In this article the author analyzes the constitutional text (Article 83 of the Basic Law) which sets the duration of the term of office of the President of Romania. The problem of setting the duration of the term of office of the President of Republic is both a legal problem and a political one, whereas, in terms of electing the President of Romania by direct universal vote, it has a legitimacy equal to that of the Parliament, which confers it the vocation to aspire to an enhanced executive power, in which case it may enter into cohabitation relations with the Government supported by a parliamentary majority hostile to the President of Republic. The author brings into discussion for the first time in the specialised literature and on the basis of the documents of the Constituent Assembly, existing in the Archive of the Senate of Romania, the duration of the five-year term of office of the President, forecast by the Commission for drafting of the Constitution and included in the original form of the Theses suggested by the Commission to the Constituent Assembly. Following the parliamentary debate, the constituent legislators reduced the five-year term of office of the President of Romania to four years. Following the constitutional revision in 2003, the five-year presidential term of office is restored starting from 2009.

This article inspired us by the following situation existing in the legislation and doctrine: The law on county councils does not contain edifying referrals to specific procedures for approving the minutes of county councils meetings (we find also a quasi-similar situation regarding the minutes’ records challenge in court); The doctrine which should have filled this gap is inexistent and is limited to making referrals to other aspects of the minutes, taken from legislation, legislation which, as already mentioned, is extremely vague on this matter; The lack of an administrative procedure code leaves unclear this side of the concrete way for the minutes’ approval. Therefore, starting from the unequal practice of local authorities on the minutes’ approval in court, we shall try, through the arguments in this article, to come to support practitioners in local government and, why not, to also offer a source of inspiration in drafting the Administrative Procedure Code.

Curtea Constituțională a fost sesizată cu excepția de neconstituționalitate ridicată de un număr mare de funcționari publici trimiși în judecată pentru săvârșirea infracțiunii de abuz în serviciu, care a fost reglementată de art. 246 din Codul penal din 19691, având conținutul „Fapta funcționarului public, care, în exercițiul atribuțiilor de serviciu, cu știință, nu îndeplinește un act ori îl îndeplinește în mod defectuos și prin aceasta cauzează o vătămare intereselor legale ale unei persoane se pedepsește cu închisoare de la 6 luni la 3 ani”, precum și de art. 297 alin. (1) din Codul penal în vigoare, adoptat în anul 2009, potrivit căruia „Fapta funcționarului public care, în exercitarea atribuțiilor de serviciu, nu îndeplinește un act sau îl îndeplinește în mod defectuos și prin aceasta cauzează o pagubă ori o vătămare a drepturilor sau intereselor legitime ale unei persoane fizice sau ale unei persoane juridice se pedepsește cu închisoare de la 2 la 7 ani și interzicerea exercitării dreptului de a ocupa o funcție publică.”

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.

After the adoption and the entry into force of the Law on the administrative disputes No 554/2004, subsequently to the constitutional revision of 2003, the problems of the special administrative jurisdictions are of particular interest, being one of the institutions of the public law meant to ensure the celerity of the settlement of disputes, doubled by the guarantee offered to the litigants, concerning the compliance with the constitutional principle of free access to justice, the right to a fair trial and to the settlement of cases within a reasonable time. In this context, the study intends to make an analysis of the constitutionality of the special administrative jurisdictions regulated by the Law No 554/2004 and in some special normative acts, adopted after the constitutional revision from 2003, in relation to the provisions of Article 21 (4) of the Romanian Constitution revised and republished.

In this article the author discusses from a constitutional perspective the concept of capital – commonly used by the Constituent Assemblies to designate within the constitutions the headquarters of the national sovereignty authorities. In his comments, the author presents the political conditions and the historical context of choosing Bucharest as residence of the princely court of Walachia mid seventeenth century and the evolution of the city from a historical, political and administrative viewpoint. The study presents in detail the changes suffered by the city of Bucharest during the Organic Regulations that have established administrative measures for its modernization. Bucharest became capital of the United Principalities in 1862 during the reign of Alexandru Ioan Cuza. Since then its status as capital has not been contested anymore, a situation also reflected in provisions of constitutional rank.

In the last decades, administrative law underwent a phenomenon of didactic fragmentation which nobody can ignore today. Numerous monographies within the doctrine of public law, whose purpose – stated in their own titles – is to treat, from multiple perspectives and in a more or less profound manner, (very) narrow subjects of administrative law, have invaded the book market. It happened not only in Romania, but also in France, a country which reasonably claims to be the homeland of administrative law as a branch of law, and therefore as a teaching subject, in its current European continental approach. This literary explosion went hand in hand with an unprecedented proliferation of master studies specializations offered by higher education institutions, in the area of administrative law and/or public administration. Are these phenomena able to fragment the theoretical discourse of administrative law in such a way that this subject loses its unity and, hence, ideological identity? Most likely not. The model proposed by us – that of the five ideological foundations of administrative law – seems to have the ability to prevent the undesirable result hereabove mentioned. With these five ideological foundations – the public administration, the public authority, the public service, the public interest and the public power – almost all the defining and descriptive equations of the major institutions of administrative law (such as the civil service, the public domain, the public enterprise, the unilateral administrative act, the administrative contract, the administrative litigation and public authorities’ financial liability for damage caused by their illegal acts) are likely to be solved. And if this is possible, then the idea of ideological unity/identity of the administrative law is safeguarded, despite the didactic fragmentation previously envisaged.

The new legislative context was a strong argument, mainly, for reconfiguring the recourse, which is not a new legal remedy for our system of law, the cassation recourse being actually built on the structure of the recourse of the previous Criminal Procedure Code, with no fundamental differences in this regard. Article 433 of the Criminal Procedure Code expressly provides the purpose of the cassation recourse, which seeks to subject to the High Court of Cassation and Justice the examination, under the terms of the law, of the conformity of the challenged judgment with the applicable rules of law. However, the cassation recourse aims at ensuring a uniform practice at the level of the entire country. There are expressly provided the judgments which can be challenged by means of the cassation recourse, as well as those that are not subject to this extraordinary legal remedy. In relation to the specificity of this extraordinary legal remedy, the code imposes strict conditions on the contents of the application for cassation recourse, the holders and the time limit for bringing this action, aspects presented within the paper, being followed up all the legislative amendments that have occurred so far.

This study, entitled „Harmonisation between tribunals. Some points of reference”, is dedicated to some considerations on the collaboration between the national tribunals, on the one hand, and the tribunals established at the level of the European Union – the Tribunal of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights –, on the other. The author starts from the finding that the European citizens can protect their rights both through the courts in their own country and through the previously mentioned European courts.