Search

During the Preliminary The unconstitutional nature of the provisions of art. 126 para. (4) and (5) CPP has not yet been ascertained by the Constitutional Court, however, its way of drafting involves extensive discussions at the level of judicial practice. Specifically, the power of the judicial body to establish the status of threatened witness and to establish the protection measures referred to in art. 125 CPP in conjunction with art. 126 para. (1) CPP covers situations that call into question firm, coherent and adequate interventions to ensure the safety of the persons involved, which may also involve restrictions on the exercise of fundamental rights of defendants. However, in the latter hypothesis, the texts of law that exceed the generic regulatory framework and allow the execution of specific actions must also be subordinated to the principle of legality, as well as the constitutional conditions regarding the restriction of the exercise of certain rights provided by the provisions of art. 53 of the Romanian Constitution. Thus, it may be regarded that the legal provisions criticised are unconstitutional insofar as they do not recognise, during the preliminary chamber proceedings, the power of the preliminary chamber judge to rule on the protection measures, i.e., the manner in which his/her competence is exercised. In this way, the provisions of art. 1 para. (5) of the Fundamental Law on the clarity, precision and predictability of the law and the provisions of art. 124 para. (3) of the Romanian Constitution on the principles of judicial independence and separation of judicial functions are violated. This paper aims to present all these aspects and to provide the author's point of view on the reasons why the text of art. 126 para. (4) and (5) CPP is unconstitutional.

This paper aims to analyse the implications of „Law no. 140/2022 on some protection measures for people with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities and the amendment and completion of some legal acts” in Romania, by reviewing the aspects pointed out by the CCR in its unconstitutionality dec. no. 601/2020. This paper will also analyse legislative regulations on the protection of the adult in different legal systems.

As a result of the revision of the Constitution in 2003, art. 147 of the Basic Law strengthened the binding legal effect of decisions declaring the unconstitutionality of laws and ordinances, an aspect that was required to strengthen the role of the Constitutional Court. Thus, according to art. 147 para. (4) of the Constitution, the decisions of the Constitutional Court are published in the Official Gazette of Romania. From the date of publication, decisions are generally binding and have force only for the future. From the moment the decisions of the Constitutional Court are published in the Official Gazette of Romania, the legal norms declared as unconstitutional cease to have legal effects for the future. As the Constitutional Court ruled, regarding the general binding effect of its decisions, jurisprudence must be taken into account by all authorities involved in the process of applying laws and Government ordinances. The constitutional consecration of the general binding character of the decisions of the Constitutional Court determines that they are imposed on all legal subjects, just like a normative act, unlike the decisions of the courts, which produce effects inter partes litigantes. But, as I will highlight in this study, the effectiveness of unconstitutionality decisions depends on the behavior of public authorities after the moment Constitutional Court states a non-compliance with the provisions of the Basic Law.

Copyright of Revista Foco (Interdisciplinary Studies Journal) is the property of Revista Foco and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present study brings into discussion a possible problem of unconstitutionality of the provisions of art. 713 para. 2 C. proc. civ. whereas, in certain particular cases, a divergence can be identified between the restrictive conditions for exercising the objection to enforcement and the fundamental rights relevant to civil proceedings, such as the right to a fair trial or the right of defence. It is also analyzed the situation in which the enforcement is based on an enforceable title arising from administrative or tax matters, and the civil procedure is the common law.

