L 189 - svar på spm. 4, om der er andre EU-lande, som har mulighed for at fastsætte et generelt forbud mod deltagelse i nattelivet, fra justitsministeren

Side 1/2
Endelig besvarelse af spørgsmål nr. 4 fra Folketingets Retsudvalg ved-
rørende forslag til lov om ændring af straffeloven, lov om politiets virk-
somhed, retsplejeloven og udlændingeloven (L 189)
Hermed sendes endelig besvarelse af spørgsmål nr. 4 vedrørende forslag til
lov om ændring af straffeloven, lov om politiets virksomhed, retsplejeloven
og udlændingeloven (Forbud mod deltagelse i nattelivet, tryghedsskabende
opholdsforbud, udvidet adgang til beslaglæggelse af værdigenstande og ud-
visning af udlændinge dømt for vanvidskørsel m.v.) (L 189), som Folketin-
gets Retsudvalg har stillet til justitsministeren den 23. marts 2021. Spørgs-
målet er stillet efter ønske fra Kristian Hegaard (RV).
Nick Hækkerup
/
Mette Johansen
Folketinget
Retsudvalget
Christiansborg
1240 København K
DK Danmark
Dato: 1. juli 2021
Kontor: Strafferetskontoret
Sagsbeh: Natasja Walbom
Sagsnr.: 2021-0037-0114
Dok.: 1968329
Slotsholmsgade 10
1216 København K.
T +45 3392 3340
F +45 3393 3510
www.justitsministeriet.dk
jm@jm.dk
Retsudvalget 2020-21,Retsudvalget 2020-21,Retsudvalget 2020-21
L 189 - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4,L 189 A - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4,L 189 B - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4
Offentligt
Side 2/2
Spørgsmål nr. 4 fra Folketingets Retsudvalg vedrørende forslag til lov
om ændring af straffeloven, lov om politiets virksomhed, retsplejeloven
og udlændingeloven (Forbud mod deltagelse i nattelivet, tryghedsska-
bende opholdsforbud, udvidet adgang til beslaglæggelse af værdigen-
stande og udvisning af udlændinge dømt for vanvidskørsel m.v.) (L
189):
”Vil ministeren oplyse, om der er andre EU-lande, som har mu-
lighed for at fastsætte et generelt forbud mod deltagelse i natte-
livet, som det i lovforslaget indeholdte?”
Svar:
Der henvises til den samtidige besvarelse af spørgsmål nr. 2 fra Folketingets
Retsudvalg vedrørende forslag til lov om ændring af straffeloven, lov om
politiets virksomhed, retsplejeloven og udlændingeloven (Forbud mod del-
tagelse i nattelivet, tryghedsskabende opholdsforbud, udvidet adgang til be-
slaglæggelse af værdigenstande og udvisning af udlændinge dømt for van-
vidskørsel m.v.) (L 189).


Side 1/2
Endelig besvarelse af spørgsmål nr. 2 fra Folketingets Retsudvalg ved-
rørende forslag til lov om ændring af straffeloven, lov om politiets virk-
somhed, retsplejeloven og udlændingeloven (L 189)
Hermed sendes endelig besvarelse af spørgsmål nr. 2 vedrørende forslag til
lov om ændring af straffeloven, lov om politiets virksomhed, retsplejeloven
og udlændingeloven (Forbud mod deltagelse i nattelivet, tryghedsskabende
opholdsforbud, udvidet adgang til beslaglæggelse af værdigenstande og ud-
visning af udlændinge dømt for vanvidskørsel m.v.) (L 189), som Folketin-
gets Retsudvalg har stillet til justitsministeren den 23. marts 2021. Spørgs-
målet er stillet efter ønske fra Kristian Hegaard (RV).
Nick Hækkerup
/
Christian Fuglsang
Folketinget
Retsudvalget
Christiansborg
1240 København K
DK Danmark
Dato: 1. juli 2021
Kontor: Politikontoret
Sagsbeh: Alexander Langgaard
Olesen
Sagsnr.: 2021-0037-0114
Dok.: 1968324
Retsudvalget 2020-21,Retsudvalget 2020-21,Retsudvalget 2020-21
L 189 - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4,L 189 A - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4,L 189 B - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4
Offentligt
Side 2/2
Spørgsmål nr. 2 fra Folketingets Retsudvalg vedrørende forslag til lov
om ændring af straffeloven, lov om politiets virksomhed, retsplejeloven
og udlændingeloven (Forbud mod deltagelse i nattelivet, tryghedsska-
bende opholdsforbud, udvidet adgang til beslaglæggelse af værdigen-
stande og udvisning af udlændinge dømt for vanvidskørsel m.v.) (L
189):
”Vil ministeren oplyse, om der er andre EU-lande, som har mu-
lighed for at fastsætte et generelt opholdsforbud?”
Svar:
Justitsministeriet har til brug for besvarelsen af spørgsmålet via Udenrigs-
ministeriet indhentet oplysninger fra de øvrige EU-lande om, hvorvidt der i
de pågældende lande er mulighed for at fastsætte et generelt opholdsforbud
eller et generelt forbud mod deltagelse i nattelivet.
Justitsministeriet har modtaget oplysninger fra ambassaderne i de øvrige
EU-lande på enten dansk eller engelsk. De modtagne oplysninger er vedlagt
som bilag til besvarelsen.
Det bemærkes, at Justitsministeriet endnu ikke har modtaget oplysninger fra
Cypern og Luxembourg. Justitsministeriet vil vende tilbage over for Rets-
udvalget, såfremt Cypern og Luxembourg måtte oplyse, at de har regler om
at fastsætte et generelt opholdsforbud eller et generelt forbud mod deltagelse
i nattelivet.
Slotsholmsgade 10
1216 København K.
T +45 3392 3340
F +45 3393 3510
www.justitsministeriet.dk
jm@jm.dk


1
Oplysninger fra EU-lande om muligheden for at udstede generelle forbud
mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum og forbud til
enkeltpersoner mod ophold i bestemte områder, herunder f.eks. i
nattelivet, som tillægsstraf til en dom for kriminalitet.
Indhold
Belgien .............................................................................................................................................................. 2
Bulgarien .......................................................................................................................................................... 3
Estland.............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Finland.............................................................................................................................................................. 6
Frankrig............................................................................................................................................................ 7
Grækenland...................................................................................................................................................... 8
Irland................................................................................................................................................................ 9
Italien.............................................................................................................................................................. 11
Kroatien.......................................................................................................................................................... 13
Letland............................................................................................................................................................ 14
Litauen............................................................................................................................................................ 23
Malta............................................................................................................................................................... 24
Nederlandene ................................................................................................................................................. 25
Polen ............................................................................................................................................................... 26
Portugal .......................................................................................................................................................... 28
Rumænien ...................................................................................................................................................... 29
Slovakiet ......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Slovenien......................................................................................................................................................... 32
Spanien ........................................................................................................................................................... 33
Sverige ............................................................................................................................................................ 36
Tjekkiet........................................................................................................................................................... 37
Tyskland......................................................................................................................................................... 39
Ungarn............................................................................................................................................................ 40
Østrig.............................................................................................................................................................. 43
Retsudvalget 2020-21,Retsudvalget 2020-21,Retsudvalget 2020-21
L 189 - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4,L 189 A - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4,L 189 B - endeligt svar på spørgsmål 4
Offentligt
2
Belgien
“There is no general prohibitions of sojourn at specific locations in the public space that is
provided in the Belgian criminal legislation. But depending on the stage of the criminal
procedure, several possibilities exists on the base of generic rules or practice to prohibit the
access to bars or discotheques to persons.
Firstly, the public prosecutor can decide to suspend the prosecution under specific conditions
(“probation prétorienne”). If the conditions are not respected or new facts are committed, the
prosecution can be decided.
On a later stage (if the prosecutor has engaged the prosecution), the judge can recognize the
person guilty without determining a penalty, while he imposes some conditions (“suspension
probatoire du prononcé”; exemple: https://www.rtl.be/info/belgique/faits-divers/assises-du-
hainaut-5-ans-avec-sursis-partiel-pour-le-meurtre-de-la-luna--255153.aspx ). If the conditions
aren’t met, the person will come back before of the judge to be condemned to a penalty.
Or the judge can condamn to an autonomy probatory penalty (“peine de probation autonome”) on
the base of Section V quater of the Penal Code (see art. 37octies to 37undecies).
Or the judge can pronounce a conviction with a penalty whose execution is totally or partially
suspended under conditions (“sursis probatoire”).
About criminal minors, the youth judges can take decisions (“measures”) of protection of the
youth and ask to the police services to control a prohibition to frequent certain persons or certain
places or a prohibition to go out.
On the later stage of the execution of a condemnation, such prohibition of frequent night places
or persons can also be pronounced as conditions for a conditional liberation (see act of 17 May
2006 “Loi relative au statut juridique externe des personnes condamnées à une peine privative de
liberté et aux droits reconnus à la victime dans le cadre des modalités d'exécution de la peine »,
http://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/eli/loi/2006/05/17/2006009456/justel ).
The prohibition to frequent bars or night clubs can be decided for example in case of
alcoholic/drugs addition, or to avoid to meet some persons exercising a bad influence on the
person. In such cases, the identity of those persons and the practical limits of the places must be
registered precisely.
Prohibition of the access to some defined places or to meet specific persons has been proposed as
a specific penalty in the annexed bill, next to existing penalties (see art. 62, see pages 161 and
1538) reforming the criminal code that is currently on the agenda of the Parliament (n°55-1011).”
3
Bulgarien
“Answer to question № 1
Law on protection of public order during sports events
This law regulates the measures for protection of the public order, as well as the measures against
anti-social acts, carried out during sport events.
The law provides penalties for anti-social acts and penalties for other violations in connection
with protection of public order during sport events, as well as the imposition of forcible
administrative measures.
The penalties for anti-social acts during sport events are a fine, gratuitous labour for the benefit of
society, detention in the territorial structures of the Ministry of Interior.
The forcible administrative measures provided by law are a ban for attending sport events in the
country and abroad for the period for which the administrative measure has been imposed, and a
suspension of the use of the sports facility for holding sports events for a certain period.
The Ministry of Interior establishes and maintains a Unified Automated Register, which contains
data on natural and legal persons who have been imposed penalties, forcible administrative
measures or sanctions under this Act; persons against whom criminal prosecution has been
initiated for committed intentional crimes of a general nature during sport events; persons
convicted with entered into force sentences for intentional crimes of a general nature, committed
during sport events; committed anti-social acts during sport events, provided by foreign countries
or international organizations by virtue of international treaties and agreements to which the
Republic of Bulgaria is a party (Art. 6, para. 1, items 1-4 of the Law on protection of public order
during sports events).
Law on Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations
This law determines the order and the guarantees for organizing and conducting assemblies,
rallies and demonstrations.
When the time and place of the assembly, the rally or the way of the movement of the
demonstration create conditions for violation of the public order or the safety of the traffic, the
mayor of the municipality proposes their change. The mayor of the municipality may prohibit the
holding of the assembly, rally or demonstration, when there are undoubted data that they are
aimed at forcible change of the constitutionally established order or against the territorial
integrity of the country; endanger the public order in the respective settlement; endanger public
health in a pre-announced epidemic situation; violate the rights and freedoms of other citizens.
