[ad_1]
President Klaus Iohannis on Wednesday sent a petition to the CCR for unconstitutionality on amendments to Law no.
President Iohannis attacked the law of the CCR on the enforcement of sentences and measures of deprivation of liberty, which provides, among others, which allows detention at home
"The law to amend and supplement the law No. 254/2013 on the enforcement of sentences and custodial measures ordered by the judicial organs during the criminal procedure was
forwarded by Parliament to the President of Romania for promulgation on 16 June 2018. In our opinion, because of its adoption, the said law violates the principle
bicameralism provided by the art. 61 para. (2) and art. 75 of the Constitution, as developed by the case-law of the Constitutional Court. In addition, through the normative content,
The law to modify and complete the law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences and detention orders ordered by the judicial organs during criminal proceedings violates
the provisions of the art. 1 par. (5), but the art. 21 para. (1) and (2) and art. 24 (2) of the Constitution, as well as the international conventions to which Romania is a party ", according to
unconstitutionality on the law to amend and supplement the law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences and detention orders ordered by
penal procedure.
According to the document, President Klaus Iohannis believes that the law was passed in violation of the provisions of art. 61 and Art. 75 of the Constitution, which states that Parliament is the body
the supreme representative of the Romanian people and the only legislative authority of the country, and its structure is bicameral, composed of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate.
"We consider that the Law to amend and supplement Law No. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences and detention orders ordered by the courts during the trial
The Penal Code was adopted in defiance of the constitutional requirements of the principle of bicameralism, according to which parliamentary debate on a legislative proposal can not
abstraction of its evaluation in plenary session of both Houses of Parliament. In particular, the goal envisioned by the initiators was to establish the right of the individual
the freedom to participate in the funeral of a family member and the establishment of an effective procedure for the exercise of this right. The need for this new regulation
(19459009),
during pre-trial detention). This legislative initiative aimed to transform the possibility of leaving the penitentiary of a reward to a right, applicable at the same time
those arrested preventively and those who were finally sentenced, thus adopting the normative act outside the aim pursued by the initiators, "states the statement addressed to the RCC.
The Presidency also states that, in the form adopted at the meeting of 06.06.2018, the Chamber of Deputies, as House of Decisions, also intervened on: Art. 9 in terms of quality
in which the penitentiary arbitrator attends the meetings of the Parole Board; art. 36 para. (1), art. 37 (1), art. 38 para. (1) on the criteria
establish the initial regime for the enforcement of custodial sentences (closed, semi-open, open); art. 381 on the regulation of the detention regime
the House " ; art. 39 para. (16) and (17), art. 97 on the procedure of judgment of the appeal formulated by the person deprived of liberty against the individualized decision
the regime of execution of the sentence applied; art. 96 para. (1) lit f) considering the execution of prison days on the basis of published scientific documents; art. 97 on attributions
the judge of deprivation of liberty to order parole and changes in the jurisdiction of the courts.
According to the document issued by the Presidential Administration, from the comparative analysis of the form adopted by the First Chamber (the Senate) and that adopted by the House Chamber
Plenipotentiaries) that the text of the bill has undergone substantial changes in the regulatory and configuration decision-making body, with consequent diversion
the ultimate goal pursued by the legislator. It is clear that in the Trial Chamber, for the first time, amendments were made to the status of the supervisory judge exercising his functions
the activity in places of detention, the conditions of the parole of persons executing custodial sentences, the execution of custodial sentences at home,
the individualization of sentencing regimes, the power to process applications for parole, the jurisdiction of the courts in the second.
"In the light of the foregoing, it follows that the criminal law was adopted by the Chamber of Deputies in violation of the principle of bicameralism, since, on the one hand, the form adopted by the Chamber of Deputies
reveals the existence of significant differences in legal content between the forms adopted by both Houses of Parliament and, on the other hand, departs from the objectives pursued by the
initiators of the legislative proposal and respected by the first notified Chamber, which determines the unconstitutionality of the provisions of art. 61 para. (2) corroborated with those of
art. 75 of the Basic Law ", he states in the petition of unconstitutionality.
Another article criticized concerns trainees who have the right, under the same conditions as convicts, to participate in the interment or cremation of their spouse,
child, parent, brother or sister, grandfather or grandmother.
"This new regulation is also unpredictable because for persons admitted to an educational center, it is not specified the authority that can carry out the verification
the veracity of the grounds invoked, the authority granting permission to leave the center and who is responsible for guardianship. By sending by
legislator "under the same conditions as convicts", one could interpret that the controls and surveillance should be carried out by the prison management, but it is precisely this
the referral is likely to make the rule unclear because the person requesting consent is in an educational center, "said the presidency.
If you liked this article, follow MEDIAFAX.RO on FACEBOOK »
The content of www.mediafax.ro is solely for your personal information and use. It is forbidden to republish the content of this site without MEDIAFAX's consent. To obtain this agreement, please contact us at [email protected]
[ad_2]
Source link
