-
-
-
The purpose of this study is to present the Case Loomis v. State of Michigan, settled by the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin in the United States of America, on how the right to a fair trial may be affected assuming that the solution is pronounced by the judge, having at his disposal, among the usual elements of fact and of law in a classic trial also a report provided by an artificial intelligence system. The study contextualizes the time and the place in which the case appeared, realizing in its beginning a brief parallel between the characteristics of the American justice system and the European one in the field of fundamental rights, with a marginal incursion in the scope of the principle of proportionality. In this framework, the respective case is presented with emphasis on the arguments used by the judges of the Court, in order to reach the conclusion that the right to a fair trial is not violated insofar as the conclusions produced by the algorithm are used by observing some guiding principles, drawn on this occasion. The conclusion of the study shows that the arguments presented in the North American system can remain valid and can be transposed into the European system, when it will face such a problem. Finally, the final part is intended to be a plea for awareness of the immediate reality of artificial intelligence, which will penetrate more and more in the legal field, including in the judge’s office, as well as for a mental openness towards these new concepts. -
In the study hereby, the author makes a comparative analysis of regulations covering negative prescription under the current Civil Code (Law No. 287/2009, republished on July 15th, 2011 and effective since October 1st, 2011) as compared to the previous legal regulations (in particular, Decree No. 167/1958 on negative prescription). At the end of this comparative analysis, the author concludes that the relevant regulation covering negative prescription is manifestly superior under the current Civil Code, as compared to Decree No. 167/1958. -
The present study analyses from the point of view of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) a topic of current interest in the Romanian law, namely the topic of the legality of evidence as a link between the rule of law and the right to a fair trial. By corroborating general principles and individual solutions emerges a differentiation mechanism used by the ECHR in order to distinguish between possible breaches of the domestic law in respect to their nature and degree. While in principle the way the law is interpreted and the breach of law allegedly committed in obtaining and presenting the evidence are by themselves irrelevant from the perspective of the fair trial, the arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable interpretation of the law, which violates the principles of the rule of law, is relevant from that perspective. A serious breach of law can mean the inadmissibility of the evidence obtained thereby. The ECHR doesn’t lay down general rules regarding the assessment of the arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable character of the interpretation of the law and, respectively, the seriousness of its breach, but from the case-law emerges a series of relevant criteria, such as the manifest error of assessment, the breach of law committed in bad faith or systematically, inevitable discovery of evidence and the purpose of law.
-
The doctrine of the state of law springs from the German theory and case law, but at present it is also a requirement and a reality of the constitutional democracy in the contemporary society. At present, the state of law is no longer merely a doctrine, but a fundamental principle of democracy enshrined in the Constitution and in international political and legal documents. In essence, the concept of the state of law is based on the supremacy of law in general and of the Constitution in particular. Essential to the contemporary realities of the state of law are the following fundamental elements: the moderation of the exercise of state power in relation to the law, the consecration, guarantee and respect for the constitutional human rights especially by the state power, and last but not least, the independence and impartiality of justice. In this study we are analyzing the most important elements and features of the state of law with reference to the contemporary realities in Romania. An important aspect of the analysis relates to the separation, balance and collaboration of the state powers, in relation to constitutional provisions. The most significant aspects of the case law of the Constitutional Court regarding the state of law are analyzed. -
In this study, the author examines the constitutional and legal statute of the Romanian Court of Accounts, according to art. 140 of the Constitution of Romania (revised and republished on 31 October 2003), corroborated with a series of provisions contained in Law no. 94/1992 for the organization and operation of the Court of Accounts, as republished, for the second time, on 29 April 2009. To this effect, the authors examine the constitutional and legal statute of: the counselors of accounts; the personnel making up the executive management of the Court of Accounts and the Audit Authority, as well as the specialized personnel of the Court of Accounts (external public auditors). -
In this article, the author analyzes extensively the issue of the status of the judges of the Constitutional Court from Romania, as it was prefigured in the theses debated by the Constituent Assembly in 1991 and regulated in the provisions of the Constitution approved by the national referendum of 8 December 1991 and revised by the Law No 429/2003. The status of the constitutional judges is analyzed by reference to the role and attributions of the Constitutional Court. The status of the constitutional judges derives from the role of the Court as guarantor of the supremacy of the Fundamental Law. The constitutional provisions regarding the status of the constitutional judges are developed by the Law No 47/1992 on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court, as well as by other special laws. The judges enjoy independence and are obliged to impartially exercise their attributions. The constitutional provisions provide that the constitutional judges are incompatible with any other public or private office, except for higher legal education teaching activities, are independent in the exercise of their mandate and irremovable during their term of office. The Law No 47/1992 establishes that the judges are not legally responsible for the opinions and votes cast in connection with the cases pending before the Court. For any other deeds, the constitutional judges may be tried in criminal proceedings with the consent of the plenum of the Constitutional Court, under the conditions provided by the Law No 47/1992.