The integration, at national level, of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights may open the subject of a dispute in relation to a contrary jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, regarding the protection of human rights. This paper integrates the possible disputes and proposes ways of solving them, as well as proposals for improving the dialogue of European states regarding the jurisdictional protection of human rights.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of non)unanimous verdicts in jury trials in Argentina. To this end, it refutes, from an originalist and contextualist paradigm, the validation, by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Argentine Nation (CSJN), of the majority verdicts in the judgment entitled: Canales, Mariano Eduardo y otro s/Homicidio Agravado - Impugnación Extraordinaria of May 2, 2019. To this end, a study is made of the arguments put forward by the CSJN to support its judgment. Likewise, the main national antecedents of trial by jury, the historical context in which it was adopted by the National Constitution of Argentina of the 1853 and the legal traditions that influenced its incorporation to the constitutional text are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current article aims in presenting and analysing the notion of "academic imposture", with relevant aspects of the legislation incident to plagiarism and self-plagiarism, as well as the legality regarding the withdrawal of the Ph.D. title in the previous and current regulations. Is plagiarism a matter of pure legality, or should it have an ethical and moral dimension? By reviewing aspects of historical writings, contemporary examples of authors accused of plagiarism, and also national examples of Ph.D. thesis, this article intends to highlight the interpretations issued by Constitutional Court of Romania, and also emphasize the need to better understand the instruments accessible for issuing a decision of withdrawal/maintaining the Ph.D. title, through a legal, ethical and moral lens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Digital de Derecho Administrativo is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Derecho Fiscal is the property of Revista de Derecho Fiscal and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article analyzes the legal consequences of the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 1-р/2023 of February 7, 2023 for the regulation of labor relations between the employer and teaching staff who are paid an old-age pension, and for the practice of resolving labor disputes regarding the recognition of their dismissal and reinstatement as illegal. Different types of situations are considered. For example, if such labor relations lasted/continues after February 7, 2023 and a labor dispute has not yet arisen, the most optimal "way out" from the point of view of the theory of labor law is to transfer teachers who are paid an old-age pension, by order of the employer, to open-ended labor contracts. Various variants of the influence of the decision of the KSU No. 1-r/2023 of February 7, 2023 on the practice of resolving labor disputes were also studied. Such labor disputes are being systematized. The following groups of authors are distinguished: 1) labor disputes that arose after February 7, 2023 and, accordingly, were considered after this date; 2) labor disputes that arose before February 7, 2023, but were considered/reviewed after February 7, 2023; 3) labor disputes that arose and were considered by the court until February 7, 2023, if the decision was not reviewed or its review was completed before this date. The article concludes that the disputes of the first group are not characterized by problems. Court practice shows that such lawsuits to declare dismissal illegal and reinstatement are decided in favor of the plaintiffteacher, who is paid an old-age pension. Labor disputes of the second group are resolved ambiguously in judicial practice. In one of the cases, the Supreme Court noted that the contested decision was based on the law that was in force at the time (as of the date of adoption of such a decision), and therefore no violations of substantive or procedural law were observed. On the other hand, in another case under a similar situation, the Supreme Court returned the case for a new consideration, pointing out the absence of other legal mechanisms for revising the court's decision, which is based on an unconstitutional norm. Labor disputes of the third group are the most problematic and debatable, because formally, the final decision in the case was made before the adoption of the KSU decision No. 1-r/2023. Review of such cases under exceptional circumstances due to recognition as unconstitutional of the provisions of par. 3 ch. 2 Art. 22 of the Law is impossible. Violation of appellate or cassation review of such cases is complicated by missing the deadlines for such an appeal. "Summary" of the KSU decision under "newly discovered" circumstances is a debatable issue, although, in our opinion, in general, such an option is not excluded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlighting the importance and actuality of the elements of negotiated justice in the criminal trial, this study deals with the issue of the statement given by the defendant during the criminal investigation, as an expression of his consent in order to conclude a guilty plea agreement. The institution of the guilty plea agreement, as a form of negotiated justice, was introduced into the procedural-criminal legislation in Romania through the provisions of the current Criminal Procedure Code (entered into force on 1 February 2014). Starting from an aspect of non-unitary practice regarding the legal consequences of the defendant's withdrawal of consent regarding the admission of guilt, as well as from the finding, by the Constitutional Court of Romania, of the unconstitutionality of some provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the guilty plea agreement procedure (including in relation to the statement given by the defendant in order to conclude the agreement), the present work brings into discussion the difficulty of adapting the adversarial elements to the continental law system to which the Romanian law is also part. The research methods used for the elaboration of the study are: the documentation, the observation and the scientific analysis, including aspects of comparative analysis (between the Anglo-Saxon legal system and the continental one, between the procedural-criminal legislations of several European states, as well as between the special procedure of the guilty plea agreement and the simplified trial procedure in the case of admission of guilt in the regulation of the current Romanian Criminal Procedure Code). The paper presents the solution pronounced by the Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice (in the Decision No 5/2017) for the unification of the judicial practice, in the sense of establishing