-
When the court of judicial review is vested with the settlement of the recourse against the court order under which the legal and the solid nature of the preventive arrest has been reviewed ex officio according to the procedure set forth by art.3001 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the recourse should be settled before the expiry of the preventive arrest period, taken or extended by the judge subsequently. This review deadline is a bar period, not a recommendation one. In practice, it is found that the court decides in relation to the review of the legal and the solid nature of the preventive arrest upon the receipt of the file, many times on the last or penultimate day of the 30-day deadline of the preventive arrest. This situation occurs either due to the non-observance of the 5-day deadline by the prosecutor, or by the court itself, and consequently the court of appeal decides within a period of a few days following the expiry of the 30-day period. -
The aim of this paper is to identify how and if cultural diversity, as a fundamental and moral value of the EU, is effectively protected by EU law. I will start from the EU competences on cultural matters and try to find out if, while dealing with cultural issues, the EU is actually protecting its “unity without uniformity” and its “diversity without fragmentation”. The recent and stronger intervention of the EU in cultural matters, after Lisbon, raises questions as to its real aims, be it the building of a stronger and stronger “small common denominator” in cultural issues as well, by means of uniformity or the real protection of cultural diversity of its Member States.
