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.
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 [...]
Nivelul şi evoluţia corupţiei din România reflectate în rapoarte oficiale şi independente
NIVELUL ŞI EVOLUŢIA CORUPŢIEI DIN ROMÂNIA REFLECTATE ÎN RAPOARTE OFICIALE ŞI INDEPENDENTE
judecător Gabriel Caian,
Judecătoria Craiova
In the context of freedom of market and politics and in the circumstances of free choice of travel, movement of financial resources and exchange of information between different areas, the opportunities to gain power and wealth, including the illegal ways, [...]
Discriminarea generată de jurisprudenţa Î.C.C.J. în materia gradului profesional al procurorilor D.N.A. şi D.I.I.C.O.T.
DISCRIMINAREA GENERATĂ DE JURISPRUDENŢA Î.C.C.J. ÎN MATERIA GRADULUI PROFESIONAL AL PROCURORILOR DIRECŢIEI NAŢIONALE ANTICORUPŢIE ŞI DIRECŢIEI DE INVESTIGARE A INFRACŢIUNILOR DE CRIMINALITATE ORGANIZATĂ ŞI TERORISM
judecător Dragoş Călin, judecător Sergiu-Leon Rus,
Curtea de Apel Bucureşti Curtea de Apel Cluj
An unprecedented and absolutely impredictible crack in the status of the magistrates, until that moment fairly well [...]
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 [...]