The ban is imposed by a reasoned written act within 24 hours of notification.
The organizer of the assembly, rally or demonstration may appeal the prohibition under the
previous paragraph before the respective administrative court within 3 days of its receipt. The
appeal shall not suspend the execution of the order for prohibition. The court shall announce its
decision within 24 hours. The decision of the court is announced immediately and is final. The
mayor of the municipality shall immediately notify the competent bodies of the Ministry of
Interior for the holding or non-holding of the assembly, rally or demonstration (Art. 12 from the
Law on Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations).
In addition, according to Art. 13 of the Law on Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations, the
mayor of the municipality shall terminate the assembly, rally or demonstration, when they are not
4
organized or are not held under the conditions and by the order, established by this law. Upon
termination of the assembly, rally or demonstration, the participants are obliged to disperse.
Citizens and officials who violate the established order and the guarantees for organizing and
holding assemblies, rallies or demonstrations shall be punished with a fine of BGN 50 to BGN
300, if they are not subject to a stricter penalty. Violations are established by acts from officials
appointed by the mayor of the municipality. Penal decrees are issued by the mayor of the
municipality and can be appealed under the Administrative Violations and Penalties Act (Art. 14
of the Law on Assemblies, Rallies and Demonstrations).
Answer to question № 2
The Penal Code provides for the imposition of the penalty probation.
According to the provision of art. 42a of the Penal Code, probation is a set of control and impact
measures without deprivation of freedom, which are imposed jointly or separately. The probation
measures are: mandatory registration at the current address; mandatory periodic meetings with a
probation officer; restrictions on free movement; inclusion in professional qualification courses,
social impact programs; corrective labour; gratuitous labour to the benefit of society.
The probation measure "restrictions on free movement" is the imposition of one or more of the
following prohibitions for: visiting specific places, areas and establishments determined in the
sentence; leaving the settlement for more than 24 hours without permission from the probation
officer or the prosecutor and leaving the dwelling the person inhabits during a certain period of
the day and night (Art. 42b, para 3 of the Penal Code). Probation is carried out in accordance with
the law.
According to the Law on Execution of Sentences and Detention, the implementation of the
probation measure "restrictions on free movement" is controlled by inspections according to a
plan and schedule prepared by the probation officer and agreed with the head of the relevant
regional department of the Ministry of Interior or with an official authorized by him. The
inspections are carried out by a probation officer or an official designated by him.
The ban on visiting the places, areas and establishments specified in the sentence shall also be
communicated to the owners or officials responsible for the access to these places, areas and
establishments determined by the court. Permission to leave the settlement is given to the convict
by the probation officer for reasons of personal or public character- for no more than 7 days; for
hospitalization and for taking an examination in schools or in connection with legal proceedings.
When it is necessary to use emergency medical care in a hospital and outside the current address
of the convict, the probation officer allows the absence based on a doctor's referral and official
note for the time of treatment. The convict or his relatives are obliged to immediately notify the
probation officer about the hospitalization.
When the absence has to last more than 7 days, the probation officer coordinates the permission
to leave with the district prosecutor (art. 213 of the Law on Execution of Sentences and
Detention).”
5
Estland
”I Estland er der ikke nogen generel regulering på området. Beslutninger vedr. udelukkelse af
særlige personer fra enten det offentlige rum eller særlige lokaliteter bliver taget af domstolene
gennem en sag-for-sag tilgang.”
6
Finland
“The Finnish system of criminal sanctions is based on the premise that the execution of sentences
does not result in any “ex-post sanctions” after the execution of the sentence as suggested by
question two. Sojourn in public places cannot be restricted on the basis of previous convictions
for violence crimes or other convictions.
Furthermore, the police cannot prohibit access to the public space on the basis of a threat of
disturbance (question 1).”
7
Frankrig
”Artikel 131-6, pt. 12 i den franske straffelov siger at: « L'interdiction, pour une durée de trois
ans au plus, de paraître dans certains lieux ou catégories de lieux déterminés par la juridiction et
dans lesquels l'infraction a été commise ». Ambassadens uofficielle oversættelse, som ikke er
juridisk funderet: ”Forbud i en periode på op til tre år fra tilstedeværelse på bestemte steder eller
kategorier af steder, der er bestemt af retten, og hvor lovovertrædelsen er begået”. Dvs. at der i
stedet for fængsling er muligt at lave et opholdsforbud i et defineret område eller kategorier af
områder i relation til den forbrydelse, personen er blevet dømt for. Nattelivet vil derfor formentlig
være inkluderet i nogle specifikke tilfælde.
Derudover siger artikel 131-9 i straffeloven, at det ikke er muligt at tilføje en opholdsforbudsdom
ovenpå en fængselsstraf.
Det er generelt op til borgmestrene i samarbejde med politiet at regulere nattelivet i den enkelte
kommuner. Det ser dog ikke ud som om et forbud mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige
rum eksisterer som et værktøj i denne håndhævelse eller er inkluderet i deres kompetencer.
Politiet kan udstede bøder, hvis individer forringer den offentlige orden, ved f.eks. støj.
Link til relevant del af fransk straffelov:
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000029371133/2017-01-29”
8
Grækenland
”1. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede generelle forbud mod ophold på
bestemte steder i det offentlige rum.
I den græske retsplejelovs paragraf 283 fremgår det, at der i tilfælde af en verserende retssag
og i perioden op til denne og i sager, hvor der er meget stærke indicier imod tiltalte, kan udstedes
forbud, der inkluderer forbud mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum samt forbud
mod at mødes med bestemte personer.
2. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede forbud til enkeltpersoner mod ophold i
bestemte områder, herunder f.eks. i nattelivet, som tillægsstraf til en dom for kriminalitet.
Vedrørende spørgsmålet om tillægsstraf til domme for kriminalitet, fremgår det i den græske
straffelovs paragraf 65, at der kan afsiges domme, der forbyder retten til at udøve et erhverv i en
periode fra 1 måned til 2 år for personer, som har begået betydelige lovovertrædelser i forbindelse
med deres erhvervsudøvelse, hvortil der kræves en speciel tilladelse. Disse tillægsstraffe (af
varighed mellem 1 måned og 2 år) kan afsiges i forbindelse med fængselsdomme på over to år og
træder i kraft dagen efter løsladelsen fra fængslet.
Ved domme afsagt i forbindelse med vold ved sportsbegivenheder (lov 2725/1999), vil retten
obligatorisk forbyde den dømte at følge sportsbegivenheder, der hvor der er tale om holdsport –
uanset sportsgren – i en periode på mellem 2 og 5 år. Retten har ligeledes mulighed for at forbyde
adgang til sportsbegivenheder for personer i tilfælde, hvor det skønnes, at vedkommende udgør
en fare for sikker afholdelse af sportsbegivenheden. For at denne dom (adgangsforbuddet) kan
eksekveres, bliver den dømte bedt om at indfinde sig på den lokale politistation to timer inden
sportsbegivenhedens afholdelse og forblive der i to timer efter afholdelsen.
3. Andre oplysninger, som skønnes relevante i forhold til de to ovenstående forhold.
I forbindelse med det sidste spørgsmål kan det nævnes, at der i Den Græske Grundlovs
paragraf 11, stk. 2 gives mulighed for udstedelse af opholdsforbud i særskilte områder med
henblik på at opretholde sikkerheden for beboerne i dette område. Forsamlinger udendørs kan
forbydes, hvis der foreligger en begrundet afgørelse fra politiet, hvis det skønnes, at der vil være
fare for den offentlige orden samt det sociale og økonomiske liv.”
9
Irland
”Resumé:
 Der er i Irland ikke generelle forbud mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum.
Under første nedlukning under Corona-pandemien blev det overvejet at indføre forbud
mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum, hvor social afstand ikke var mulig.
Ligeledes blev det diskuteret, om der skulle indføres et udgangsforbud om natten for at
mindske spredningen af Covid-19. Intet af ovenstående blev en realitet.
 I landet skulle befolkningen under nedlukning på niveau 5 blive inden for en 5km. radius
fra deres bopæl med undtagelse af arbejde og andre væsentlige formål. Der gælder på
nuværende tidspunkt en rejserestriktion på kommuneniveau og/eller 20km. fra
bopælsadresse.
 I Irland er det muligt at forbyde personer dømt eller tiltalt for visse lovovertrædelser at
opholde sig i og i nærheden af områder, lokaler, bygninger med alkoholbevilling. Dette
forbud kan maksimalt vare 12 måneder.
 Det er også muligt at indskrænke enkeltpersoners bevægelsesfrihed, hvis de er dømt for
visse lovovertrædelser. En indskrænkning af bevægelsesfriheden kan omfatte et
udgangsforbud om natten og/eller et forbud mod ophold på bestemte områder eller
lokaler. En indskrænkning af enkeltpersoners bevægelsesfrihed kan maksimalt vare 6
måneder.
Generelle forbud mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum.
I Irland er der ikke generelle forbud mod ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum. I marts
2020 i starten af landets første nedlukning blev det overvejet at udstede et generelt forbud mod
ophold på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum, hvor social afstand ikke var muligt. Områder der
var medtaget i disse overvejelser var: strande, parker og campingvognsparker. Dette forbud blev
aldrig en realitet, men der blev indført øget tilstedeværelse af vagter og politi i parker og andre
offentlige steder for at sikre, at social afstand blev overholdt. Det blev ligeledes under første
nedlukning diskuteret, om der skulle indføres et udgangsforbud om natten for at mindske
spredningen af Covid-19, som man har set det i andre europæiske storbyer. Dette blev dog heller
aldrig en realitet. Befolkningen har under nedlukning på niveau 5 ikke måtte bevæge sig længere
væk end en radius på 5km. fra deres bopæl med undtagelse af arbejde og andre væsentlige
formål. Der gælder på nuværende tidspunkt en rejserestriktion på kommuneniveau og/eller 20km.
fra bopælsadresse.
Forbud for enkeltpersoner mod ophold i bestemte områder
I Irland er det muligt at forbyde personer dømt eller tiltalt for visse lovovertrædelser i henhold til
straffeloven fra 1994 at opholde sig i og i nærheden af områder, lokaler og bygninger, der har
alkoholbevilling. Dette gælder også supermarkeder, boder og køretøjer. Lovovertrædelser der
berettiger sådanne forbud omfatter: truende og aggressiv adfærd i det offentlig rum, overfald,
manglende overholdelse af politiets anvisninger, chikane mv. Et forbud kan maksimalt vare 12
måneder. Dette blev vedtaget med loven Criminal Justice (Public order) Act fra 2003.