the irrevocable character of the recognition of guilt made under the conditions of a validly expressed consent. Likewise, in the context of the legislative changes foreseen by the most recent draft law on the amendment and completion of the Criminal Procedure Code, approved by the Government of Romania on 28 December 2022, the paper formulates a concrete proposal, de lege ferenda, for the implementation of the Constitutional Court Decision No 490/2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Starting from the interpretation that the Constitutional Court of Romania (in the considerations of Decision no. 405/2016) gives to the principle of ultima ratio in criminal matters, this study addresses the issue of the application of this principle, by distinguishing between its application at the legislative level (by the legislator) and the application at the judicial level (by the criminal judicial bodies). We consider that, while, at the legislative level, the application of the principle of ultima ratio in criminal matters is manifested by the legislator exercising his power to legislate (in the sense of criminalizing an act as a crime only as a last resort to protect a social value), at the judicial level, the application of this principle, by the judicial bodies, is achieved through their possibility to order/pronounce a solution of non-engagement of criminal liability, even if the act is provided for by the criminal law, to the extent that all the conditions required by the law are met for ordering/pronouncing such a solution. In conclusion, we appreciate that the solution of closing the case or acquittal under art. 16 para. (1) lit. b) thesis I from the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code („the act is not provided for by the criminal law") cannot be argued by the judicial body by applying the ultima ratio principle in criminal matters; only a solution of waiving the criminal prosecution, respectively waiving the application of the penalty or postponing the application of the penalty can be justified by the application, at the judicial level, of this principle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accepting that the existence of an interval of time in which the perpetrator was aware at every moment of the risk of being detected and brought to justice, was sometimes equated to a real punishment, the period in which the perpetrator was forced to avoid the authorities, to live under the empire the fear that he will not escape liability, justifies the removal by law of the possibility of his conviction after the passage of a time interval related to the maximum duration of the punishment that the law provides for the committed act. Achieving the purpose of the criminal law requires that the criminal liability of the criminal intervene as close as possible to the moment of the crime, so that the process proceeds with speed. The passage of time leads to the dilution of the evidence, with the risk of convicting some innocent people, and the social resonance of the crime diminishes until it disappears. The prescription of criminal liability appears as a legal institution having effects both on the level of substantive criminal law, failure to meet the deadline being a condition to be punishable, and on the level of criminal procedural law, being a condition of procedure, the fulfillment of the limitation period preventing the exercise of criminal action. If a national regulation, specific to another legal system, considers that the prescription of criminal liability belongs to procedural law, not to substantive law, it will be possible to modify that rule in order to extend the limitation period in respect of crimes for which it has not already been fulfilled this term at the time of modification. In an attempt to emphasize the differences between a criminal procedural legislative regulation and a regulation specific to the substantive law, we considered it necessary to make a short foray into the modern criminal legislation of Romania in order to highlight the contextual orientation of the national legislator in this field of regulation. It becomes extremely important for any internal legislative process, an approach to the regulation of the prescription of criminal liability in the legal order of other states, the experience of these states being able to be considered and capitalized by the national legislator, respecting the constitutional requirements. An essential purpose of this endeavor is to provide a perspective on how to regulate the prescription of criminal liability in other legal systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Técnica Tributaria is the property of Asociacion Espanola de Asesores Fiscales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Prudentia Iuris is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica Argentina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ankara Barosu Dergileri is the property of Ankara Bar Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The paper puts forward an analysis of the effects triggered by two decisions rendered by the Constitutional Court, namely the Decision No 279/2015 and the Decision No 405/2016, in relation to one of the suspension of employment cases regulated under Article 52 (1) b) under the Labour Code, which, originally, allowed for the employer to suspend the employment agreement in the event where the latter filed a criminal complaint against the employee for acts incompatible with their position. The conclusion of this analysis is that upon entry into force of the Decision No 279/2015 of the Constitutional Court, which ascertained the unconstitutionality of the provision allowing for the suspension of the employment agreement by the employer in the event where the latter filed a criminal complaint against the employee for acts incompatible with their position, it became mandatory to terminate the effects of the suspension decision, because the legal basis for applying such measure disappeared. Therefore, any ulterior decisions rendered by the Constitutional Court, which decriminalize (in full or partially) a crime for which a criminal complaint was filed against the employee lacks relevance, as Decision No 279/2015 applies with priority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plagiarism in Romania became a controversial issue analyzed by the specialists. Also, the problem became not only a subject for the administrative authority (CNATDCU), but also for the courts of law who were empowered to analyze if doctoral theses were authentic or not, solving therefore plagiarism allegations. Historically speaking, we can discuss about legislation in this field starting with 2004. Could it be considered that doctoral theses defended before 2004 are subject to the application of the respective piece of law? The current study will try to analyze the legal provisions applicable to the withdrawal of the title of doctor and to argue that this text is clearly unconstitutional from our point of view.

