在评估适用于腐败罪行的制裁时，审议组注意到，针对此类罪行的重大案件的 制裁非常严厉，而基本形式的此类罪行的最低惩罚，例如公共部门中的受贿 （“拘捕”6 个月）、公共部门中的行贿（最高两年监禁）或私营部门中的贿赂 （最高两年监禁）似乎相对较轻。此外，公共部门中“提议给予”贿赂受到的 制裁要少于“实际给予”贿赂，且仅预见“实际给予”贿赂为加重情节。审议 组提请国家当局注意制裁措施的此种差异，并请它们研究途径和方式，在今后 审查刑事立法时解决此种不一致问题。 根据《宪法》规定，以下类别的高级官员在刑事诉讼中享有豁免权：总统、议 员和法官。总统在任期内享有豁免权，并可能因弹劾而被免职，这要求议会四 分之三的多数决定。议员对投票结果或在议会的发言不承担法律责任。没有议 会的同意，不得拘留或逮捕法官，但可在没有议会的同意情况下判定法官有 罪。解除议员或法官的豁免权的程序是《议会条例》确立的。依据强制起诉原则提起刑事诉讼。《刑事诉讼法》第 4 条提出检察官在侦查到 罪行蛛丝马迹时有义务提起刑事诉讼。新的《刑事诉讼法》规定了检察官和被告达成辩诉协议的可能性，除其他事项外，这可决定该人在配合侦查另一人所 实施的刑事罪方面的义务。
In assessing the sanctions applicable for corruption offences, the review team noted that the rather high sanctions were available for aggravated cases of such offences, but the minimum penalty of the basic forms of such offences as passive bribery in the public sector (“arrest” of six months), active bribery in the public sector (imprisonment of up to two years), or bribery in the private sector (imprisonment of up to two years) appeared to be comparatively lower. Moreover, the “offering” of a bribe in the public sector is subject to less severe sanctions than the “giving” and the aggravated circumstances are foreseen only for the “giving” of the bribe. The review team drew the attention of the national authorities to this disparity of sanctioning measures and invited them to consider ways and means to address such disparity in future reviews of criminal legislation. According to the Constitution, the following categories of high-ranking officials benefit from immunity in criminal proceedings: the President, Members of the Parliament and judges. The President enjoys immunity during the term of office and may be removed from office by impeachment, which requires a three quarters’ majority decision of the Parliament. Members of the Parliament are not legally liable for the results of voting or for statements made in the Parliament. The judges cannot be detained or arrested without the consent of the Parliament, but they can be convicted without its consent. The procedure for lifting the immunity of MPs or judges is established by the Regulations of Parliament.The initiation of criminal proceedings is based on the principle of mandatory prosecution. Article 4 CPC foresees a duty for the prosecutor to initiate criminal proceedings upon detection of offence indications. The new CPC prescribes the possibility of concluding a plea agreement between the prosecutor and the accused person, which can determine, inter alia, that person’s obligations regarding cooperation in detecting the criminal offence perpetrated by another person.