Domstolene kan også indføre en begrænsning af bevægelsesfriheden for enkeltpersoner dømt for
visse lovovertrædelser. Disse lovovertrædelser omfatter: truende og aggressiv adfærd i det
offentlig rum, overfald, manglende overholdelse af politiets anvisninger, ulovlig indtrængning i
en bygning, hærværk, chikane mv. Dette blev indført i 2006 i straffeloven. Et forbud mod ophold
10
i bestemte områder gælder kun, når en person på 18 år eller derover er dømt i retten og idømt
fængsel på 3 måneder eller mere. En begrænsning af en enkeltpersons bevægelsesfrihed kan ikke
vare længere end 6 måneder. En begrænsning af enkeltpersoners bevægelsesfrihed kan indebære
udgangsforbud om natten, men også forbud mod ophold på bestemte gader eller lokaler i et
bestemt angivet tidsrum. Man kan ikke kræve, at en person med indskrænket bevægelsesfrihed
skal forblive på et bestemt sted i mere end 12 timer om dagen. En enkeltperson kan godt få tildelt
flere forskellige indskrænkninger af sin bevægelsesfrihed, som gælder samtidigt eller bliver afløst
af hinanden. Ordrerne må dog tilsammen ikke overstige 6 måneder.
Loven Criminal Justice Act fra 2017 skærpede kautionsbetingelserne i Irland, således at al
kontakt med offeret for den anklagedes kriminelle handlinger blev forbudt. Dette omfattede også
ofrets familiemedlemmer. Derudover blev et udgangsforbud om natten også en del af
kautionsbetingelserne.
Lovene fra 2003, 2006 og 2017 har været hyppigt brugt siden. I 2015 blev en ung irsk mand, der
var dømt for voldelig og aggressiv adfærd i nattelivet, forbudt ophold på steder med
alkoholbevilling i hovedstadsområdet i 6 måneder. En del af kautionsbetingelserne for den
voldsdømte bokser John Joe Nevin var forbud mod ophold på steder og områder med
alkoholbevilling i kommunen Westmeath og et udgangsforbud fra 23.00 til 08.00.
Forlængede åbningstider for pubber og natklubber
I slutningen af februar offentliggjorde Justitsministeriet en ny plan, der gør det muligt for pubber
og natklubber at forlænge deres åbningstider. Dette skal bidrage til, at nattelivet kommer sig efter
Covid-19 pandemien. Planen indeholder også en revision og udvidelse af reglerne om salg af
alkohol og alkohollicenser. Ændringerne er del af den nye handlingsplan for retssystemet i Irland.
På nuværende tidspunkt skal pubber og natklubber have en særlig tilladelse fra byretten til at
holde åbent længere end de gængse åbningstider. Den gængse lukketid for pubber og natklubber
er 22.30 fra mandag til torsdag, 00:30 fredag og lørdag, og 23.00 søndag. Landet har tidligere set
et markant fald i domme for lovovertrædelser relateret til den offentlige orden i takt med et fald i
antallet af ovenstående særlige tilladelser.”
11
Italien
”1. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede generelle forbud mod ophold på
bestemte steder i det offentlige rum?
Som svar herpå henviste vicedirektør Mandaglio til det forhold, at de italienske borgmestre og
præfekter (højtstående embedsmænd, der repræsenterer staten lokalt) har kompetence til at
udstede midlertidige, generelle opholdsforbud på bestemte steder i det offentlige rum, som skal
være begrundet med henvisning til en generel risiko for folkesundheden og alle individers
sikkerhed. Et konkret eksempel herpå er indførelsen af et opholdsforbud for personer og køretøjer
på en offentlig vej, hvor der er opstået en fordybning i jordoverfladen, som kan være til fare for
personer og bilister.
Desuden henvises der til italienske politimyndigheders mulighed for at udstede forbud mod
adgang til sportsbegivenheder, den såkaldte D.A.SPO. (Divieto di Accedere alle manifestazioni
SPOrtive), med henblik på at forebygge vold på stadions. D.A.SPO. er en foranstaltning udstedt
af den lokale politidirektør (Questore), hvormed personer, der anses for at være til fare for den
offentlige orden og sikkerhed, kan formenes adgang til sportsbegivenheder på stadion i en
periode på ét til fem år. For at gøre foranstaltningen mest effektfuld kan forbuddet ledsages af et
påbud om at møde op på det lokale politikontor, mens sportsbegivenheden finder sted.
D.A.SPO. hidrører fra lov af 13. december 1989, n. 401, art. 6, der har til formål at forebygge
voldsepisoder forbundet med afviklingen af sportsbegivenheder.
2. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede forbud til enkeltpersoner mod ophold i
bestemte områder, herunder f.eks. i nattelivet, som tillægsstraf til en dom for kriminalitet?
Italiensk lovgivning tillader udstedelsen af forbud mod specifikke enkeltpersoners adgang til og
ophold i bestemte områder (samt i umiddelbar nærhed af disse steder) i nattelivet. Alle
kommuner har beføjelse til at identificere områder, hvor der kan indføres adgangsforbud for
bestemte personer.
Med det seneste immigrations- og sikkerhedsdekret fra 2020 (det såkaldte ”Lamorgese-dekret”,
som i populær tale har fået navn efter sin initiativtager indenrigsminister Luciana Lamorgese) kan
adgangsforbuddet til bl.a. bestemte barer og klubber i nattelivet, der er specifikt identificeret som
de steder, hvor forbrydelser mod ejendom eller personer, herunder vold, er blevet begået,
pålægges ikke alene enkeltpersoner, der er dømt for disse forbrydelser. Den kompetente
politidirektør kan ligeledes udstede adgangsforbud mod enkeltpersoner, der er under anklage for
eller er blevet anholdt for ovennævnte forbrydelser, og som vurderes til at udgøre en
sikkerhedsrisiko for andre.
Denne tilføjelse til loven har haft til hensigt at muliggøre en hurtigere effektueringen af
eventuelle indgreb mod enkeltpersoner end hidtil. Den kom bl.a. i stand som en politisk reaktion
på den massive folkelige indignation, der opstod i kølvandet på en drabsepisode i nattelivet i
efteråret 2020, da den 21-årige Willy Monteiro blev dræbt efter at have forsøgt at gribe ind i et
slagsmål.
12
Opholdsforbuddet kan begrænses til specifikke tidsrum og kan gælde fra seks til 24 måneder.
Overtrædelser af forbuddet mod ophold på bestemte områder i nattelivet sanktioneres med
udelukkelse fra disse områder i seks til 24 måneder og med en bøde rangerende fra 800 til 2.000
euro.”
13
Kroatien
“In addition to criminal sanctions that the court will impose on perpetrators of criminal offenses
in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Code, the court may, in addition to a verdict
finding them guilty, respect the principle of proportionality, determine some security measures if
they can eliminate circumstances that enable or encourage new acts of offense.
Consequently, it is important to mention the security measures in a form of a restraining order,
prohibition of harassment or stalking of the victim, other person or group of persons, or the
prohibition of approaching a certain place, which the court will impose on the perpetrator when
there is a danger that the perpetrator could commit a crime again. The measures can be imposed
by the Court for a period of one to five years.
In addition to the above, the Court, with a suspended sentence and a partial suspended sentence,
may impose some of the special obligations prescribed by the Criminal Code to the perpetrator.
Thus, if the court deems that their application is necessary for the protection of the health and
safety of the person to whose detriment the criminal offense was committed or when it is useful
to eliminate circumstances that favour or encourage the commission of a new criminal offense, it
may impose the following obligations on the perpetrator:
- a ban on visiting certain places, facilities and events, which may be an opportunity or incentive
to commit a new criminal offense,
- a ban on associating with a particular person or group of persons who could lead him to commit
a criminal offense, a ban on the employment, teaching or accommodation of those persons,
- ban on leaving home during a certain period of the day,
- regular reporting to the competent probation authority, social welfare center, court, police
administration or other competent authority, and
- other obligations that are appropriate with regard to the committed criminal offense.
Please note that the Croatian Criminal Code also has several other security measures and special
obligations. Here, only those that in their content could correspond to the query, were
mentioned.”
14
Letland
“Whether there exist rules, which makes it possible to issue general prohibitions of sojourn at
specific locations in the public space. Whether there exist rules, which makes it possible to
issue prohibitions of sojourn at specific locations, such as in nightlife, for individuals, as a
consecutive sentence for a criminal conviction.
In Latvian legal system there are possible to issue prohibitions of sojourn at specific locations as
a consecutive sentence for criminal conviction. According to Section 36 of the Criminal Law one
of the types of criminal penalties is the restriction of rights. According to first Paragraph of
Section 44 of the Criminal Law restriction of rights is the deprivation of specific rights or
determination of such prohibition which precludes a person from executing specific rights, taking
up a specific office, performing a specific professional or other type of activity, visiting of
specific places or events. The forms of restriction of rights may be applied to any guilty person,
as appropriate, whether or not in a criminal article sanction, it is supposed to be, or not. It is
determined by the third paragraph of Section 44 of the Criminal Law, where it is directly
provided that, in addition to the limitation of rights provided for in the relevant Section of the
Special Part of the Criminal Law, it is possible to impose another restriction on rights.
However, we would like to draw your attention to the fact that, although Section 44 of the
Criminal Law allows for a person to be banned from visiting certain places or measures, criminal
law focuses mainly on a ban on a certain occupation or a ban on a certain position. In particular,
there is no sentence in the Criminal Law of Latvia that expressis verbis would prohibit a person
from visiting cafes, restaurants or entertainment events at a given time, for example at night 23.00
to 6.00. However, this is possible according to the general wording of the additional punishments.
At the same time, we would like to draw your attention to the fact that according to Second
Paragraph of Section 55 and Fourth Paragraph of Section 61 a certain public denial may also
apply to a conditionally sentenced person and a conditionally released person. To those persons
according to State Probation Service Law is an obligation to be in a specified place and time and
to observe the duties specified by the State Probation Service. In particular, the State Probation
Service is entitled to process the data on the location of such probation client at certain place and
time are processed who has been conditionally released and for whom electronic monitoring has
been determined.
At the same time, we would like to point out that currently in Latvian legal system we have an
additional punishment – probationary supervision - within the framework of which persons may
be barred from being in public places. In particular, according to Section 45.1
of the Criminal
Law probationary supervision is an additional punishment which a court may adjudge or a
prosecutor determine in a penal order as a compulsory measure, in order to ensure the supervision
of the behaviour of a convicted person or person whose additional punishment has been
determined by prosecutor's order, encourage social reintegration of this person and prevent him
or her from committing new criminal offences. Accordingly, persons to whom probationary
supervision has been applied have a duty to observe the duties imposed by an official of the State
Probation Service, including a prohibition to be present in a specified place and time.
In turn, from 1 January 2022 probationary supervision will be as a basic punishment and as a
basic punishment will mean the forced involvement of a person in social behaviour adjustments
and social rehabilitation measures appropriate to his or her age, psychological characteristics and
15
level of development. Subject to the referred to type of punishment, officials of the State
Probation Service will be entitled to apply to persons a similar penalty, such as a ban on leaving
their place of residence at a certain time of day, staying in certain public places, purchasing,
carrying or storing certain items.
In the framework of criminal proceedings in Latvia, it is also permissible for a person to apply a
prohibition from approaching a specific person or location. According to Section 243 of the
Criminal Procedure Law in criminal proceedings a suspect and a accused may be subjected to a
security measure such as prohibition from approaching a specific person or location. In particular,
a prohibition from approaching a specific location is a restriction, provided for with a decision of
the person directing the proceedings, upon a suspect or accused from visiting the relevant
location, or being located closer than the distance referred to in the decision.
