally received.

There are no differences between an individual and an entity. Please see question 13.1. The removal of the detrimental consequences of a criminal offence or voluntary payment of damages is generally understood as a mitigating circumstance.

14 Plea Bargaining

14.1 Can a defendant voluntarily decline to contest criminal charges in exchange for a conviction on reduced charges, or in exchange for an agreed upon sentence?

The introduction of the agreement on guilt and punishment between the accused and the public prosecutor can be seen as plea bargaining in the Czech Republic (for more details see question 8.3). The legal instrument of a Cooperating Accused can be taken into consideration (for more details see question 13.1).

14.2 Please describe any rules or guidelines governing the government's ability to plea bargain with a defendant. Must any aspects of the plea bargain be approved by the court?

Please see question 14.1. The entire agreement on guilt and punishment between the accused and the public prosecutor must be approved by the court.

15 Elements of a Corporate Sentence

15.1 After the court determines that a defendant is guilty of a crime, are there any rules or guidelines governing the court's imposition of sentence on the defendant? Please describe the sentencing process.

The law stipulates the type of punishment that can be imposed on an entity (abolition of the legal entity, forfeiture of property, monetary penalty, forfeiture of tangible or other assets, disqualification, etc.). The court shall particularly take into account the nature and seriousness of the crime, the property relationship, current activity, performance of activities in public interest, the offender's activity after the act, and efforts at making good any damage or mitigating any other detrimental effects of the act.

15.2 Before imposing a sentence on a corporation, must the court determine whether the sentence satisfies any elements? If so, please describe those elements.

Generally the court must prove every element of the crime and the criminal liability of an entity (for more details see questions 4.1 and 4.2).

16 Appeals

16.1 Is a guilty or a non-guilty verdict appealable by either the defendant or the government?

A guilty verdict may be appealed by the defendant or by the public prosecutor, while an acquittal may be appealed only by the prosecutor.

16.2 Is a criminal sentence following a guilty verdict appealable? If so, which party may appeal?

A sentence (guilty verdict) may be appealed by the defendant as well as by the public prosecutor. If only the public prosecutor appeals to the detriment of the defendant, the verdict can be changed to the disadvantage of the defendant (reformatio in peius).

16.3 What is the appellate court's standard of review?

The appellate court reviews the legality and justification only of those statements of the judgment against which an appeal was filed, including the correctness of the proceedings that preceded it in terms of alleged errors. The appellate court shall consider any errors that are not contested by the appeal only if they affect the accuracy of the statements against which the appeal was filed.

16.4 If the appellate court upholds the appeal, what powers does it have to remedy any injustice by the trial court?

If the appellate court upholds the appeal, the court shall revoke the contested judgment. The appellate court may decide on the matter itself only if a new decision can be made based on the facts which were correctly identified in the contested judgment or on the basis of the evidence presented before the appellate court, supplemented or changed. Otherwise the appellate court returns the case to the court of first instance or, in special cases, to the public prosecutor.

The appellate court may deviate from the factual findings of the court of first instance only if it again presents evidence important for the factual findings that was already presented during the main trial, or if it presents new evidence.

This article appeared in the 2013 edition of The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Business Crime; published by Global Legal Group Ltd, London. www.iclg.co.uk

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.