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

Editorial “Criza din justiţia română a anului 2009. Demnitatea magistraţilor”

CRIZA DIN JUSTIŢIA ROMÂNĂ A ANULUI 2009.
DEMNITATEA MAGISTRAŢILOR
 
 judecător Roxana Maria Lăcătuşu,
Judecătoria Sectorului 4 Bucureşti 
În contextul unor dezechilibre economice, financiare şi politice, acutizate pe parcursul anului 2009, în toate domeniile de activitate, magistraţii români au dorit în acelaşi an să realizeze o abordare diferită a problemelor în care se zbat. Discuţiile din interiorul sistemului au [...]

Nelegalităţi ale autorităţilor publice. Răspunsurile instituţionale în experienţa italiană

Nelegalităţi ale autorităţilor publice.
Răspunsurile instituţionale în experienţa italiană  
Vito Monetti,
Preşedinte MEDEL
Rezumat
Interceptările telefonice ale membrilor Serviciilor implicaţi în cazul Abu Omar au permis deschiderea paginilor a două afaceri ulterioare referitoare la nelegalităţi ale puterii.
Prima afacere a constituit-o un episod de deviere a competenţelor şi puterilor publice în interesul unui particular: descoperirea unor contacte între numărul doi din [...]

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 [...]

Conferinţa ”Libertatea de exprimare a magistraţilor. Limite şi vulnerabilităţi”. Scurtă relatare

Conferinţa ”Libertatea de exprimare a magistraţilor. Limite şi vulnerabilităţi”. Scurtă relatare 
 
Revista Forumul judecătorilor, Societatea de Studii Juridice, Institutul de Cercetări Juridice al Academiei Române şi Editura Universitară, cu sprijinul Institutului Naţional al Magistraturii au organizat, la data de 30 noiembrie 2009, Conferinţa ”Libertatea de exprimare a magistraţilor. Limite şi vulnerabilităţi”.
Dezbaterea a realizat un schimb de [...]

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.

Perspective asupra Consiliilor magistraturii

Each of the topics I have addressed would form a talk in itself and benefit from a much more detailed analysis. Time does not permit. However, in my view, when an analysis of the tasks which must be performed to maintain the independence of the judicial branch of the state is carried out, I think the inevitable conclusion is that a Council for the Judiciary is needed. It must fulfil a central role, even though some of the tasks may be carried out by others. There is no real alternative. The judicial branch of the state needs a central institution not only to discharge the tasks I have enumerated itself (or to ensure that others discharge them independently), but also to manage the relationship with the legislature and the executive and to take overall responsibility for the proper functioning of the judicial branch of the state and in particular the timely and impartial delivery of justice at the lowest cost consistent with the interests of justice. A judiciary that does not have the means of ensuring this will find that others are quite happy to do it for them. Without proper and responsible arrangements for governance this may well happen.

Not only will a Council fulfil the central role I have described, but it should also provide leadership and central representation for the judiciary and balance the relationships with the Judges Associations and the judicial hierarchy. Finally may I add a word about the composition of a Council for the Judiciary. If a Council is to fulfil the role in the governance of the judiciary which I have outlined, its composition is of central importance. There is great diversity across Europe. In England and Wales we do not have direct elections to the Council. Each level of the judiciary has its own Association where elections are held and the officers of those Associations (or their delegates) serve on our Council; our Lord Chief Justice is our chairman. We have found that selecting the representation by means of using the Associations means that the Associations work closely with the Council and understand and generally support what it does. There is generally no tension between the Associations and the Council; nor between the Council and the judicial hierarchy (the senior or presiding judges at courts or groups of courts or in regions). That is because the Lord Chief Justice is both President of all the Courts of England and Wales and Chairman of the Council.

The Evolution of the Judicial System in Romania

THE EVOLUTION OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN ROMANIA DURING THE PAST 60 YEARS 
     Horaţius Dumbravă,                                          Dragoş Călin,
     Judge, Court of Appeal Mures                      Judge, Court of Appeal Bucharest
 
The reform of the judicial system is very difficult taking into account the judges from the communist period are mentained, whose vision of the rule of law [...]

Independence of Magistrates as a Guarantee to Reduce Political Corruption.Specific Case of Prosecutors in Romania

INDEPENDENCE OF MAGISTRATES AS A GUARANTEE TO REDUCE POLITICAL CORRUPTION. SPECIFIC CASE OF PROSECUTORS IN ROMANIA
Marius Bulancea,
Prosecutor, Office attached to the
High Court of Cassation and Justice 
  
Successfully prosecuting high profile cases of political corruption is an exceptional challenge for any law enforcement agency.
The fundamental democratic principle according to which everyone is equal under the [...]

Detaşarea judecătorilor şi procurorilor la alte autorităţi publice decât instanţele sau la instituţii publice

DETAŞAREA JUDECĂTORILOR ŞI PROCURORILOR
LA ALTE AUTORITĂŢI PUBLICE DECÂT INSTANŢELE SAU LA INSTITUŢII PUBLICE
 
 judecător Horaţius Dumbravă,                                              judecător Dragoş Călin,
Curtea de Apel Târgu Mureş                                                 Curtea de Apel Bucureşti
 
The secondments of the judges and of the prosecutors to other public authorities than the Courts, or to the public institutions, in any public service, public offices as well, impair [...]

Recrutarea magistraţilor

RECRUTAREA MAGISTRAŢILOR – GARANŢIE PRINCIPALĂ A INDEPENDENŢEI ACESTORA
  
judecător Roxana Maria Lăcătuşu,                                   judecător  Angelica Cruceanu, 
Judecătoria Sectorului 4 Bucureşti                                   Judecătoria Focşani
   
The training of a body of magistrates responding to the actual and optimum profil of the magistrate is a desideratum and its achievement is necessary in order to fulfill the actual needs of the system.
The valuation of the [...]

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.”

Theme Copyright Revista Forumul Judecătorilor