The Criminal Law
Section 36. Forms of Punishment
(1) One of the following basic punishments may be adjudged against a person who has
committed a criminal offence:
1) [1 December 2011];
2) deprivation of liberty;
3) [13 December 2012];
4) [13 December 2012];
5) community service;
6) a fine.
(2) In addition to a basic punishment, the following additional punishments may be adjudged
against a convicted person:
1) confiscation of property;
2) deportation from the Republic of Latvia;
21
) community service;
3) a fine;
4) restriction of rights;
5) [8 July 2011];
51
) probationary supervision; and
6) [13 December 2012].
(3) For a person who has committed a criminal violation, a less serious crime or a serious crime
for which a punishment of deprivation of liberty for a period of up to five years is provided for, a
prosecutor in drawing up a penal order may specify a fine or community service, as well as an
additional punishment - restriction of rights or probationary supervision.
(4) The procedures for serving a punishment shall be determined in accordance with law.
Section 44. Restriction of Rights
(1) Restriction of rights is the deprivation of specific rights or determination of such prohibition
which precludes a person from executing specific rights, taking up a specific office, performing a
specific professional or other type of activity, visiting of specific places or events.
16
(2) Restriction of rights is an additional punishment adjudged by a court, or determined by a
prosecutor in drawing up a penal order for a period from one year up to five years, depriving the
rights provided for in the relevant Section in the Special Part of this Law or determining a
prohibition. Taking into account the type and nature of the criminal offence in the cases provided
for in the Special Part of this Law a person may also be restricted the rights for a longer period,
however, the period may not exceed ten years.
(3) According to the nature of the criminal offence a court may also adjudge restriction of rights
in cases when such punishment has not been provided for in the sanction of the relevant Section
of the Special Part of this Law, or in addition to the restriction provided for in the sanction of the
relevant Section of the Special Part of this Law another restriction of rights may also be
determined.
(4) If a person has been convicted with deprivation of liberty and with restriction of rights, then
the prohibition referred to in this Section shall apply not only to the period when the person is
serving the deprivation of liberty, but also to the period to be served for the additional
punishment adjudged in the judgment, calculated from the day when he or she completes serving
the basic punishment. In the determining of such additional punishment jointly with suspended
sentence, the period of serving the additional punishment shall be calculated from the day when
the probationary period specified for the person starts. In determining of such additional
punishment jointly with other forms of basic punishment, the period for serving the additional
punishment shall be calculated from the day when the judgement of conviction or the prosecutor's
penal order has entered into effect.
Section 45.1 Probationary Supervision
(1) Probationary supervision is an additional punishment which a court may adjudge or a
prosecutor determine in a penal order as a compulsory measure, in order to ensure the supervision
of the behaviour of a convicted person or person whose additional punishment has been
determined by prosecutor's order, encourage social reintegration of this person and prevent him
or her from committing new criminal offences.
(2) Probationary supervision shall be imposed only in the cases set out in the Special Part of this
Law, for a period of one year and up to three years. The prosecutor, when determining
probationary supervision in the penal order, may impose no more than half of the maximum
duration of probationary supervision provided for in the respective Section of the Special Part of
this Law. In the cases provided for in the Special Part of this Law a person may also be applied
probationary supervision for a longer period, however, the period may not exceed five years.
(3) During the period of probationary supervision the convicted person or person whose
additional punishment has been determined by a prosecutor's penal order, shall fulfil the duties
stipulated by the State Probation Service.
(4) If probationary service is applied together with deprivation of liberty, execution thereof shall
be commenced after serving of the basic punishment, but if a fine or community service is
imposed - from the moment when the judgement of conviction and a prosecutor's penal order has
entered into effect. In cases where a person is conditionally released from execution of the
punishment of deprivation of liberty prior to completion thereof, the additional punishment -
17
probationary supervision - shall be commenced from the moment that the supervision of a person
after conditional release prior to completion of punishment has ended.
(5) A court may reduce the period of probationary supervision, or revoke it, according to a
submission by the State Probation Service.
(6) If a convicted person or a person whose additional punishment has been determined by
prosecutor's penal order commits a new crime during the period of serving the additional
punishment, a court shall substitute the additional unserved punishment period with deprivation
of liberty and shall determine the final punishment in accordance with the provisions provided for
in Sections 51 and 52 of this Law.
(7) If a person who has been determined probationary supervision by the judgment of court or the
prosecutor's penal order violates provisions thereof without a justified reason, a court, after
receipt of a submission by the State Probation Service, may substitute the additional unserved
punishment term, counting two probationary supervision days as one day of deprivation of
liberty.
Section 55. Suspended Sentence
(1) If, in determining a punishment - deprivation of liberty - for a period exceeding three months
but not exceeding five years, or not exceeding three years if an especially serious crime has been
committed, a court, taking into account the nature of the committed criminal offence and the
harm caused, the personality of the offender and other circumstances of the matter, becomes
convinced that the offender, without serving the punishment, will not commit violations of the
law in the future, it may punish the offender with a suspended sentence.
(2) In such case, the court shall decide that the execution of sentence is suspended if, within the
period of probation adjudicated by it, the convicted person does not commit a new criminal
offence, does not violate public order, and fulfils the obligations provided for in the law
governing the execution of criminal punishments and stipulated by the State Probation Service.
(3) In imposing suspended sentence, the court shall determine a period of probation of not less
than six months and up to five years. The period of probation shall commence on the day of the
entering into effect of the court judgment. The specified period of probation may not be less than
the applied period of deprivation of liberty.
(4) In imposing suspended sentence, circumstances, which the court has found material for not
serving the punishment, shall be set out in the judgment.
(5) In imposing a suspended sentence, additional punishments may be imposed. Additional
punishment - probationary supervision - shall be executed only if the court decides to execute the
basic punishment determined in the judgment.
(6) [16 October 2014]
(7) [16 October 2014]
(8) [16 October 2014]
18
(9) If a convicted person upon whom a suspended sentence has been imposed, without justifiable
reason does not fulfil the obligations provided for in the law governing the execution of criminal
punishments or stipulated by the State Probation Service, the court, on the basis of a submission
by the State Probation Service, may take a decision to serve the punishment determined in the
judgment for the convicted person, or to extend the period of probation up to one year.
(10) If a convicted person upon whom a suspended sentence has been imposed, commits a new
criminal offence during the period of probation, his or her imposed punishment shall be
implemented and the court shall determine punishment for him or her in accordance with the
provisions provided for in Sections 51 and 52 of this Law.
(101
) If a convicted person, upon whom a suspended sentence has been imposed, commits a new
criminal offence through negligence or is a minor and if he or she is released from criminal
liability for the new criminal offence in accordance with Section 58 of this Law or is released
from the punishment in accordance with Section 59 of this Law, or a fine or community service
has been determined as the basic punishment to him or her for the new criminal offence, a court
may take a decision to extend the probationary period up to one year.
(11) Imposing of a suspended sentence shall not be determined for a person for committing of an
intentional criminal offence, if the person has been previously convicted with deprivation of
liberty and the criminal record thereof has not been set aside or extinguished in accordance with
the procedures laid down in law. Imposing of a suspended sentence shall not be determined for a
person who has committed the crime provided for in Section 159 or 160 of this Law.
Section 61. Conditional Release Prior to Completion of Punishment
(1) A person who has been convicted with deprivation of liberty, except temporary deprivation of
liberty, may be conditionally released prior to completion of his or her basic punishment, if there
is a reason to believe that he or she is able to adapt in the society after release without committing
a criminal offence.
(2) Taking into account the personality and behaviour of the convicted person, conditional release
prior to completion of punishment may be ordered, if:
1) the convicted person has reached a certain result of resocialisation;
2) the convicted person to the extent possible has voluntarily made compensation for the
losses caused by his or her crime;
3) the convicted person has the possibilities to acquire means of subsistence in legal way
after his or her release;
4) the period specified in a law governing the execution of criminal punishments after
imposition of a punishment for the violation of the punishment serving regime has
lapsed and there are no effective punishments for administrative violations committed
during execution of the punishment of deprivation of liberty;
5) the convicted person is solving and is ready to continue to solve his or her
psychological problems which have caused or may cause commitment of criminal
offence;
6) the convicted person has agreed to treatment for alcoholism or addiction to narcotic,
psychotropic or toxic substances, if he or she has committed the criminal offence due to
alcoholism or addiction to narcotic, psychotropic or toxic substances.
19
(21
) Upon conditional release prior to completion of punishment a convicted person may be
applied electronic monitoring in conformity with the following conditions:
1) the convicted person agrees to electronic monitoring;
2) implementation of electronic monitoring is possible at the place of residence of the
convicted person;
3) application of electronic monitoring will promote inclusion of the convicted person in
the society.
(3) Conditional release prior to completion of punishment may be proposed if the convicted
person has actually served:
1) not less than half of the punishment imposed for a less serious crime committed;
2) not less than two-thirds of the punishment imposed, if it has been imposed for a serious
crime, or if the convicted person is a person who has previously been convicted with
deprivation of liberty for an intentional crime and the criminal record for this crime has
not been set aside or extinguished;
3) not less than three-quarters of the punishment imposed, if it has been adjudged for an
especially serious crime or if the convicted person is a person who has previously been
conditionally released prior to completion of punishment and has newly committed an
intentional crime during the period of the unserved punishment;
4) twenty-five years of a punishment of deprivation of liberty, if the convicted person is a
person for whom life imprisonment has been imposed.
(31
) If application of electronic monitoring is possible in accordance with that laid down in
Paragraph 2.1 of this Section, conditional release prior to completion of punishment with
determination of electronic monitoring may be proposed, if the convicted person has actually
served:
1) not less than one third of the punishment imposed for a less serious crime;
2) not less than half of the punishment imposed, if it has been imposed for a serious crime,
as well as if the convicted person is a person who has previously been convicted with
deprivation of liberty for an intentional crime and the criminal record for this crime has
not been set aside or extinguished;
3) not less than two-thirds of the punishment imposed, if it has been adjudged for an
especially serious crime, as well as if the convicted person is a person who has
previously been conditionally released prior to completion of punishment and has newly
committed an intentional crime during the period of the unserved punishment;
4) not less than twenty-four years of a punishment of deprivation of liberty, if the
convicted person is a person for whom life imprisonment has been imposed.
(4) During the unserved part of the punishment a person who has been conditionally released
prior to completion of punishment shall fulfil the obligations provided for in the law governing
the execution of criminal punishments or stipulated by the State Probation Service. If a convicted
person upon whom a suspended sentence has been imposed, does not fulfil the abovementioned
obligations without a justifiable reason, the court, on the basis of a submission by the State
Probation Service, may take a decision to execute the part of unserved punishment.
(41
) If a person who has been conditionally released prior to completion of punishment and who
has been applied electronic monitoring, without justifiable reason does not fulfil the obligations
20
related to electronic monitoring laid down in the law governing the execution of criminal
punishments, revokes his or her consent to electronic monitoring or implementation of electronic
monitoring is not possible anymore in the conditions in which he or she lives, the court, on the
basis of a submission by the State Probation Service, may take a decision to execute the part of
unserved punishment.