-
On the basis of the organization and operation of the union institutions there are the principle of autonomy of their organizing, the principle of conferral of competencies and the principle of the institutional balance. MEPs represent the people (in the system previous to the Treaty of Lisbon) and the EU citizens (under the current regime), they can not receive instructions, orders from governments of the Member States, not being appointed by them. The States are associated in the Union itself, which reveals a community of interests and aspirations, embodied in the objectives and decisions set. -
The present study intends to reveal the complexity of the serious humanitarian problems generated by the migration of the population in today’s world, emphasizing the causes, the effects, but especially the democratic mechanisms to address this matter. We intend to reveal a series of legal mechanisms, made available to the national executive authorities in order to combat this phenomenon, but also the legal instruments and the procedural ways of solving the applications for asylum, formulated by the persons who are in a situation of separation from their countries of origin, often against their will. At the heart of this legal system for solving migration, with continental valences, there are the courts of law, which have the tutelary role in solving the legal matters related to these problems. We will present in this study a series of solutions of the judicial practice, having as finality the exemplification of the way of correlation of the legal institutions created by the national legislator and by the European Union in order to solve the aspects related to the phenomenon of migration. In this way we intend to offer both to those who are beginning the initiation into the mysteries of law and theorists and to those involved in the activity of judicial practice of solving the applications for summons, a useful and easy, also well-documented and exemplified, tool of information regarding the way of solving the contestations against the decisions of the administrative institution legally competent to solve the applications for granting the refugee status. We will reveal both the national practice and the one in the field of the Court of Justice of the European Union, these examples of judicial solutions being meant to give us a balance in approaching the legal problems of migration. -
The study briefly analyzes the status of the deputy mayor in relation to the status of the public administrator in order to debate a possible conflict between them. The similarities and differences between these two functions are highlighted. The delegation of attributions by the mayor is discussed from the perspective of the possibility for the mayor to appoint like substitute the public administrator during his vacation. There are three situations provided by law in which the deputy mayor becomes the legal substitute of the mayor presented in detail in the study: the vacancy of the position of mayor; the suspension from office of the mayor and the cases of impossibility to exercise the mandate by the mayor. In any other situation, there is no legal provision for the deputy mayor to become the legal substitute for the mayor. Two issues need to be debated in this context, namely: identification of the status of the public administrator in the public administration staff and like a consequence, the legal nature of the management contract concluded by public administrator with the mayor. Finally, it is argued the impossibility of suspending the addendum to the management contract, under the conditions of Article 14 of the Law on Administrative Litigation. -
Un eveniment major al istoriei unui popor și aniversarea sa, precum Centenarul Marii Uniri (desăvârșirea procesului de constituire a statului național unitar), reprezintă pentru știința națională ocazia, după caz, deopotrivă de evocare și evaluare peste timp a semnificațiilor aferente din perspectivă proprie și, respectiv, de privire asupra sine însuși, surprinderea evoluțiilor și progreselor înregistrate în dezvoltarea proprie, a provocărilor prezentului și a posibilităților viitorului. Din acest punct de vedere știința dreptului are o implicare specială. Într-adevăr, prin natura și consecințele sale, ceea ce s-a întâmplat și realizat acum o sută de ani reprezintă, prin excelență, un proiect politico-juridic și poartă o puternică încărcătură prospectivă. Cercetarea dimensiunii juridice indispensabile și prioritare a procesului de constituire, desfășurare, desăvârșire și consolidare a statului unitar român, a permanențelor și manifestărilor și urmărilor sale de azi și de mâine a fost și rămâne o prioritate pentru știința juridică românească.
