-
The author provides detailed analysis of the legal content of the offense of abuse of office as stipulated for in Art. 297 of the new Criminal Code. He examines the object of criminal protection, the subjects of offense, the objective and subjective sides, the forms, methods, sanctions and certain procedural aspects relating to the offense provided for in Art. 297 of the new Criminal Code. Also, the author does not hesitate to express his views regarding the constituent content of this criminal offense, its systematization, and its nature and to advance certain solutions and ideas of his own in this regard. Last but not least, certain personal views about the concept of subsidiarity, and the law applicable in the event of transitional situations are also promoted. -
The authors present another opinion on the subject regulated by Article 132 of the Law No 78/2000, arguing that it constitutes a special legal aggravating circumstance for the offences of abuse of office and usurpation of the function provided by Article 297 and Article 300 of the Criminal Code. In the current regulation the abuse of office provided by Article 297 of the Criminal Code by reference to Article 132 of the Law No 78/2000 is not a criminal offence assimilated to corruption offences and, consequently, may not fall within the competence of the NAD unless the damage caused exceeds the ROL equivalent of one million euros. Drawing attention to the fact that the provisions of Article 132 of the Law No 78/2000 are not precise, predictable, they bring arguments in support of the thesis of the susceptibility of unconstitutionality thereof. -
Prin Rechizitoriul din data de 18 octombrie 2013, procurorul din cadrul Parchetului de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție – Secția de Combatere a Infracțiunilor Conexe Infracțiunilor de Corupție a dispus trimiterea în judecată a inculpaților: M.J. pentru săvârșirea infracțiunii prevăzute și pedepsite de art. 132 din Legea nr. 78/2000 raportat la art. 248 C.pen. 1969, P.C. pentru complicitate la săvârșirea infracțiunii prevăzute și pedepsite de art. 132 din Legea nr. 78/2000 raportat la art. 248 C.pen. 1969 și Z.P. pentru complicitate la săvârșirea infracțiunii prevăzute și pedepsite de art. 132 din Legea nr. 78/2000 raportat la art. 248 C.pen. 1969. -
Following the Decisions of the Constitutional Court No 405/2016 and No 392/2017 there are numerous discussions regarding the regulation of the offence of abuse of office, provided by Article 297 (1) of the Criminal Code. The Ministry of Justice has proposed the amendment of Article 297 (1) of the Criminal Code without establishing a value threshold and without the circumstantiation of the injury caused by committing the facts, elements depending on which it can be assessed the incidence or lack of incidence of the criminal law, by ignoring the above-mentioned decisions of the Court. In the public debates organized by the Ministry of Justice different opinions have been expressed in the sense of establishing a derisory threshold of ROL 1 000, in another opinion a threshold of ROL 2 000 000, and in another opinion in the absence of any threshold, without any circumscribing of the offence of abuse of office. In the context of these discussions, we propose the adoption of the regulation of the French Criminal Code in which facts are clearly, precisely and predictably circumscribed. -
In this study we are making reference to the acceptance of the bill of exchange in the Republic of Moldova and in Romania. The bill of exchange includes the drawer’s order addressed to the drawee to pay to the holder of the bill of exchange (payee) the amount of money mentioned in the title. This order itself includes only an obligation of the drawer to determine the payment of the amount of money to be made to the beneficiary, as well as a designation of the person (the drawee) which is going to make the payment at maturity. But the obligation to pay the amount of money does not arise from the order given by the drawer, but from the expression of the will of the drawee itself. So only by accepting the order the drawee becomes acceptor, that is debtor of bill of exchange, and will be obliged to pay at maturity the amount of money provided by the bill of exchange. By accepting the bill of exchange, the drawee becomes the principal debtor and, as a consequence, he must be presented with the bill of exchange. -
The new regulation in the civil matter, as represented by Law no. 287/2009 on the Civil Code, adapts quasi-totally the institution of the acceptance of the inheritance. In this context, this study intends to examine the problem of the acceptance of the inheritance, a valence of the law on succession option, in all the matters it comprises, to reveal the novelties brought by Law no. 287/2009 in this matter and to assess their usefulness and opportunity. -