(42
) If a person who has been conditionally released prior to completion of punishment and who
has been applied electronic monitoring, has, in exemplary manner, fulfilled the obligations
provided for in the law governing the execution of criminal punishments or stipulated by the
State Probation Service and the period laid down in Section 61, Paragraph three of this Law has
set in, according to which conditional release prior to completion of punishment is possible
without determination of electronic monitoring, the court, on the basis of a submission by the
State Probation Service, may take a decision to revoke electronic monitoring. If the court takes a
decision to revoke electronic monitoring, the convicted person is monitored in accordance with
the provisions for monitoring of the convicted persons conditionally released prior to completion
of punishment provided for in the laws and regulations governing the execution of criminal
punishments.
(43
) After release, the life-sentenced prisoner who has been conditionally released prior to
completion of punishment shall be under supervision of the State Probation Service for life and
shall fulfil the obligations provided for in the law governing the execution of criminal
punishments and stipulated by the State Probation Service. If the life-sentenced prisoner who has
been conditionally released prior to completion of punishment does not, without justifiable
reason, fulfil the obligations provided for in the law governing the execution of criminal
punishments and stipulated by the State Probation Service, the court may, on the basis of a
submission by the State Probation Service, take a decision to replace the period of supervision of
conditionally released with deprivation of liberty for life (life imprisonment).
(44
) If a life-sentenced prisoner who has been conditionally released prior to completion of
punishment and who has been applied electronic monitoring does not, without justifiable reason,
fulfil the obligations related to electronic monitoring laid down in the law governing the
execution of criminal punishments, revokes his or her consent to electronic monitoring or
implementation of electronic monitoring is not possible anymore in the conditions in which he or
she lives, the court shall, on the basis of a submission by the State Probation Service, take a
decision to replace the period of supervision of conditionally released with deprivation of liberty
for life (life imprisonment).
(5) If a person who has been conditionally released prior to completion of punishment commits a
new criminal offence during the period of the punishment unserved, the court shall determine
punishment for him or her in accordance with the provisions provided for in Sections 51 and 52
of this Law.
(6) Conditional release prior to completion of punishment shall not be applied, if it has been
imposed on a person of legal age for an especially serious crime committed against a person who
has not attained the age of sixteen years, and is related to sexual violence.
The State Probation Service Law
Section 16.1 Electronic Monitoring Information System
21
(1) The Electronic Monitoring Information System shall be an information system the
administrator of which is the State Probation Service and in which data on the location of such
probation client at certain place and time are processed who has been conditionally released and
for whom electronic monitoring has been determined.
(2) Upon processing the information referred to in Paragraph one of this Section, the purpose of
the Electronic Monitoring Information System shall be to ensure intensive and operative control
of the movement of such probation client who has been conditionally released and for whom
electronic monitoring has been determined.
(3) The information processed in the Electronic Monitoring Information System is restricted
access information.
The Criminal Procedure Law
Section 242. Procedural Compulsory Measures
(1) In order to ensure criminal proceedings, the rights of a person may be restricted with the
following procedural compulsory measures:
1) detention;
2) placement in a medical institution for the performance of an expert-examination;
3) conveyance by force.
(2) Security measures are also procedural compulsory measures. Such measures may be applied
only to a suspect or accused.
Section 243. Security Measures
(1) The following are security measures:
1) [12 March 2009];
11
) notification of the change of the place of residence;
12
) reporting to the police authority at a specific time;
2) prohibition from approaching a specific person or location;
3) prohibition from a specific employment;
4) prohibition from departing from the State;
5) residence in a specific place;
6) personal guarantee;
7) bail;
8) placement under police supervision;
9) house arrest;
10) arrest.
(2) The following may also be applied to a minor as a security measure:
1) placement under the supervision of parents or guardians;
2) placement in a social correctional educational institution.
(3) Placement under the supervision of a unit commander (supervisor) may be applied to a soldier
as a security measure.
22
(4) The security measures referred to in Paragraph one, Clauses 1.1- 4 of this Section may also be
applied additionally to any other security measure.
Section 253. Prohibition for Approaching a Specific Person or Location
(1) Prohibition from approaching a specific person is a restriction upon a suspect or accused,
provided for with a decision of the person directing the proceedings, from being located closer
than the distance referred to in a decision from the relevant person, from having physical or
visual contact with such person, and using means of communication, or techniques for
transferring information, in order to make contact with such person.
(2) A prohibition from approaching a specific location is a restriction, provided for with a
decision of the person directing the proceedings, upon a suspect or accused from visiting the
relevant location, or being located closer than the distance referred to in the decision.
(3) Approaching a specific person or location shall not be recognised as a violation of the
prohibition referred to in Paragraphs one and two of this Section, if such approaching takes place
within the framework of criminal proceedings, fulfilling the instructions of the person directing
the proceedings.”
23
Litauen
”Litauens straffelov giver ikke mulighed for at pålægge borgere en straf, som direkte forbyder en
pågældende borger at besøge bestemte steder i det offentlige rum.
Man kan dog være opmærksom på et par bemærkninger hertil:
1) Hvis den pågældende borger er straffet efter bestemmelserne i straffelovens artikel 721, hvilket
omfatter forpligtelsen til at leve adskilt fra offeret og/eller ikke at nærme sig offeret tættere end
den fastsatte afstand (polititilhold), kan retten pålægge den dømte en forpligtelse til ikke at
nærme sig offeret tættere end den fastsatte afstand, hvis dette er nødvendigt for at beskytte
offeret. Retten kan dermed pålægge den dømte et forbud mod at besøge offentlige steder, hvor
offeret fast opholder sig og/eller arbejder, herunder også en natklub eller andre steder i nattelivet.
Heraf fremgår det dog, at forbuddet mod at besøge bestemte offentlige steder ikke er knyttet til en
lovovertrædelse begået på det pågældende sted, men derimod er pålagt for at beskytte et offer,
der f.eks. arbejder på en natklub.
2) Ifølge artikel 31 i kodekset for administrative lovovertrædelser kan retten pålægge en person,
som er dømt for en administrativ lovovertrædelse, et (tillægs)forbud mod at deltage i forskellige
former for events, som afholdes i det offentlige rum. Forbuddets varighed kan løbe fra en måned
til to år.”
24
Malta
”1. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede generelle forbud mod ophold på
bestemte steder i det offentlige rum?
I den henseende henvises der til en maltesisk forordning (subsidiær lovgivning 10.33) af 11.
august 1978 om opretholdelsen af den offentlige orden på sportspladser, som tillader, at enhver
person, der overtræder bestemmelser, foruden sanktionering ved domfældelse med en bøde, kan
forbydes adgang til en sportsplads i en periode på højst ét år.”
25
Nederlandene
”Nederlandene (NL) vedtog i 2010 en lov vedr. fodboldhooliganisme og offentlig
utryghedsskabende adfærd, der giver hjemmel til udstedelse af opholdsforbud for individer eller
grupper i det offentlige rum, herunder fodboldstadier, nattelivet, parker, legepladser og lign.
Opholdsforbud kan udstedes, hvis et individ eller en gruppe enten er mistænkt for overtrædelse af
straffeloven eller har udvist gentagende utryghedsskabende adfærd. Udstedelse af opholdsforbud
kan ske både administrativt og strafferetligt.
Ved udstedelse på administrativt grundlag kan den pågældende borgmester indføre
opholdsforbud mod individer eller grupper på maksimalt 90 dage for gentagende forstyrrende
opførsel. Det inkluderer bl.a. tydeligt beruset tilstand, utryghedsskabende adfærd og tiggeri.
Opholdsforbuddet kan gives til personer ned til 12 år og kan forlænges maksimalt tre gange inden
for to år.
Individer kan ud over opholdsforbud også pålægges en rapporteringspligt, hvor vedkommende
skal møde på en politistation inden for et givent tidsinterval for derved at bevise, at man ikke er
tilstede på områder eller ved arrangementer, hvortil man har opholdsforbud.
Det administrative opholdsforbud bruges primært i større byer.
Ved udstedelse af opholdsforbud på strafferetligt grundlag kan anklagemyndigheden indføre et
opholdsforbud for et individ, der er mistænkt for overtrædelse af straffeloven. Strafferetligt
opholdsforbud kan gives til specifikke områder, hvor anklagemyndigheden ser en risiko for, at
den mistænkte vil begå forbrydelser eller udvise anden utryghedsskabende adfærd.
Opholdsforbuddet for den mistænkte kan være op til 90 dage med mulighed for forlængelse
maksimalt tre gange. Ved domsfældelse kan domstolen som en del af straffen udstede
opholdsforbud, forsamlingsforbud og/eller rapporteringspligt i op til fem år.
Justitsministeriet har evalueret lovens virkning og resultaterne forventes offentliggjort til maj.”
26
Polen
“The answer provided covers issues related to criminal law, where prohibitions to stay in certain
places in criminal proceedings are normalized in the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure
(hereinafter the CCP) - (preventive measures) and in the Criminal Code (hereinafter the CC) -
(penal measures).
Pursuant to Article 249 § 1 of the CCP, preventive measures may be used exclusively for two
purposes: 1) to secure the proper course of criminal proceedings and 2) to prevent the accused
(suspect) from committing a new, serious crime. Preventive measures have a safeguarding
function (they secure, protect criminal proceedings from unlawful obstruction), and at the same
time a preventive function (they prevent unlawful influence on the proper course of proceedings)
and a protective function (they protect the legal order and society from the committing of a new
serious crime).
Preventive measures can be applied by the court and by the prosecutor. The only body authorized
to use pre-trial detention is the court. In pre-trial proceedings, pre-trial detention at the
prosecutor's request is applied by the district court in whose district the proceedings are
conducted, and, in urgent cases, also another district court (Article 250 § 1 and 2 of the CCP).
Other preventive measures are applied by the court, and in pre-trial proceedings also by the
prosecutor (art. 250 § 4 of the CCP).
One of the preventive measures is police supervision specified in Article 275 of the CCP. The
person under supervision is obliged to comply with the requirements contained in the court's or
prosecutor's decision. This obligation may consist in the prohibition to leave a certain place of
residence, to report to the supervising authority at specified intervals, to notify it of the intended
departure and the date of return, to prohibit contact with the victim or other persons, to prohibit
the defendant from staying in certain places, as well as other restrictions on the defendant's
freedom necessary for the execution of the supervision (Article 275 § 2 of the CCP).
In the CC, Article 39, paragraph 2b specifies a punitive measure in the form of a prohibition to
stay in certain environments or places, to contact certain persons, to approach certain persons or
to leave a certain place of residence without the court's consent. The penal measure in question
can be adjudged both along with the penalty and on its own pursuant to article 59 of CC or article
60 § 7 of CC. Particular forms of penal measure can be imposed on their own, they can also be
cumulated in such a way as to achieve specific penological aims. The mechanism that guarantees
the observance of the imposed prohibitions and the control of their execution is the possibility to
oblige the offender to report at specified intervals to the Police or to another designated body,
which is a government administration body or a local government body competent as to the place
of the convicted person's residence (see Art. 181a KKW [Executive Penal Code]). In addition to
the obligation to report to the Police, such control may be carried out by means of an electronic
supervision system.
Article 39, section 2c of the CC specifies the prohibition of entry to a mass event and in section
2d the prohibition of entry to a gambling center and participation in gambling.
