{"id":10049,"date":"2022-02-23T18:06:52","date_gmt":"2022-02-23T16:06:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/apador.org\/?p=10049"},"modified":"2022-02-23T18:06:52","modified_gmt":"2022-02-23T16:06:52","slug":"cautarea-persoanelor-disparute-s-ar-putea-face-neconstitutional-prin-perchezitii-domiciliare-la-orice-ora-si-fara-mandat-de-la-judecator","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/cautarea-persoanelor-disparute-s-ar-putea-face-neconstitutional-prin-perchezitii-domiciliare-la-orice-ora-si-fara-mandat-de-la-judecator\/","title":{"rendered":"C\u0103utarea persoanelor disp\u0103rute s-ar putea face, neconstitu\u021bional, prin perchezi\u021bii domiciliare la orice or\u0103 \u0219i f\u0103r\u0103 mandat de la judec\u0103tor"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sorry, this entry is only available in Rom\u00e2n\u0103<\/a>. For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.<\/p>

\n

Comisiile juridic\u0103 \u0219i de ap\u0103rare din Camera Deputa\u021bilor \u00eei \u00eendeamn\u0103 pe deputa\u021bi s\u0103 voteze Proiectul de lege privind c\u0103utarea persoanelor disp\u0103rute, care are cel pu\u021bin un articol neconstitu\u021bional; APADOR-CH cere Senatului s\u0103 \u00eendrepte aceast\u0103 gre\u0219eal\u0103<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Proiectul legii privind c\u0103utarea persoanelor disp\u0103rute<\/a> a intrat \u00een linie dreapt\u0103, \u00een procesul de adoptare, urm\u00e2nd s\u0103 fie pus pe ordinea de zi a Camerei Deputa\u021bilor, dup\u0103 ce a primit avize favorabile de la toate comisiile. Ultima avizare favorabil\u0103 a venit de la comisiile juridic\u0103 \u0219i de ap\u0103rare, care au adoptat la 15 februarie un raport comun<\/a> \u00een acest sens.<\/p>\n

Concret, raportul celor dou\u0103 comisii accept\u0103 o prevedere din proiectul de lege (art. 33 al. 2) potrivit c\u0103reia perchezi\u0163ionarea domiciliului unei persoane s<\/strong>e<\/strong> poate face \u015fi f\u0103r\u0103 autoriza\u0163ia judec\u0103torului, fiind suficient acordul persoanei din locuin\u0163a perchezi\u0163ionat\u0103<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

APADOR-CH a atras aten\u021bia deja, prin recomand\u0103rile transmise \u00een luna decembrie 2021<\/a>, c\u0103 acest articol este neconstitu\u021bional, dac\u0103 va fi adoptat \u00een forma propus\u0103 \u00een proiect. Constat\u0103m, din raportul comun al celor dou\u0103 comisii, c\u0103 articolul a r\u0103mas nemodificat, deci este foarte probabil c\u0103 deputa\u021bii vor vota legea ca atare.<\/p>\n

\n

De ce este neconstitu\u021bional\u0103 perchezi\u021bia f\u0103r\u0103 autoriza\u021bia judec\u0103torului<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Potrivit defini\u0163iei perchezi\u0163iei domiciliare din Codul de procedur\u0103 penal\u0103 (art. 157, art. 158 al. 3, art. 159 al. 8, 12, 14 lit. c din Codul de procedur\u0103 penal\u0103, care reprezint\u0103 \u201edreptul comun\u201d \u00een materie de perchezi\u0163ie domiciliar\u0103), activitatea de c\u0103utare a unei persoane \u00eentr-o locuin\u0163\u0103 (\u201everificarea prezen\u021bei fizice \u00een acel spa\u021biu a persoanei c\u0103utate<\/em>\u201d), constituie perchezi\u0163ie domiciliar\u0103.<\/p>\n

\n

Constitu\u021bia Rom\u00e2niei prevede la articolul 27 c\u0103 pentru efectuarea unei perchezi\u0163ii domiciliare nu este suficient acordul de\u0163in\u0103torului locuin\u0163ei, ci este obligatorie existen\u0163a unei autoriza\u0163ii emise de judec\u0103tor<\/strong>. De asemenea, perchezi\u0163iile \u00een timpul nop\u0163ii sunt interzise<\/strong>, \u00een afar\u0103 de cazul infrac\u0163iunilor flagrante, prevedere constitu\u0163ional\u0103 care nu se reflect\u0103, de\u015fi trebuia, \u00een con\u0163inutul art. 33 al. 2 din proiect. Concret trebuia prev\u0103zut \u00een articolul din proiect un interval orar \u00een care se puteau face, de regul\u0103, <\/strong>\u201e<\/strong>verific<\/em><\/strong>\u0103<\/em><\/strong>rile<\/em>\u201d<\/strong> \u00een locuin\u021ba unei persoane<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Desigur, \u00een situa\u021bia de excep\u021bie<\/strong> \u00een care este necesar\u0103 \u00eenl\u0103turarea unei primejdii privind via\u021ba sau integritatea corporal\u0103 a unei\/unor persoane din acel spa\u021biu<\/strong>, p\u0103trunderea \u00een spa\u021biul respectiv se va face nu \u00een condi\u021biile art. 33 al. 2 din proiect – care ridic\u0103 problemele de constitu\u0163ionalitate men\u0163ionate mai sus -, ci ale art. 33 al. 3 din proiect, adic\u0103 la orice or\u0103 \u0219i f\u0103r\u0103 autorizare de la judec\u0103tor (tez\u0103 conform\u0103 cu art. 27 al. 2 lit. b) din Constitu\u021bie).<\/p>\n

\n

Cu alte cuvinte, deputa\u021bilor li se cere s\u0103 ignore Constitu\u021bia \u0219i s\u0103 transforme excep\u021biile \u00een norm\u0103, legifer\u00e2nd perchezi\u021biile domiciliare la orice or\u0103 \u0219i f\u0103r\u0103 mandat judec\u0103toresc, indiferent de situa\u021bie.<\/p>\n

\n

\u00cen cazul, cel mai probabil, \u00een care proiectul de lege va fi adoptat \u00een aceast\u0103 form\u0103 la Camera Deputa\u0163ilor, APADOR-CH solicit\u0103 Comisiei juridice din Senat (camera decizional\u0103) s\u0103 remedieze aceste deficien\u0163e, av\u00e2nd \u00een vedere \u015fi recomand\u0103rile scrise trimise de APADOR-CH celor dou\u0103 Camere ale Parlamentului.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sorry, this entry is only available in Rom\u00e2n\u0103<\/a>. For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.<\/p>\n

Comisiile juridic\u0103 \u0219i de ap\u0103rare din Camera Deputa\u021bilor \u00eei \u00eendeamn\u0103 pe deputa\u021bi s\u0103 voteze Proiectul de lege privind c\u0103utarea persoanelor disp\u0103rute, care are cel pu\u021bin un articol neconstitu\u021bional; APADOR-CH cere Senatului s\u0103 \u00eendrepte aceast\u0103 gre\u0219eal\u0103<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":10050,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,29,81],"tags":[871,1364,1500,545,1499],"class_list":["post-10049","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-buna-guvernare","category-comunicate","category-slider","tag-cautare-disparuti","tag-cautarea-persoanelor-disparute","tag-conditii-perchezitie","tag-lege-neconstitutionala","tag-perchezitie-domiciliara"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10049","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10049"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10049\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10053,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10049\/revisions\/10053"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10050"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10049"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10049"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10049"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}