[ad_1]
The Constitutional Court of Romania admitted Wednesday the exception of unconstitutionality formulated by the High Court of Cassation and Justice concerning the law on the execution of sentences and measures depriving of liberty [19659002] The image of the CCR article: The laws stipulating the execution of the sentence ” id=”main_picture” src=”http://storage0.dms.mpinteractiv.ro/media/1/1/1687/17343419/1/catuse-arest-shutterstock2.jpg?width=560″ />
JRC: The law providing for the execution of the home sentence is NON CONFIDENTIAL
The judges of the Supreme Court notified to the Constitutional Court in early June the draft adopted by the government that the persons sentenced for a maximum year The prison that
have not committed violent acts, have the right to execute the penalty of arrest at home.
"As a result of the deliberations, the Constitutional Court voted unanimously in favor of the exception of unconstitutionality and held that the provisions of the single article, paragraphs 2 and 3 to 5 and point 10 of the law
amending and supplementing Law No 254/2013 on the enforcement of sentences and detention ordered by the courts during the criminal proceedings
contrary to the Constitution. In support of the decision, the Court held that the regulation of unclear rules on the layout of the home detention measure was a means of individualizing
the execution of imprisonment affects not only the predictability of the law but also its purpose, namely the institution of measures of a judicial nature, alternatives to the execution of the trouble
deprivation of liberty " the press release issued by the RCC States.
The Court therefore concluded that the provisions of Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Law amending and supplementing Law 254/2013 did not meet the requirements of the law by violating
the provisions of Article 1 paragraph (5) of the Constitution.
"With regard to the provisions of only Article 10 of the Regulated Law, the Court ruled that they create uncertainty in the process of law enforcement
competent to order the conditional release in violation of Article 1 (5) of the Constitution, given the lack of clarity and predictability of the legal norm, "also emphasizes the Court.
Magistrates pointed out in their petition that there were irregularities in the provision that detainees who still have to be executed for 18 months until they are placed under house arrest
complete the minimum duration of parole.
"The placement of those sentenced to house arrest 18 months before the end of the punitive sentence reconfigures the institution of parole without the legislator
has made minimal amendments to the Criminal Code to ensure the correlation of the law. So, for example, in the art. 100 per. (1) lit b) C. pen. it is stated that "parole in the case
the prison can be ordered if the sentenced person is executing the sentence in a semi-open or open regime. "
At the beginning of June, the Chamber of Deputies adopted, as a decision-making body, a project according to which persons sentenced to a term of imprisonment of at least one have not committed acts of violence have the right
to run the home arrest penalty.
A PSD proposal to law no. 254/2013 on the execution of custodial sentences and custodial measures handed down by the judiciary in criminal proceedings
that: "The semi-open regime is initially applied to persons sentenced for acts committed without violence to a term of imprisonment of more than 3 years but not more than 13 years, respectively for persons
sentenced to more than one year of imprisonment but not more than three years for acts of violence. "
Another amendment of the UDMR in Lefea adopted by the Chamber of Deputies shows that: "In the case of persons sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than one year," execution of the sentence is carried out by detention at
home, except for persons found guilty of acts of violence. "According to a proposal of the Social Democrats, the provisions of the UDMR amendment" apply to convicted persons
who must still be executed for 18 months until the mandatory minimum fraction for the conditional release of the initial term of imprisonment of more than one year is reached. "
In addition, the text of the amendments provides for 20 days of sentence for each published scientific work or invention and patented innovation.
"The scientific character of the work elaborated by the prisoners is established, in accordance with the legal provisions, by the National Council for Scientific Research, hereinafter referred to as CNCS, with
the logistical support of the Executive Unit for the Financing of Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation, hereinafter referred to as "EUFISCDI", according to the text of the ;initiative
legislation.
Another amendment adopted provides that "humanitarian consent may be granted for the resolution of social, medical or family problems, as well as for
calamity ".
CCR: Unconstitutional Act on Network and Information Security
The Constitutional Court authorized President Klaus Iohannis to address the issue of guaranteeing a high common level of security of networks and information systems,
that it was adopted in violation of the constitutional provisions
"Following the deliberations, the Constitutional Court unanimously approved the objection of unconstitutionality made by the President of Romania and the concluded that the law on insurance
a high common level of network and information security is unconstitutional as a whole. The Court held that in the legislative procedure, the author did not
requests the opinion of the Supreme Council of Defense of the country in accordance with Article 4, letter d), point 1 of Law No. 415/2002 on the organization and functioning of the Supreme Council of the defense of the country,
published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, No. 494 of 10 July 2002, according to which one of the tasks of the Higher Council of Defense of the Country is the approval of the draft acts
normative acts initiated or published by the Government concerning, inter alia, national security ", the communication sent by the CCR States.
The Court held that the normative act had been adopted in violation of the constitutional provisions.
Share on Facebook
If you liked the article, follow MEDIAFAX.RO on FACEBOOK »
The content of www.mediafax.ro site is reserved for your personal information and its use. It is forbidden to republish the content of this site without the consent of MEDIAFAX. To obtain this agreement, please contact us at [email protected]