Article 72 of the CC specifies obligations that the court may impose or imposes in the case of a
sentence with conditional suspension of its execution. Among these obligations, it should be
27
pointed out in point 7 that the person should refrain from staying in certain environments or
places, and in point 7a that the person should refrain from contacting the wronged party or other
persons in a specified manner or approaching the wronged party or other persons. The time and
manner of performing the imposed obligations shall be determined by the Court after hearing the
convicted person.
However, the catalog of trial obligations upon conditional sentencing is not closed, which is
indicated by the phrase contained in the provision of Art. 72 par. 1 item 8 of the CC that the court
may oblige the convicted person to "conduct in an appropriate manner". This solution is a clear
breach of the principle of defining penalties and punishment measures. It is motivated by the
principle of individualization of punishment, which, in relation to conditional suspension of
sentence execution, requires flexibility in defining probation terms. Thus, it helps to adjust the
obligation to the preventive-criminal needs that the criminal law is supposed to satisfy towards
the offender, and it also allows for more effective support of compliance with the legal order
defined in other branches of law by obliging the convicted person to behave appropriately during
the probation period.
It should also be emphasized that punitive measures under Article 39 of the CC and obligations
under Article 72 of the CC can be imposed only by the court.
At the same time, the Department of International Cooperation and Human Rights signals that in
matters related to preparing draft amendments to the law it is worth using the existing
possibilities offered by the inquiry to the Legicoop network, while in the area of regulations
related to the maintenance of public order the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration
remains competent to respond.”
28
Portugal
”1. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede generelle forbud mod ophold på
bestemte steder i det offentlige rum.
Retten til frihed er en af den portugisiske stats grundlæggende rettigheder og den portugisiske
forfatnings artikel 27 om fri bevægelighed beskriver således: Under normale omstændigheder kan
ingen borgeres frihed og fri bevægelighed begrænses, undtagen som følge af en
domstolsafgørelse, der kan straffes med fængsel eller den retlige anvendelse af en
sikkerhedsforanstaltning.
Undtagelser til dette princip er som den vi i øjeblikket opleveler i betragtning af Coovid19-
pandemien, hvor det gennem den iværksatte nødretstilstand, midlertidigt er tilladt at begrænse
borgeres ret til bevægelse. Nødretstilstanden kan kun vedtages i bestemte tilfælde, som fx en
offentlig katastrofe. Nødretstilstanden kan dog kun påvirke den frie borgeres rettigheder i et
begrænset omfang og varighed og kun ved hjælp af midler som antages for værende strengt
nødvendigt, for at kunne genoprette normaliteten.
Ud over nødretstilstand, er der også den mere juridiske term ”belejret tilstand”, som er et mere
begrænset begreb, som gør sig gældende i usædvanlige situationer, hvor magthandlinger truer den
nuværende demokratisk valgte regering eller truer statens suverænitet, uafhængighed, territorial
integritet eller demokratiske forfatning. I forbindelse med belejret tilstand kan forbud på
offentlige områder sættes i værk.
2. Hvorvidt der er regler, som gør det muligt at udstede forbud til enkeltpersoner mod ophold i
bestemte områder, herunder f.eks. i nattelivet, som tillægsstraf til en dom for kriminalitet.
Ved pålæggelse af fængselsstraf, giver den portugisiske straffelov retten mulighed for at
suspendere afsoning, hvis den specifikke dom ikke overstiger fem år. Retten har hermed
mulighed for at pålægge den dømte specifikke regler for adfærd og endog pligter i henhold til
straffelovens artikel §51 og §52. Disse artikler indeholder ikke udtømmende lister, og det
vurderes derfor af retten i den enkelte sag om de krævede regler for adfærd og pligter ikke
overstiger, hvad der er rimeligt at kræve af den dømte.
Som resultat vil det derfor også være muligt at forbyde dømte personer at besøge bestemte steder,
herunder også natteliv.
3. Andre oplysninger, som skønnes relevante i forhold til de to ovenstående forhold.
I øjeblikket er Portugal i nødretstilstand for at bekæmpe truslen fra Covid19-pandemien. Derfor
er visse begrænsninger for fri bevægelighed på plads. Derfor kan borgere kun bevæge sig frit
rundt, hvis nogle af de juridiske undtagelser for den specifikke bevægelse er bekræftet.”
29
Rumænien
”1.Rumænsk lovgivning muliggør ikke udstedelse af generelle forbud mod ophold på bestemte
steder i det offentlige rum, med undtagelse af restriktioner iværksat i forbindelse med Covid19
pandemien såsom udgangsforbud på bestemte tidsrum.
2. Der kan udstedes forbud mod enkeltpersoners ret til at opholde sig i bestemte områder,
deriblandt nattelivet, f.eks. som konsekvens af en dom, såvel som i forbindelse med
prøveløsladelser.
3. Et opholdsforbud kan udstedes i forbindelse med selve straffesagen, dvs. inden en eventuel
dom er afsagt, som en form for juridisk overvågning.”
30
Slovakiet
“1. Rules which makes it possible to issue general prohibitions of soujourn at specific
locations in the public space.
Issuance of prohibition without prior conviction is possible but it is necessary to identify an
individual/group of individuals to whom such prohibition would apply.
From the perspective of criminal law, only below-mentioned penalties imposable upon convicted
individuals may restrict attendance of certain places (Section 62 CC - punishment of prohibition
of residence, Section 62a CC - punishment of prohibition of attendance of public events and
appropriate restrictions according to Section 51 (3) d) CC).
However, police officer may within its authority order anybody not to enter a designated place if
required so for the national security, maintenance of public order, the protection of health or the
protection of rights and freedoms of other persons:
Act No.171/1993 Coll. on the Police Force (Part II: Authority of the Police Officer) Article 27:
Authority to Forbid Entry into a Designated Place, or Order to Remain at a Designated Place
If required for the national security, maintenance of public order, the protection of health or the
protection of rights and freedoms of other persons, a police officer is authorised to order anybody
a) not to enter a designated place or remain there for the absolutely necessary amount of time,
b) to remain at a designated place for the absolutely necessary amount of time.
2. Rules, which makes it possible to issue prohibitions of sojourn at specific locations, such
as in nightlife, for individuals, as a consecutive sentence for a criminal conviction.
The Slovak Criminal Code (CC) knows the punishment of prohibition of residence (Section 62
CC). Restriction of the possibility of the convicted person to remain in a designated area or in a
particular district may be imposed for one to five years for an intentional criminal offence if the
protection of public order, family, health, morals or assets so requires with regard to the previous
conduct of the offender and the place of the commission of the act.
The punishment of prohibition of attendance of public events (Section 62a CC) is close in its
nature to the purpose of Section 62 CC. The court may impose the punishment of prohibition of
attendance at public events for up to ten years if the offender commits an intentional criminal
offence in connection with attendance at a public event or if such is required to protect public
order, health, morals or assets with regard to the previous conduct of the offender and the
circumstances of the commission of the offence. The convicted person would be thus prohibited
from attending sporting, cultural or other public events to the extent determined in the court
decision.
Similar purpose is also fulfilled by the so-called appropriate restrictions according to Section 51
(3) d) of the Criminal Code which shall be imposed by the court as part of the probational
supervision in case of conditional deferral of punishment of prison sentence. Restrictions are
mainly based on the prohibition to attend designated public events, to consume alcoholic
beverages and other addictive substances, to meet with persons who have a negative impact on
31
the offender or who were his accomplices or accessories to a criminal offence, to enter reserved
places or areas where they committed the criminal offence, to take part in hazardous games,
gambling, gaming machines and betting, etc.”
32
Slovenien
”Sloveniens Straffelov [Criminal Code] indeholder bestemmelser om opholdsforbud på bestemte
steder, der kan indføres under Straffelovens Artikel 65, paragraf 3, subparagraf 8. Derudover
indeholder Straffelovens Artikel 71.a en sikkerhedsforanstaltning, hvorunder en gerningsmand
kan idømmes et polititilhold eller et kommunikationsforbud med offeret for en kriminel handling,
som gerningsmanden har begået, i en periode mellem en måned og tre år (dog kun for visse
kriminelle handlinger, herunder kriminelle handlinger mod liv og krop, ære og omdømme,
seksuel integritet, menneskers sundhed og anden strafbar handling med elementer af vold).
Ved frigivelse af en dømt person på prøveløsladelse er der også mulighed for at indføre
adgangsforbud til bestemte steder (artikel 88, stk. 8, afsnit 8).
Slovenien har desuden bestemmelser om opholdsforbud på bestemte steder i sektorlovgivningen,
herunder i Loven om Forebyggelse af Familievold [the Prevention of Family Violence Act] og
Loven om Politiopgaver og Autorisationer [The Act on Police Tasks and Authorisations]. I disse
tilfælde er der hovedsageligt tale om kortsigtede administrative foranstaltninger, der muliggør
frihedsberøvelse med bestemmelser om hurtig domstolsprøvelse.”
33
Spanien
”Opholdsforbud behandles i spansk lovgivning som I) straf og som II) beskyttelsesforanstaltning.
I. Opholdsforbud som straf:
Straffelovens afsnit 3 vedr. rettighedsfrakendelser fastsætter følgende:
§ 39: Rettighedsfrakendelser er:
f) Frakendelse af retten til at opsøge eller opholde sig på bestemte steder.
§ 40:
Stk. 3.: Frakendelsen af retten til at opsøge eller opholde sig på bestemte steder vil have en
varighed på op til 10 år. Forbud mod at nærme sig ofret eller ofrets familie eller andre personer,
samt forbud mod at kommunikere med disse, vil have en varighed på én måned til 10 år.
§ 48:
1. Frakendelsen af retten til at opsøge eller opholde sig på bestemte steder forbyder den
dømte person at opsøge eller opholde sig på det sted, hvor vedkommende har begået
forbrydelsen, eller det sted, hvor ofret eller ofrets familie opholder sig, hvis der er tale om
forskellige steder. I de tilfælde hvor der foreligger en erklæring om intellektuelt handicap
eller et handicap, der skyldes en mental forstyrrelse, skal den konkrete sag undersøges,
idet der skal tages højde for de retsgoder, der skal beskyttes samt for hvad, der er til den
handicappede persons bedste, som evt. vil skulle have ledsage- og støtteforanstaltninger
stillet til rådighed for at kunne opfylde den pålagte beskyttelsesforanstaltningen.
2. Forbuddet mod at nærme sig ofret, eller ofrets familie eller andre personer som dommeren
eller domstolen fastsætter, forbyder den dømte at nærme sig disse personer uanset, hvor
de måtte opholde sig, samt at nærme sig disse personers bopæl, arbejdsplads og hvilket
som helst andet sted, hvor de normalt plejer at opholde sig. Hvis der er børn, ophæves den
samværs-, kommunikations- og opholdsret, der måtte være stadfæstet i en civilretsdom,
indtil den dømte har afsonet sin fulde straf.
3. Forbud mod at kommunikere med ofret, eller ofrets familie eller andre, som dommeren
eller domstolen fastsætter, forbyder den dømte at kommunikere med disse personer
skriftligt, verbalt eller visuelt og ved brug af et hvilket som helst kommunikations- eller
computermedie.
4. Dommeren eller domstolen kan beslutte, at kontrollen med disse foranstaltninger
foretages ved hjælp af elektroniske medier, der muliggør denne kontrol.
