{"id":5565,"date":"2017-01-27T09:24:52","date_gmt":"2017-01-27T09:24:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.apador.org\/?p=5565"},"modified":"2017-01-27T09:24:52","modified_gmt":"2017-01-27T09:24:52","slug":"apador-ch-cere-ccr-sa-clarifice-sintagma-condamnari-penale-din-legea-902001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/apador-ch-cere-ccr-sa-clarifice-sintagma-condamnari-penale-din-legea-902001\/","title":{"rendered":"APADOR-CH cere CCR s\u0103 clarifice sintagma \u201econdamn\u0103ri penale\u201d din Legea 90\/2001"},"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>

<\/p>\n

APADOR-CH a depus azi la Curtea Constitu\u021bional\u0103 un amicus curiae \u00een sprijinul demersului de clarificare a prevederilor Legii 90\/2001, lege care \u00eei \u00eempiedic\u0103 pe politicienii condamna\u021bi s\u0103 ocupe func\u021bii de demnitate public\u0103 \u00een Guvern.<\/p>\n

Asocia\u021bia consider\u0103 c\u0103 sunt ne\u00eentemeiate argumentele folosite de Avocatul Poporului, pentru a motiva excep\u021bia de neconstitu\u021bionalitate ridicat\u0103 la CCR pe aceast\u0103 tem\u0103<\/a>, dar \u00een acela\u0219i timp apreciaz\u0103 c\u0103 sintagma \u201econdamn\u0103ri penale<\/em>\u201d din cuprinsul legii amintite ridic\u0103 probleme de constitu\u021bionalitate, \u00eentruc\u00e2t este prea vag\u0103 \u0219i las\u0103 loc la interpret\u0103ri arbitrare.<\/strong><\/p>\n

APADOR-CH apreciaz\u0103 c\u0103, prin ambiguitatea sa, sintagma \u201econdamn\u0103ri penale<\/em>\u201d din amintita lege \u00eencalc\u0103 art. 1 al. 5, art. 23 al. 11 \u015fi art. 53 al. 2 din Constitu\u0163ie (ce vizeaz\u0103 respectarea prezum\u021biei de nevinov\u0103\u021bie \u0219i restr\u00e2ngerea unor drepturi).<\/p>\n

Ca modalitate practic\u0103 de remediere a viciului de constitu\u0163ionalitate prezentat, asocia\u0163ia consider\u0103 c\u0103 este suficient ca \u00een decizia Cur\u0163ii s\u0103 se men\u0163ioneze c\u0103 respectiva sintagm\u0103 este constitu\u0163ional\u0103 \u00een m\u0103sura \u00een care ea se refer\u0103 la \u201econdamn\u0103ri definitive pentru care nu a intervenit reabilitarea sau, dup\u0103 caz, nu a \u00eencetat executarea m\u0103surilor de siguran\u0163\u0103<\/em><\/strong>\u201d.<\/p>\n

Citi\u021bi textul integral al amicus curiae depus de APADOR-CH.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

*<\/p>\n

Dosarul \u00een care CCR urmeaz\u0103 s\u0103 se pronun\u021be asupra constitu\u021bionalit\u0103\u021bii Legii 90\/2001 se afl\u0103 \u00een faz\u0103 de raport (nu are \u00eenc\u0103 un termen, conform procedurilor Cur\u021bii). \u00cen aceea\u0219i spe\u021b\u0103 a mai depus amicus curiae \u0219i organiza\u021bia Expert Forum.<\/a><\/em>
\nOrganiza\u0163iile <\/em>neguvernamentale <\/em>nu au calitate de intervenient \u00een acest contencios constitu\u0163ional<\/em>, \u00een care Curtea a fost sesizat\u0103 de Avocatului Poporului, \u00eens\u0103 prin <\/em>amicus curiae<\/em> este permis celor care au o expertiz\u0103 \u00eentr-un anumit domeniu s\u0103 ajute instan\u0163a, ca \u201cprieteni ai instan\u0163ei\u201d (amicii curiae), prin furnizarea, cu rol consultativ, de informa\u0163ii\/observa\u0163ii relevante pentru solu\u0163ionarea unei cauze importante.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

\n

<\/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

Amicus curiae pentru clarificarea legii care le interzice condamna\u021bilor s\u0103 fie premieri – Consider\u0103m c\u0103 sunt ne\u00eentemeiate argumentele folosite de Avocatul Poporului, dar sintagma \u201econdamn\u0103ri penale\u201d ridic\u0103 probleme de constitu\u021bionalitate, \u00eentruc\u00e2t este prea vag\u0103 \u0219i las\u0103 loc la interpret\u0103ri arbitrare.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":5567,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,29,81],"tags":[125,41,42,581,90,580,126],"class_list":["post-5565","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-buna-guvernare","category-comunicate","category-slider","tag-amicus-curiae","tag-apador-ch","tag-avocatul-poporului","tag-condamnare-penala","tag-curtea-constitutionala","tag-legea-902001","tag-neconstitutional"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5565","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=5565"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5565\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5567"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5565"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5565"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/apador.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5565"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}