Search

Currently, in the Romanian legal system, the judge interprets and adapts the law to the concrete realities, remedies the normative gaps and discovers remedies that can inspire the legislator. In this regard, the role of the judicial precedent materialised in the decisions of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, pronounced in the appeal in the interest of the law, must be emphasised, because these decisions create general rules for interpreting and applying legal provisions that generate non-unitary practices. The legal doctrine is unanimous in considering that the decisions pronounced in the appeal in the interest of the law are sources of law. Of course, there are also differences of opinion in this respect, but insignificant, in the sense that they are considered by some authors as main sources, and by other authors as secondary sources of law, as long as the character of source of law is recognized.

In this study, I decided to analyze the activity of the judge of surveillance of deprivation of liberty in relation to the amendments made by Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences and custodial measures ordered by the court during the criminal trial, published in the Official Gazette no. 514 of August 14, 2013. I will also analyze its role, both in terms of the powers of an administrative nature, especially those with administrative-jurisdictional nature in establishing and changing the arrangements for enforcement and custodial, educational measures for the solving of the complaints regarding the disciplinary sanctions and the complaints regarding the exercise of the rights provided by Law no. 254/2013;

Juridical principles have a privileged place within the positive juridical order, representing foundation of the legal edifice: they prove the continuity of law during the centuries and that is why here we have to dig in order to find out the foundation of law, its permanent nature, its substance; they precede and give birth to positive law, which lies upstream of legal rules; principles build and direct the entire system of law, conferring to the legal order its necessary stability; being the underlayer of positive law, the principles of law represent a stability factor and, also, a source of unity, coherence, consistency and efficiency for that legal system1. The entire law science consists in reality of “generating from the multiplicity of law dispositions their essential, namely these exact last justice principles, from which all the other dispositions derive. Hereby, the entire legislation becomes of a great clarity and is caught in the so-called legal spirit”2.

Nowadays, the Romanian social and political context debates more and more on the patrimonial liability of judges for errors of law in cases settled by them. This work aims at presenting legal terms, based on which both the civil and criminal disciplinary liability can be generally enacted.

The Prosecutor, in charge with the criminal prosecution, informs the Court through the indictment drawn up by him. Given its importance, as Court informing document, the law provides special treatment for its content and form. Both the end of the criminal prosecution and the arraignment, as distinct moments of the procedure, are parts of the criminal prosecution, considered criminal trial phase. The New Criminal Procedure Code introduced this new phase, the preliminary chamber, with the purpose to verify the lawfulness of arraignment. Thus, incorrectly drawn up files are stopped from being presented before the Court.

According to Law no. 254/2013 regarding the execution of sentences and custodial measures ordered by the court during the criminal trial, the judge that oversees the limitation of freedom process to monitor and control the execution of sentences and ensures the legality of custodial measures. Although Spanish and Italian law systems influenced the institution of this judge it did not copy the regulation from this countries, but continues the line started in our country by Law no. 275/2006, which regulated the judge delegated for the execution of custodial sentences. This study aims without trying to be exhaustive, to present different models adopted by European countries in the matter of justices that control the activity during the execution of custodial sentences. Thus we analyzed the laws of Italy, Spain and Germany. Without trying to prioritize these European regulations, the paper aims to present the legal nature of the activity of this type of justice in relation to the regulated activity of the Romanian legislation, which mentions that his or hers responsibilities are administrative and also administrative jurisdictional. We also note the similarities between the powers of this type of judge in the European countries presented, regarding, for example, the complaints of inmates against prison conditions or infringements of their rights, but at the same time the difference which will be highlighted in particular in relation to the status of these judges. In the last part of the paper we present a number of problems and we propose possible solutions to their law by adopting new legal provisions taken from the laws of the European countries analyzed in this study.

Since it’s entry into force in February 2014, the new criminal legislation has brought many new institutions in the field of criminal procedure. One of the most important changes is found in the matter of sanctioning of minors, which, as of this date, cannot receive imprisonment, but only educational measure, custodial or non-custodial. This article focuses on the first category of educational measures applicable to minors that purpotrate a crime, the ones that do not require a deprivation of personal freedoms under Art. 115 para. 1 pt. 1 of the Criminal Code, namely: civic training course, supervision, home arrest on weekends and daily assistance and everything needed in enforcing them. The study aims to highlight, on the one hand, how the procedural enforcement of non-custodial educational measures that are applied to minors is achieved, and on the other hand, the institutions involved in this activity, namely the judge and the Probation Service. We present the method of execution, and the modification of obligations which minors must comply during non-custodial educational measures, mainly aimed at forming a spirit of responsibility and respect for the rights and freedoms of others to juvenile offenders . In the last part, the study presents the difficulties that courts faced in the first year after the entry into force of these laws, in particular the situation in which the non-custodial educational measures could not be enforced by the court in cases in which the court was not liable. A special mention is given on the exact timing at which the execution of non-custodial educational measures commences, also presenting the disparities in legislation, which led to different solutions in the practice of courts. In light of these difficulties, the study tries to identify possible solutions, including the amendment of legislation, formulating proposals for new laws in this regard.

The importance of this work lies in important changes in the new Code of Criminal Procedure, amendments justified by the new realities of a democratic society in which criminal procedural rules must be adapted according to the daily realities in the achievement of justice. The purpose of the paper is given by the need of approaching at a theoretically level the institution of The Pre-Trial Chamber Judge, given that so far there have not been developed any works on the subject. This paper addresses both practitioners and litigants.

The article examines the role of the National Bank of Romania in the insolvency procedure of the banking institutions. The most important regulations regarding this issue consist in the Government’s Order 10/2004 regarding the bankruptcy of credit institutions. According to it, the following officials are to be appointed in the insolvency procedure of banking institutions: insolvency courts of justice, insolvency judge and liquidator. Although the National Bank of Romania is not considered a participant, it has a very important role in this procedure. My article presents in the beginning the Status of the National Bank of Romania. The next chapters are dedicated to the role of the National Bank of Romania in insolvency: withdrawal of the operating license of the credit institution, taking part in the insolvency procedure as an active participant or as a creditor side, appointing and dismissing of the interim administrator, mandatory or advisory opinion, role of information.

The article examines the officials and other participants in insolvency. The main purpose of the insolvency procedure is to cover all the debts of the debtor side, in favor of his creditor side. The most important regulations regarding this issue consist in Law no. 85/2006, according to it in the insolvency procedure are to be appointed the following officials: insolvency courts of justice, insolvency judge, receiver, liquidator. All these officials have to act in celerity, in order to promptly perform acts and operations provided by law and to respect and provide other participants’ rights and obligations. My article present in the beginning the insolvency courts of justice, their material and territorial competence and the procedure rules. Next chapters are dedicated to the insolvency judge, receiver and liquidator and analyze the following issues: their appointment, their powers, their auxiliary officials and their ceasing of the powers. Some regards on the British law and French law are also included. The next chapter is dedicated to the participants to the insolvency procedure: the creditors general assembly, creditors committee and special administrator, followed by conclusions and recommendations.

The independence of the court is essential of state of rule, to maintain the stability in juridical intercourse, for the existence of a constitutional democracy achieved through a warranty of the necessary objectivity for the steady and legal settlement of the causes deducted to the trial and the achievement of a fair trial. The article emphasizes the main international juridical tools in which independence of justice is reflected, achieving an examination of judicial practice of European instance as well as an analysis of this principle as it is regulated by Romanian justice.