Stk. 5 Vedrørende tillægsstraffe
§ 57:
1. Domstolene kan for forbrydelserne drab, abort, vold, frihedsberøvelse, tortur og seksuelle
krænkelser samt for forbrydelser mod den moralske integritet, privatlivet, retten til eget
billede og hjemmets ukrænkelighed, æren, kulturarven og den socioøkonomiske orden,
henset til gerningens grovhed eller gerningsmandens farlighed, i deres afgørelse pålægge
et eller flere af de i artikel 48 omhandlede forbud, der ikke må overskride 10 år, hvis der
34
er tale om en alvorlig forbrydelse og fem år, hvis der er tale om en mindre alvorlig
forbrydelse.
Hvis den dømte er blevet pålagt en fængselsstraf, og dommeren eller domstolen i deres
afgørelse har pålagt vedkommende et eller flere af ovennævnte forbud, vil de have en
varighed på mellem ét eller 10 år mere end fængselsstraffen angivet i dommen, hvis der er
tale om en alvorlig forbrydelse, og mellem ét og fem år, hvis forbrydelsen er mindre
alvorlig. I dette tilfælde vil fængselsstraffen og de førnævnte forbud afsones samtidigt.
2. I tilfælde af forbrydelser, som de nævnte i første afsnit i stk. 1 i denne paragraf, der
udføres mod ægtefælle eller tidligere ægtefælle, eller mod personer som har eller har haft
et lignende forhold uden samliv til dømte, eller mod slægtninge i opstigende og
nedstigende linje eller søskende uanset om slægtskabet er gennem blod, adoption eller
tilhørsforhold, og uanset om det er dømtes egne eller dømtes ægtefælles eller samlevers,
eller mod mindreårige eller personer med handicap, der har brug for særlig beskyttelse, og
som samlever med dømte eller som er under dømtes eller dennes ægtefælles eller
samlevers myndighed, værgemål, pleje eller faktiske beskyttelse, eller mod en hvilken
som helst anden personer, der er en del af dømtes familiebofællesskab, eller mod
personer, der grundet deres særlige sårbarhed er underlagt dømtes myndighed eller
værgemål i en offentlig eller privat institution, vil dømte under alle omstændigheder blive
pålagt den i afsnit 2 i § 48 angivne straf i en periode, der ikke overstiger 10 år, hvis
forbrydelsen er alvorlig, og fem år, hvis forbrydelsen er mindre alvorlig med forbehold
for det angivne i andet afsnit i forrige stk.
3. Det er ligeledes muligt at pålægge fodbudene angivet i § 48 i en periode, der ikke må
overstige seks måneder for forbrydelser angivet i første afsnit af stk. 1 i nærværende §,
som anses for værende mindre alvorlige forbrydelser.
II. Beskyttelsesforanstaltning
§ 544 bis
I de tilfælde, hvor en forbrydelse, som de angivne i Straffelovens § 57, er genstand for
undersøgelse, kan dommer eller domstol på begrundet vis eller når det er absolut nødvendigt for
at kunne beskytte ofret, pålægge sigtede et forbud mod at opholde sig på et bestemt sted, kvarter,
kommune, provins eller anden lokal enhed, samt region.
Med samme begrundelse kan dommer eller domstol, efter et forsigtighedsprincip og med en
behørig graduering, pålægge sigtede et forbud mod at opsøge bestemte steder, kvarterer,
kommuner, provinser eller andre lokale enheder eller regioner, eller forbud mod at nærme sig
eller kommunikere med visse personer.
For at kunne iværksætte disse foranstaltninger skal den sigtedes økonomiske situation tages i
betragtning ligesom sundhedssituation, familiære situation og arbejde. I særdeleshed bør der
tages hensyn til sigtedes mulighed for at videreføre sit arbejde, både mens foranstaltningerne
varer og efter disses ophør.
I tilfælde af at den sigtede ikke overholder den foranstaltning, som dommer eller domstol har
pålagt vedkommende, kan dommer eller domstol indkalde til møde for retten i henhold til § 505
mhp. at vedtage varetægtsfængsling i overensstemmelse med det fastsatte i § 503 og med
beskyttelsesforanstaltningen angivet i § 544 ter eller med andre beskyttelsesforanstaltninger, der
35
indebærer en større frihedsbegrænsning, hvortil graden af undladelse, årsagerne, alvorligheden og
omstændighederne ved undladelsen skal tages i betragtning, med forbehold for det straffeansvar
som undladelsen vil kunne medføre.
Uddybende forklaring:
Det er tale om en foranstaltning, der begrænser en grundlæggende rettighed, som er det frie valg
af bopæl og den frie bevægelighed inden for det nationale territorium (§ 19 i den spanske
Grundlov). Af samme årsag, er det kun en dommer eller domstol, der kan pålægge denne
restriktive foranstaltning.
På det strafferetlige område har forbuddet mod at udøve denne ovennævnte grundlæggende
rettighed en dobbelt karakter: rettighedsfrakendelse og restriktiv sikkerhedsforanstaltning vedr.
bevægelsesfrihed, idet den afhængigt af sagen, kan pålægges som straf, som
sikkerhedsforanstaltning og som midlertidig foranstaltning.
Som kontaktforbud er der udelukkende tale om en tillægsstraf, som dommer og domstole kan
vælge at anvende, dog ikke i sager om mishandling i hjemmet, hvor det er ufravigeligt at pålægge
dømte et kontaktforbud med ofret eller med andre relevante personer.
Foranstaltningen er meget bred, idet det ikke er nødvendigt med en territorial afgrænsning
eftersom ordet ”steder” kan fortolkes bredt (provins, kommune) eller snævert (kvarter,
boligområde, konkret hus). Alle disse fortolkningsmuligheder eksisterer og skal konkretiseres i
den konkrete sag i overensstemmelse med graden af den grundlæggende forbrydelses alvorlighed
og andre behov, som skønnes hensigtsmæssige.””
36
Sverige
”1. I Sverige er der ingen juridiske muligheder for at indføre generelle forbud mod at opholde sig
på specifikke offentlige steder for på forhånd identificerede grupper. Dog har myndigheder
beføjelse til at foretage midlertidige afspærringer ved risiko for uorden, ulykker eller som led i
efterforskninger. Ligesom der kan indføres et kontaktforbud i forhold til individuelle beskyttede
personer.
2. I Sverige kan et opholdsforbud ikke indføres som en særlig sanktion for en forbrydelse. Men
under betinget løsladelse eller prøveløsladelse kan Kriminalvården (den svenske kriminalforsorg)
udstede regler, der skal følges af den dømte. En sådan regulering kan henvise til et forbud mod at
opholde sig et bestemt sted. Flere oplysninger er tilgængelige på regeringens hjemmeside:
Utökade kontroll- och stödmöjligheter avseende skyddstillsynsdömda - Regeringen.se”
37
Tjekkiet
”1. Regler, som gør det muligt at udstede generelle forbud mod ophold på bestemte steder i det
offentlige rum
Det tjekkiske retssystem giver ikke mulighed for at udstede generelle forbud mod ophold på
bestemte steder i det offentlige rum. I visse tilfælde kan kommuner dog på offentlige steder
regulere f.eks. alkoholforbrug, anvendelse af pyroteknik, drift af gadeproduktion eller adgang
med dyr, men generelt er det ikke muligt at forbyde adgang eller tilstedeværelse på et offentligt
sted. Dette anses at ville være en uforholdsmæssig indblanding i den frie bevægelighed, der er
forankret i chartret om grundlæggende rettigheder og friheder, og som er en del af Tjekkiets
forfatningsorden.
En undtagelse fra ovenstående er regeringens mulighed for at begrænse den frie bevægelighed og
retten til at forsamles fredeligt gennem et krisetiltag under nødretsstilstand eller faretilstand
(Afsnit 5 i lov nr. 240/2000 – kriseloven). Dette har været anvendt under den nuværende
coronavirus-pandemi.
Guvernører i regionerne samt borgmesteren i hovedstaden Prag har en lignende mulighed i
tilfælde af, at i den pågældende region eller hovedstaden Prag erklæres i faretilstand (§ 14, stk. 4 i
kriseloven). Forsamlingsret er også begrænset af forbuddet mod forsamlinger nær Parlamentets
bygninger (§ 1, stk. 4, i lov nr. 84/1990 – lov om forsamlingsret), ligeledes i nærheden af
forfatningsdomstolen eller steder, hvor forfatningsdomstolen handler (Afsnit 25 i lov nr.
182/1993 – lov om forfatningsdomstolen).
2. Regler, som gør det muligt at udstede forbud til enkeltpersoner mod ophold i bestemte
områder, herunder f.eks. i nattelivet, som tillægsstraf til en dom for kriminalitet
I det tjekkiske retssystem kan enkeltpersoner straffes med Forbud mod adgang til sports-, kultur-
og andre sociale arrangementer (Ban from Sport, Cultural and other Social Events – Afsnit 76 i
lov nr. 40/2009 straffeloven). Denne straf kan idømmes for en forsætlig, strafbar handling, både
for en voksen gerningsmand (med en maksimumsstraf på højst 10 år) og for unge (den maksimale
straf kan ikke overstige 5 år). Den kan ikke pålægges en juridisk person. Forbud mod adgang til
sports-, kultur- og andre sociale arrangementer kan idømmes særskilt og i tillæg til en anden straf,
selvom straffeloven ikke udmåler straffen for den givne strafbare handling (Imposing Multiple
Punishments Individually and in Parallel – straffeloven § 53).
Formålet med denne straf er at forhindre gerningsmænd i at begå yderligere kriminel aktivitet ved
eller i forbindelse med sociale arrangementer. Det kan være sports- (f.eks. fodboldkamp), kultur-
(f.eks. musikkoncert, kunstarrangement) eller andre sociale arrangementer (f.eks. fester,
diskoteker). For at straf kan pålægges, skal den forsætlige lovovertrædelse begås i forbindelse
med en sådan aktivitet. Den behøver dog ikke at blive begået på stedet og tidspunktet, hvor
arrangementet afholdes. En strafbar handling i forbindelse med et arrangement kan f.eks. begås
under en rejse til eller efter arrangementets afslutning. Når straffen pålægges, er det nødvendigt
præcist at definere de arrangementer, som lovovertræderen forbydes adgang til (det er ikke muligt
at forbyde adgang til alle arrangementer generelt).
Til Forbud mod adgang til sports-, kultur- og andre sociale arrangementer svarer
indholdsmæssigt Rimelig begrænsning, der består i forpligtelsen til at afstå fra at besøge sports-,
38
kultur- og andre sociale arrangementer og kontakt med bestemte personer (Conditional Waiver of
Punishment with Supervision – straffeloven § 48). Denne begrænsning kan pålægges af
domstolen i tilfælde af en betinget dom eller sammen med flere alternative domme (sammen med
husarrest, samfundstjeneste eller opholdsforbud) og kan også pålægges i forbindelse med betinget
løsladelse. Rimelige begrænsninger og rimelige forpligtelser kan pålægges i prøvetidens varighed
(betinget dom, betinget løsladelse) eller i løbet af straffen.
