审议组注意到,与腐败有关的罪行的制裁似乎充分且有劝诫作用。在加重判刑 的情节下,人们也会发现公务员利用其职务或能力权限实施犯罪行为除非法 律针对此种能力做出特别制裁的规定(《刑法典》第 102 条(d)款)。 只有司法机构的成员(包括检察官)在实施犯罪的情况下享有防止对其采取某 些行动和不妨碍其起诉的特权和程序豁免。议员仅在其任期内享有进行表决或 演讲内容的豁免权。 阿拉伯联合酋长国刑事司法制度以强制起诉原则(《刑事诉讼法》第 9 条)为基 础,没有任何规定可使检察官与被告签订认罪求情协议。 不过,如果行贿者或中间人在案情被揭发之前主动向司法或行政当局告知罪行 或坦白罪行,立法使检察官有权驳回一份犯罪报告或不起诉(《刑法典》第 239 条)。阿拉伯联合酋长国有关当局澄清,这项规定反映了旨在鼓励公共部门中的 腐败罪实施者在问题加剧之前报告其罪行并防止该部门中腐败蔓延的立法政 策。审议专家们欢迎这种解释。他们进一步注意到,视具体个案情况更加灵活 地适用此项规定将会使检察官能够在每个案件中“衡量”犯罪行为人的配合程 度。
The review team noted that the sanctions for corruption-related offences appear to be adequate and dissuasive. Among the aggravating circumstances, one could also find the perpetration of a crime by a public servant exploiting the authority of his position or capacity, unless the law provides for a special sanction in consideration of this capacity (article 102(d) PC). Only the members of the judiciary, including prosecutors, enjoy privileges and procedural immunities that prevent certain actions against them and do not preclude their prosecution if they commit crimes. The parliamentarians enjoy immunity for their vote or the content of a speech only during their term. The criminal justice system in the United Arab Emirates is based on the principle of mandatory prosecution (article 9 CPC) and there is no provision enabling prosecutors to enter into plea agreements with the accused. However, the legislation enables the public prosecutor to dismiss a crime report or abstain from prosecution in relation to a briber or an intermediary who takes the initiative to inform judicial or administrative authorities of the crime or who confesses his crime before the case is disclosed (article 239 PC). The authorities of the United Arab Emirates clarified that this provision reflects a legislative policy intended to encourage perpetrators of corruption crimes in the public sector to report their crimes before the exacerbation of the problem and to prevent the spread of corruption in this sector. The reviewing experts welcomed this explanation. They further noted that a more flexible application of the provision on a case-by-case basis would allow the public prosecutor to “weigh” in each case the level of cooperation of the perpetrator of the crime.