Harming the financial interests of the European Union

Legal definiton 

Section 260 of the Criminal Code:

(1) Whoever creates, uses, or submits false, incorrect, or incomplete documents, provides false, incorrect, or incomplete information, or conceals documents or information, thereby enabling the unauthorised use or retention of funds originating from the European Union budget or budgets managed by the European Union or on its behalf, or diminishes the resources of such a budget, or enables the unauthorised use or retention of property acquired from the European Union budget or budgets managed by the European Union or on its behalf, shall be punished by imprisonment for up to three years, disqualification, or forfeiture of the item.

(2) The same sentence shall be imposed on anyone who unlawfully uses funds from the European Union budget or budgets managed by the European Union or on its behalf, property acquired from the European Union budget or budgets managed by the European Union or on its behalf, or diminishes the resources of such a budget.

(3) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for one to five years or a monetary penalty if they cause greater damage through the act mentioned in paragraphs 1 or 2.

(4) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for two to eight years if they: 

a) commit the act mentioned in paragraphs 1 or 2 as a member of an organised group,

b) commit such an act as a person with a specific duty to defend the interests of the European Union, or 

c) cause significant damage through such an act.

(5) The perpetrator shall be punished by imprisonment for five to ten years if they cause large-scale damage through the act mentioned in paragraphs 1 or 2.

Subjective aspect - intent

Harming of the financial interests of the European Union is an intentional criminal offence. A criminal offence is committed intentionally if the perpetrator wanted to violate or endanger a legally protected interest in the manner specified by the Criminal Code (direct intent), or if the perpetrator knew that his actions could result in such a violation or endangerment and accepted the possibility of it occurring (indirect intent).

If the act can be deemed as mere negligence rather than intent, it does not constitute the described criminal offence. 

Defense

There are various defense strategies available. Given the elements of this criminal offence, the following questions may be relevant:

• How were the financial interests of the European Union supposed to be harmed?
  
• Did the relevant person know that their actions affected the financial interests of the European Union?
• How was the involvement of the financial interests of the European Union expressed?
  
• Were the rules for the use of European Union funds clearly stated?
  
• In which regulations or documents?
  
• Was an expert (grant consultancy) involved in the matter?
  
• Did the individual have reason to trust this expert?
  
• Was the use of the financial resources monitored?
  
• Was such monitoring conducted in the past for this individual?
  
• What was the outcome?
• Was the perpetrator's intent directed towards the decisive facts?