Som Forbud mod adgang til sports-, kultur- og andre sociale arrangementer er Rimelig
begrænsning en foranstaltning, der skal svare til omstændighederne i en bestemt sag, dvs. en
rimelig begrænsning rettet mod en bestemt kriminogen faktor i en konkret sag.
For tiden drøfter parlamentet et lovforslag, som vil tillade afskaffelse af den pålagte rimelige
begrænsning og rimelige forpligtelse i prøvetiden, hvis den tiltalte kan forventes at føre et
ordentligt liv selv uden.
En anden mulighed er Opholdsforbud (Residence ban – §75 straffeloven). Det pålægges for en
forsætlig strafbar handling, hvor det i betragtning af gerningsmandens tidligere levevis og af
hensyn til stedet, hvor handlingen blev begået, kræves til beskyttelse af den offentlige orden,
familie, sundhed, moral eller ejendom. Formålet med denne straf er primært forebyggende. Det
består i, at gerningsmanden ikke tillades at opholde sig på et bestemt sted eller i et bestemt
distrikt under afsoning af dommen. Stedet eller distriktet, som straffen gælder for, skal være på
tjekkisk territorium. Et sted er en kommune, et distrikt kan være en territorial del af en kommune
eller en territorialt adskilt del af territoriet, der omfatter flere kommuner, dvs. en region eller flere
regioner. Straffen kan ikke gælde for et bestemt hus eller en lejlighed, og det kan heller ikke
omfatte hele Tjekkiet. Opholdsforbuddet kan pålægges i en periode på 1 til 10 år. Denne form for
straf kan ikke pålægges unge og heller ikke en juridisk person.
For fuldstændighedens skyld kan nævnes begrebet natlig ro, hvis overtrædelse er en Forseelse
mod den offentlige orden (afsnit 5 i lov nr. 251/2016 om visse forseelser). For en sådan forseelse
kan pålægges en administrativ straf (f.eks. advarsel eller bøde) såvel som restriktive
foranstaltninger, der kan bestå i forbud mod at besøge udvalgte offentlige steder eller steder, hvor
sports-, kultur- og andre sociale arrangementer afholdes eller i pligt til at afstå fra kontakt med en
bestemt person/er eller til at underkaste sig et passende program til styring af aggression eller
voldelig adfærd (§ 52 i lov nr. 250/2016 om ansvar for forseelser). Sådanne restriktive
foranstaltninger kan kun pålægges for en periode på 1 år.”
39
Tyskland
”Der kan tilkendes individuelle opholdsforbud mod straffede personer ifm. overtrædelser i
nattelivet. Det vil bero på en dommerkendelse, som træffes når præmissernes for vedkommendes
tilsyn (ty. Führungsaufsicht) fastlægges. Retten kan tilkende den straffede et forbud mod at
opholde sig på særlige steder, som kan tjene som anledning eller motivation til at begå yderligere
kriminalitet, enten i tidsrummet for vedkommendes tilsyn eller for et kortere tidsrum. Derudover
kan den straffede anvises til at fralægge sig indtagelsen af alkohol og andre rusmidler, hvis der
foreligger grunde til at formode, at indtagelsen af sådanne rusmidler vil bidrage til flere
lovovertrædelser.
Tilkendelsen af tilsyn er dog kun mulig ifm. særlige forbrydelser som defineret i lovgivningen og
først ifm. en fængselsstraf af min. seks måneders varighed. Retten kan derfor kun påbyde tilsyn
ifm. eksempelvis legemsbeskadigelse, også i sammenhæng med nattelivet, hvis voldshændelsen
samtidig er en seksualforbrydelse eller et røveri.
Derudover kan politiet udstede midlertidige opholdsforbud ifm. konkrete indikationer på fare for
den offentlige sikkerhed iht. bestemmelserne i delstaternes politilovgivning. Disse tiltag skal
være tidsmæssigt og stedligt afgrænset og tilpas egnede til at kunne forebygge den konkrete fare.
Der findes i tysk ret ingen yderligere muligheder for at tilkende opholdsforbud i nattelivet mhp. at
øge borgernes sikkerhedsfølelse.”
40
Ungarn
“The referenced sections (Section 52, 53, 54, 57, 58 and 71) are all parts of the Criminal Code of
Hungary (Act C of 2012).
Disqualification from a profession
Section 52 (1) A person may be disqualified from exercising a profession if he committed the
criminal offence
a) by violating the rules of his profession that requires qualification, or
b)intentionally, by abusing his profession.
(2) Paragraph (1)a) may also be applied against a person who was not performing the activity as
his profession at the time of committing the criminal offence, but has the qualification required
for exercising the profession the rules of which he violated for committing the criminal offence.
(3) If the perpetrator of a criminal offence against the freedom of sexual life and sexual morality
committed the criminal offence against a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years,
he shall be disqualified permanently from exercising any profession or performing any other
activity that involves the education, supervision, care, or medical treatment of a person who has
not attained the age of eighteen years, or in the context of which he is in a position of power or
influence towards a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years.
(4) The perpetrator of the criminal offence of endangering a minor shall be disqualified from
exercising any profession or performing any other activity that involves the education,
supervision, care or medical treatment of a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years,
or in the context of which he is in a position of power or influence towards a person has not
attained the age of eighteen years. In cases deserving special consideration, the mandatory
application of disqualification from a profession may be dispensed with.
Section 53 (1) Disqualification from a profession shall be imposed for a fixed period or
permanently.
(2) The period of a fixed-term disqualification shall not be shorter than one year or longer than
ten years. A person may be permanently disqualified if he is unfit for or unworthy of exercising
the profession.
(3) The period of disqualification from a profession shall commence when the conclusive
decision becomes final and binding. If disqualification from a profession is imposed in addition
to imprisonment, the term of imprisonment served by the convict shall not be credited to, and any
period during which he evaded the enforcement of the imprisonment shall not be included in the
period of disqualification. The period of release on parole shall be credited to the period of the
disqualification from a profession if release on parole is not terminated.
(4) The court may exempt the disqualified person from permanent disqualification upon request,
provided that ten years have passed since disqualification was imposed and the disqualified
person has become fit for or, if disqualification was imposed due to unworthiness, worthy of
exercising the profession. Even in the latter case, a person who committed the criminal offence in
a criminal organisation shall not be exempted.
Section 54 For the purposes of this subtitle, it shall also be considered a profession if the
perpetrator is
a) a member of a body in charge of the general management of an economic operator or is
the sole manager of an economic operator,
41
b) a member of the supervisory board of a company or a cooperative,
c) the member of an individual firm,
d) a private entrepreneur, or
e) an executive officer of a non-governmental organisation as defined by the Act on non-
governmental organisations.
Ban on entering certain areas
The Basic Law of Hungary (in effect since 1 January 2012) provides the constitutional
possibility that during a special legal order – such as the so-called state of danger that is currently
in effect now, due to the Covid-19 pandemic situation; other examples are state of emergency,
state of war – the government limits or suspends people’s freedom of movement and freedom of
choosing a place of residence.
Section 57 (1) In the cases specified in this Act, a person may be banned from one or more
settlements, or certain areas of a settlement or of the country, if his presence there endangers the
interest of the public.
(2) The period of a ban on entering certain areas shall not be shorter than one year or longer than
five years.
(3) The period of a ban on entering certain areas shall commence when the conclusive decision
becomes final and binding. If a ban on entering certain areas is imposed in addition to
imprisonment, the period of imprisonment served by the convict shall not be credited to, and any
period during which he escapes from the enforcement of the sentence of imprisonment shall not
be included in the period of the ban. The period of release on parole shall be credited to the
period of the ban on entering certain areas if release on parole is not terminated.
Ban on visiting sports events
Section 58 (1) Due to a criminal offence committed with regard to a sports event in the course of
participating in, going to, or leaving the sports event, the court may ban the perpetrator from
a) visiting any sports event organised under the competition scheme of a sports association, or
b) entering any sports facility when it is used to host a sports event organised under the
competition scheme of a sports association.
(2) The period of a ban on visiting sports events shall not be shorter than one year or longer
than five years.
(3)The period of a ban on visiting sports events shall commence when the conclusive decision
becomes final and binding. If a ban on visiting sports events is imposed in addition to
imprisonment, the period of imprisonment served by the convict shall not be credited to, as well
as any period during which he escapes from the enforcement of the sentence of imprisonment
shall not be included in, the period of the ban. The period of release on parole shall be credited in
the period of the ban on visiting sports events if release on parole is not terminated.
Probationary supervision
Section 71 (2) With a view to facilitating the achievement of the objective of probationary
supervision, the court or, for a conditional suspension by a prosecutor, the prosecution service
may prescribe obligations and prohibitions as special rules of behaviour in its decision. The court
or the prosecution service may order that the supervised person
42
…
b) stay away from the aggrieved party of the criminal offence, his home or place of work, or from
the upbringing - educational institution attended by the aggrieved party, and places frequently
visited by the aggrieved party,
c) do not visit or attend public places, public events and assemblies of a specific nature or certain
public spaces,
…”
43
Østrig
“Austrian criminal law does not provide for a prohibition of attendance in nightlife for certain
individuals or a prohibition of sojourn to generate secure environments as a sanction or
preventive measure as such. However, such measures might be applied on a case-by-case basis
under certain circumstances in combination with (other) sanctions or preventive measueres, in
particular in combination with conditionally suspended sentences or preventive measures or if a
person is conditionlly released from impriosnment or preventive detention.
According tp section 50 paragraph 1 of the Austrian Criminal Code if a sentence or preventive
detention is conditionally suspended or if a person is conditionally released from imprisonment or
preventive detention, a court has to place the person under directives (or order probation
assistance) if this is necessary or appropriate to prevent the person from committing further
offences.
According to section 51 paragraph 1 CC directives may involve any obligation or prohibition that
appears suitable to prevent the person from committing further offences. Directives that could
constitute an unreasonable infringement of the personal rights or life of the person are not
permissible. According to section 51 paragaraph 2 CC a person may, in particular, be placed
under a directive to live in a specified place, with a specified family, or live in a specified
home; to avoid specified places or contacts; to abstain from consuming alcoholic beverages; to
be trained or engage in a profession suitable to the person’s experience, skills, and interests; to
report any change in the person’s place of residence or place of work; and to report regularly to
the court or to another place. The person may also be placed under a directive to repair or restore,
to the best of the person’s abilities, any damage caused by the person’s offence if this is relevant
to the need to enforce the sentence in order to prevent the commission of offences by others.
(According to section 51 paragraph 3 CC a person may also be placed under a directive to
undergo treatment of addiction, psychotherapy, or medical treatment, if the person consents to
that treatment and if the requirements set out in paragraph 1 are met. Any directive to undergo
medical treatment involving surgery is, however, not permissible, regardless of any consent by
the offender.)
During the parole period, a court may issue subsequent directives, or alter or suspend existing
directives if this is deemed necessary (sec. 51 apra. 4 CC).
There is no direct or immediate sanction for violations of a directive. According to section 53
paragraph 2 CC if, during the period determined by the court, the person after receiving formal
warning deliberately fails to comply with a directive (or if the person persistently abstains from
the control of the probation supervisor), the court has to revoke the conditional suspension of
sentence or the conditional release and enforce the sentence or remaining sentence if in the
circumstances this appears necessary to prevent the person from committing further offences.”