The absolutisation of the effects of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union or of the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in areas not falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of the European Union (EU or the Union) or in areas of shared jurisdiction where EU no longer wishes to legislate on the basis of the principles of subsidiarity or proportionality can lead to mistakes in the application of the national law by the law courts of the Member States of EU. In this article the author identifies such a case in the field of access to the data stored by the suppliers of public electronic communications networks and by the suppliers of publicly available electronic communication services and brings arguments to remedy this situation. -
This study deals with the delicate problems of infringement of the provisions of the Constitution of Romania by the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code governing the legal regime of the action in cassation, an extraordinary means of appeal. The author of the study notes that the analyzed norms are not in agreement with the principles written in the Basic Law, invoking in support thereof, for identity of reason, the grounds of the Decision No 485 of 23 June 2015 of the constitutional contentious court. -
-
In this article, the author examines the provisions of the new Criminal Code relating to the definition of railway accident, achieving a comparative examination of the current provisions. This paper is a continuation of other research in this area conducted by the author, activities which have resulted in the publication of a monograph and several articles in professional journals. Research results consist of a comparative examination of current and new provisions within the above-mentioned scope, and critical remarks. Research may be useful to theorists and practitioners in the field, especially the legislator, where the latter considers necessary to amend and supplement the definition of railway accidents. The major contribution of the article lies in author’s critical remarks, the de lege ferenda proposals concerning the definition of railway accidents, and in the need to provide another aggravated variant of offenses against railway traffic safety. -
Against the background of the interpenetration of the forms of legal liability for the same illicit deed, whether it is criminal, administrative, contraventional or disciplinary liability, in conjunction with the case law of the European courts attributing criminal character to some accusations beyond the legal qualification of the deed in the domestic law, a double criminal liability may be reached, thus posing the problem of the cumulation of these liabilities in terms of respecting the right not to be punished twice (ne bis in idem). Although no matter can be an exception, the issue arises mainly in areas where there are various forms of liability in the domestic law and different authorities with supervisory and sanctioning powers, such as tax evasion, public order, forestry or environmental offences or, finally, labour protection, which is of interest here. Thus, in the field of safety and health at work, the employer’s liability in the event of accidents at work may be exemplary for such situations, given that he is liable for both a criminal liability incurred by the judicial bodies and a contraventional liability established by the special bodies of the labour inspection, following that our approach will address this issue in the context of the current case law of the European courts of law (such as Case A and B v. Norway, Grand Chamber of the E.C.H.R., or the C.J.E.U. cases, Luca Menci, Garlsson Real Estate SA and Enzo Di Puma, Consob). -
In the context of the requirement to guarantee a higher level of protection of the health and safety of workers, imposed in the field even at European level 1 , the offences against labour protection are one of the ways that give expression internally to the highest legal protection in the field, satisfying both the special prevention in the field by preventing the occurrence of such events, sometimes having the most serious consequences and the need to punish more severely such deeds, when special social danger thereof requires so. The complexity of offences against labour protection lies in the often omissive and culpable conduct of the perpetrator, sometimes related to a particular specificity of the causality link between this and the state of concrete danger thus created, with special implications on the imputability of the deed, in the context of the difficult interpretation of the vast special legislation, which must, therefore, be known and correctly applied. The relevant doctrine was initiated, starting precisely with the comment on the first incrimination of this sort in the Criminal Code of Carol II of 1936, and relevant case law was found, including from the constitutional contentious court, with regard to the compliance with the principle of legality of the incrimination in terms of predictability of the rule of incrimination, short references being formulated to the European law in the matter of safety and health at work and of comparative law. Our analysis will cover the entire content of the specific offences, with reference to both the objective and the subjective typicalness of the offences against labour protection, including their pre-existing conditions, with the declared aim of supporting the practitioners in the field.
