Search

Magistrates, judges and prosecutors, as the main actors on the legal scene, do not benefit from absolute immunity, therefore they can be held legally liable, which wears the five forms, respectively: criminal, civil, moral, contraventional and disciplinary. To avoid this, magistrates must demonstrate good faith and responsibility, both professionally and personally. In the paper, special emphasis is placed on disciplinary liability, indicating what constitutes disciplinary misconduct, what is its structure and what are disciplinary violations, as well as disciplinary sanctions with the addition of examples from the practice of the two sections of the Superior Council of Magistracy, as a disciplinary court, as well as the panel of 5 judges of the ÎCCJ, as an appeals court. At the end, the disciplinary process is presented, indicating the stages that must be completed in order to bring the magistrate judge or prosecutor to disciplinary responsibility. In the paper, I proposed by law ferenda, the addition within article 271 of Law no. 303/2022 regarding the status of judges and prosecutors of the disciplinary offense of noncompliance with the decisions of the Constitutional Court or the decisions issued by the ÎCCJ, in the resolution of appeals in the interest of the law and in the prior resolution of some legal issues; because there is an extremely high risk that the magistrates will not give importance to these decisions, since their non-compliance is no longer provided as a disciplinary offence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the level of Romanian legislation, the accountability of deliberative authorities – the Government, local councils, or county councils – is regulated within a complex framework that includes both specific legal provisions and general principles of the rule of law. The observance of these regulations highlights both positive aspects and areas where institutional efficiency often encounters obstacles. This paper aims to analyze, at the level of local public administration, the manner in which the accountability of deliberative authorities is regulated and, more importantly, how the regulation manages to cover difficult situations arising in the functioning of the institution without affecting the basic architecture of the state. The study also presents a specific case where the accountability of a local council intervenes and follows the entire process of applying the regulation with all its consequences. The conclusion, reflected in the title of the paper, states that the institution is not fully protected in extreme situations; moreover, the intervention of a form of accountability–specifically, the dissolution of the local council – results in affecting the constitutional principle of local autonomy, allowing the functioning of an administrative-territorial unit without a deliberative authority for the entire duration of a mandate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the identification in the current legislation of two hypotheses with a correspondent in the practice of the courts – the annulment of the decision with referral for retrial and the regulator of competence in which the issue of functional incompetence is raised –, we could observe how pressure can be generated on the judge who is put to the line between one's own responsibility and the appearance of impartiality. Stated differently, the paper looks at how the judge's value-oriented conviction can be called into question by the suspicion of an objective observer, all under the law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The unfortunate events of recent years, due to the non-fulfillment or irresponsible fulfillment of service duties, have brought to the fore the discussions regarding administrative responsibility and liability. The paper below analyzes these two notions in a general way, then from a legal point of view and from the point of view of administrative law. Based on them, we formulate some conclusions and propose solutions, which we consider effective at this moment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aims at analysing the current regulatory and jurisprudential framework regarding administrative and patrimonial liability for damages caused by illegal, typical and similar administrative acts. The paper also presents the effective judicial remedies available to individuals and legal entities to repair any material or moral damage caused by the action or inaction of the administration and proposals for a coherent and uniform regulation and judicial practice for the benefit of litigants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper analyzes the aspects and implications of public authorities' liability in the case of material and moral damages suffered by citizens as a result of organizational and functional deficiencies within public services. The study focuses on identifying and evaluating cases in which state authorities can be considered solely responsible for these damages, highlighting the importance of efficient governance and competent management in public institutions. A scientific research on the liability of public authorities requires both an understanding of the existing legal framework and an investigation of its practical and theoretical implications. In our analysis, we will attempt to answer the following questions: What are the specific legal criteria by which the existence of „organizational and functional deficiencies" in public services in Romania is determined? How is material or moral damage established and quantified in the context of the patrimonial liability of public authorities? What mechanisms exist to ensure transparency and effective accountability of public authorities in the event of damages caused by organizational deficiencies? To what extent does administrative-patrimonial liability ensure a balance between the efficiency of public service and the protection of citizens' rights? What are the challenges in legal practice in demonstrating the causal link between public service deficiencies and the damage caused? What role does jurisprudence play in the evolution of the interpretation and application of the concept of liability for deficiencies in public services in Romania? The article addresses the evolution and complexity of administrative liability within the Romanian legal system, marking the transition from a traditional perception, where administrative liability was often confused with civil or criminal liability, to a distinct and institutionalized recognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]