• Home
• Redacţia
• Număr curent
• Numere anterioare
• Principii de publicare
• Comenzi
• Forum

Conferinţa „România la Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului (2005-2008)”

Centrul de Studii de Drept European (CSDE) al Institutului de Cercetări Juridice „Acad. Andrei Rădulescu” al Academiei Române, Forumul Judecătorilor din România, Institutul European din România şi  Societatea de Ştiinţe Juridice (SSJ) organizează în data de 5 mai 2010, ora 14.00, la sediul Academiei Române, Calea Victoriei, nr. 125, Sala de Consiliu,
Conferinţa
„România la Curtea [...]

Serviciul Independent de Protecţie şi Anticorupţie. O poveste despre justiţie şi servicii secrete

Serviciul Independent de Protecţie şi Anticorupţie.
O poveste despre justiţie şi servicii secrete
 
Judecător Dana Gîrbovan,
Curtea de Apel Cluj
Rezumat
Pentru o mai bună înţelegere a acestei poveşti – din nefericire, foarte asemănătoare cu realitatea -  studiul este împărţit în mai multe planuri: un scurt istoric al Serviciului Independent de Protecţie si Anticorupţie, cunoscut tuturor sub denumirea de [...]

Editorial “Deznădejdea ca excepţie procesuală – peremptorie sau dilatorie?”

Deznădejdea ca excepţie procesuală – peremptorie sau dilatorie?
 
Judecător Gabriel Caian,
Judecătoria Craiova 
 
Justiţia are o imagine catastrofală. Remarca ţine, cred, de domeniul evidenţei. Şi înainte de a incepe orice analiză despre cât de întemeiată e percepţia ori cât de necesară este îmbunatăţirea serviciilor de PR ale sistemului judiciar, se impune o constatare: orice formulă de a cerşi respectul [...]

Dragoş Bogdan, Arestarea preventivă şi detenţia în jurisprudenţa CEDO – Recenzie de Mihai Selegean

Dragoş Bogdan, Arestarea preventivă şi detenţia în jurisprudenţa CEDO
Editura Hamangiu, Bucureşti, noiembrie 2008
 
Din 1994, momentul aderării României la C.E.D.O., foarte multe s-au schimbat în peisajul autohton al drepturilor omului: România a ajuns unul din principalii « clienţi » ai Curţii atât ca număr al plângerilor soluţionate, cât şi ca diversitate a libertăţilor deduse judecăţii, legislaţia internă [...]

Discuţii asupra constituţionalităţii art. 55 alin. 1 şi 2 din Legea nr. 304/2004

The provisions of the Article 55(1) and (2) of the Law No. 304/2004 concerning the organisation of judiciary, republished, run counter to the Constitutional framework of Article 21(3) and also to the more favourable provisions of the Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, directly applicable according to Articles 11 and 20(2) of the Constitution of Romania as far as they are construed as the mandatory opinion expressed by the judiciary assistants may not be debated by the litigants as the Court has not reached a decision.

The same provisions run counter the Constitutional framework of Articles 1(4) and 124(3) and also to more favourable provisions of the Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, as far as they are construes as the judiciary assistants may take part in the deliberations, having a secret nature deemed to guarantee the independence and impartiality of the judges, and that those are obliged to sign the judgments.

Dreptul cetăţenilor străini la reconstituirea dreptului de proprietate asupra terenurilor în calitate de moştenitori ai autorului lor

We assess that the foreign citizens may obtain the property of the lands by means of the legal reconstitution, in their capacity of successors of the former owner, immaterial of the date of his/her death, providing the reconstitution is regulated by the Constitution (which means that the procedure was pending at the date of 29.10.2003 or the procedure would be initiate after that moment, under the Law No. 247/2005).

Probațiunea în materia infracțiunilor de corupție. Provocarea. Martorul “denunțător”

The following paper deals with certain issues concerning the rights to a fair trial, such as presumption of innocence, principle of „equality of arms”, assessment of the evidence, and expose the evolution of national and European caselaw and also the requirements derived from the European Convention on Human Rights.

The relevant caselaw reveals difficulties in assessing the evidence concerning the crimes of corruption, difficulties caused by the nature of the crimes, taking into account those as a rule entail two different authors of two separate crimes – active and passive bribery, persons that usually do not have an interest in disclosing the action, when the benefit is gained from an unlawful activity.

In some cases, the acts committed in a longer period of time have to be established, taking also into account the question of assessing the witnesses’ statements as valid evidence, those being regarded as indirect evidence and the proven actions from those statements amounted to proved acts but not main actions.

The assessment of evidence in criminal matters stemmed from the presumption of innocence principle has to comply with in dubio pro reo standard, entailing also a condition of certainty, i.e. of a solid ascertainment the guilt.

Moreover, the fair assessment of evidence, as part of the right to a fair trail, has to play a central role in a democratic society, so it cannot be disregarded in favor of expediency of the fight against corruption.

Practica neunitară în interpretarea dispoziţiilor legale privind remunerarea magistraţilor stagiari

PRACTICA NEUNITARĂ ÎN INTERPRETAREA DISPOZIŢIILOR LEGALE PRIVIND REMUNERAREA MAGISTRAŢILOR STAGIARI 

        judecător Roxana Maria Lăcătuşu,                    judecător Ionuţ Militaru,
        Judecătoria Sectorului 4 Bucureşti                  Judecătoria Sectorului 6 Bucureşti
 
The purpose of the Legislator, according to the principle of nondiscrimination, was that of taking into account the seniority as the single criterion in order to assess the remuneration due to [...]

Discriminări determinate de diferenţe de rasă şi origine etnică

DISCRIMINĂRI DETERMINATE DE DIFERENŢE DE  RASĂ ŞI  ORIGINE ETNICĂ
 judecător Laura Curcio,
Curtea de Apel pentru litigii de muncă
Milano, Italia 
  
Nationality is not included as possible factor of discrimination nor by the n. 43/2000 Directive Union either by the Italian decree law n. 268/1998.This exclusion seems debatable , above all because article 12 of CE Treaty [...]

Интервью Ольга Кудешкина – свобода выражения мнений

“The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights is a great victory for all Russian citizens who need an independent, impartial and equitable justice, that in many instances cannot be found in Russia. This is also the reason for which many of them need to address to the European Court of Human Rights.

The decision rendered to me a great moral and professional satisfaction, it represented for me a model and an example regarding how a judgment has to be reasoned and how cases regarding infringement of fundamental rights have to be handled, what kind of problems and aspects needs to be clarified and by which manner these kind of cases have to be evaluated.”

Interviu cu d-na Olga Kudeshkina

Interviu cu d-na Olga Kudeshkina
-         judecătoare din Rusia exclusă din magistratură pentru exprimarea opiniei în legătură cu starea sistemului judiciar
 
            “The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights is a great victory for all Russian citizens who need an independent, impartial and equitable justice, that in many instances cannot be found in Russia. [...]

Theme Copyright Revista Forumul Judecătorilor