The Penal Code adopted the Chamber of Deputies to the limit. 167 votes "for". It was needed 165

Realitatea.net publishes the text live, the main discussions of debates:

The Penal Code was voted by 167 votes for. 165. More specifically, the Penal Code was adopted with the nine "for" votes cast by minorities, according to a voting report published by parliamentary sources. Indeed, out of 12 minority MPs, 9 voted "for" and 2 voted "against", while one voted no.

UPDATE 14.00 NLP and USR announced that they will appeal the CCR Criminal Code

UPDATE 13.50 PMP leader Eugen Tomac told the panel that MP Mocanu, who voted Penal Code will be expelled from the party

] UPDATE 13.45 The Penal Code is the last on the agenda, it has the number 14. There were 167 votes "for", 97 against.

UPDATE 13.38 Daniel Suciu, the leader of the PSD deputies, spoke to and criticized the USR saying, "You turned this plenary session into a videochat"

UPDATE 13.30 Varujan Pambuccian returned to the presidency: "I do not think it's worth emphasizing, but persisting in the threats is a mistake." Someone else tried and was wrong, "said Pambuccian, of the presidency.

Tudor Benga came and spoke:" Mr. Pambuccian, I have not threatened anyone "

UPDATE 13.37 There was a brief dispute between Tudor Benga and Varujan Pambuccian Minorities, after Benga said the minorities quarrel because they do not know how to vote

UPDATE 13.10 The last voting session has started There are 228 members present at the meeting To pass, the project needs 165 votes "for" and PSD -ADLE only 159 votes

The meeting can be seen here:

UPDATE 12.57 According to sources, there are also three ALDE members. As a result, the coalition needs more than 9 votes. Indeed, 165 votes are needed, and the PSD and ALDE only have 159 votes. After the meeting of the PSD, says Liviu Dragne, asked if the project would pass: "We'll see." UPDATE 12.55 PMP announced that it would vote against the Code, and if all of the opposition is in agreement, will also leave the hall.

UPDATE 12:30 pm Emergency meeting at the PSD, at 12:30, before the final vote for the Penal Code, at the House Group. There are 6 deputies of the PSD, so the PSD has emotions before the vote. Dragnea came to the meeting, but he made no statement. PSD group leader Daniel Suciu said the PSD would get the 6 votes of other parliamentary groups.

UPDATE 12.00 The Plenum will vote on the Penal Code on Articles. It has been passed and the abrogation of negligence in the service.

UPDATE 10.55 Ioan Cupsa, to Florin Iordache: "How grobian, as usual"

UPDATE 10.52 Florin Iordache come to the presidency , nervous: "To find out what you're voting for." Our NLP and USR colleagues who do not understand yesterday told the Commission that the rejected amendments are included in the final vote. do not understand or do not find it, that's their problem "

UPDATE 10.44 Florin Iordache:" We are sort of at the end of the road, a road that we have assumed Please show me a problem article.I believe the laws of justice will be definitively promulgated in the next two weeks.To return to the codes.You're attacking it, but it's not enough. It will not come out, we said that whoever breaks the law should answer, but not on the basis of what the The dozens of acquitted persons are an alarm signal. There has been a lot of manipulation, no one will be able to answer, if someone is guilty, to go to court.

UPDATE 10.40 Attila Korodi stated that the UDMR will only vote for the Code when it adopts the amendments proposed by the UDMR.

UPDATE 10.38 John Cupsa and Stelian Ion came to the podium to say how dangerous the changes to the Penal Code are:

"A knife that cuts the victim on the face and who pays the operation of the victim benefits from a reduction of one third of the sentence. Here are some wonderful gifts you have made, "added Stelian Ion.

Update 10.20 The proposal that the final vote be held today still has 90 votes "for" and 40 "against". The plenum decided that the time for the penal code be held for one hour.

The penal code passed Tuesday by the Senate, with the PSD's proposal to redefine the abuse of power. The plenary assembly was a scandal, after the opposition said that the debate on the project was not a quorum. USR, PMP and PNL left the room, while the PSD expressed. So a senator told them shouting, "Are you, but are not you working ?! Later, the audience also heard "Go to the market, Orban is waiting for you!" Then the PSD mobilized, so that the quorum was assured: there were 73 senators and the opposition returned to the room. On the other hand, a surprise came from UDMR. They stated that they would vote for the Penal Code only if negligence in the service remained in force, and the abuse of power would be the form proposed by Marton Arpad. This did not happen, and eventually UDMR refrained from voting.

The most important changes for all

1. The redefinition of service abuse was, by far, the most significant change, in which a wide range of misconduct would be reluctant. That is, we are talking about abuse in the service if the act was done "in order to obtain an undue material advantage for himself, husband, parent, or second degree." More specifically, if a mayor gives a contract to a business that does not belong to a second-degree family or a cousin, but to a family friend or distant relative, the act will 39 is more a misuse of power.

In addition, the provisions of the article on the abuse of office do not apply to the drafting, issuance and approval of acts adopted by Parliament or the government.

3. Service negligence has been canceled. More specifically, we are talking about the facts of which public servants are exempt. For example, if I make a mistake or if the documentation is not appropriate.

4. The limitation periods for offenses have been reduced.

5. The extended confiscation has been redefined. [6] The author's favor is not punishable even if it is committed by a second degree bush (sister, in-laws). Until now, it was just members of the family. At the same time, the publication of normative acts does not constitute an offense of favoring the author

7. The organized crime group has been redefined, so that the group formed occasionally to commit one or more offenses and has no continuity is not an organized crime group

8. If an official refers to a suspect as having already been convicted, he would be sentenced to six months to three years' imprisonment

9. Unfair disclosure of information from a criminal case where such a prohibition is imposed by the Criminal Procedure Law is punishable by a term of imprisonment from one month to one year. or a fine, if the act is committed by a magistrate or a representative of the criminal prosecution body, the penalty is increased by half.

10. The bribe is not sanctioned when he denounces the act before the investigating body has been informed, but no later than one one year after the date of its opening

11. It is considered to be an influence traffic only if the offense is aimed at "material benefits", and not "benefits", as it is currently the case