Summary

Starting from 15 July 2013, subsection 288 (1) of the Penal Code defines that an official is a natural person who holds an official position for the performance of public duties regardless of whether he or she performs the duties imposed on him or her permanently or temporarily, for a charge or without charge, while in service or engaged in a liberal profession or under a contract, by appointment or election. From the point of view of this definition, it is not relevant under which public authority the person acts nor whether they exercise their responsibilities only by performing administrative, supervisory, or management tasks, or by organising the operations of material value or acting as a representative of public authority.

In practice, there has been some confusion in situations in which it needs to be assessed whether or not a doctor’s activity can be qualified as an act of an official. There are regulations in Estonian law that enable a doctor to be qualified as an official, but at the same time, the entire professional activity of a doctor cannot be viewed as exercising public duties as an official. Doctors are usually persons governed by private law. At the same time, there are operations in a doctor’s profession that seem inherent to an official, but are not according to legal provisions, or the norms are so narrow or general that it cannot be concluded that a doctor holds an official position for the performance of public duties.

The article explains when a doctor is an official due to performing a public duty and in which cases could the objective characteristics established in an official’s qualification be implemented in a doctor’s profession. It also presents an overview of some of the cases when a doctor’s professional operations could be viewed as performing public duties, and the conditions in which a doctor cannot be viewed as an official.