In the current pandemic context, in which modern society is being challenged not only from a socio-medical point of view, but also from a moral and legal perspective, legislators across the world have been confronted with the fact of identifying a series legislative, concrete and coherent solutions, in order to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV virus 2. From this perspective, it is clear that legislative solutions have been both dissipated as an overview and insufficiently analyzed and publicly debated, arousing a wave of controversy and impugnment around the world, an issue that could cause serious concern in the legal world and to really question the citizens' trust in the judicial and constitutional litigation system, which are those designed to resolve legislative inconsistencies, with a direct transposition in the way of resolving various administrative cases before the courts. The situation is not at all special in Romania, which has adopted during the pandemic a series of normative acts that raised a multitude of legal interpretation issues. In this regard, we recall the fact that, on several occasions, the Romanian Constitutional Court has declared unconstitutional the legislative approach of the national authorities, just as the courts have invalidated a series of unilateral administrative acts, with normative character. The GEO no. 129/2021 on the implementation of the digital entry form in Romania also provided heated discussions in the legal field as well as an endless wave of criticism from the recipients of this normative act, which requires a detailed analysis of the issues related to the adoption of this normative act.

The law to combat tax evasion provides a compulsoriness of establishing the precautionary measures. Therefore, Article 11 of Law no. 241/2005 for the prevention and combating of tax evasion, sets down that, in the event that a crime provided for by this law has been committed, taking precautionary measures is mandatory. As a principle, the provisions of a special law are supplemented by the provisions of the general law, tot the extent that they do not conflict. Therefore, it is obvious that in relation to the competence to dispose of them, the act by which it is disposed of, the remedy, the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure are applicable. From the analysis of art. 11 of Law 241 of 2005, however, it would result that the precautionary measures are taken in all cases, without any exception, without the courts being able to make an evidence-based analysis of the necessity and proportionality of these measures. The article analyzes to what extent this interpretation does not contradict the constitutional requirements regarding free access to justice, the right to defense, the protection of private property equally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The integration, at national level, of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights may open the subject of a dispute in relation to a contrary jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, regarding the protection of human rights. This paper integrates the possible disputes and proposes ways of solving them, as well as proposals for improving the dialogue of European states regarding the jurisdictional protection of human rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Romanian Case Law Review / Revista Română de Jurisprudenţă is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Anuario Iberoamericano de Justicia Constitucional is the property of Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai, Iurisprudentia is the property of Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this study, the author aims to present the relevant aspects of mediation, as an alternative means of resolving disputes that the parties may use by virtue of availability, highlighting both its advantages and the reasons why the law governing it has become increasingly less applied. In addition, there are situations in which the courts have been called to approve mediation agreements, but also the author's opinion regarding the need to use the optional procedure, except for disputes in the field of family law, which should be analyzed by judges, who are the most able to pronounce solutions that correspond most faithfully to the best interests of the child. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relevance of the study is conditioned by a number of problems of declaring legal acts unconstitutional and the specifics of the consequences of such decisions to guarantee the rights of the individual. This requires a review of approaches to the temporal effect of the relevant decisions of the Constitutional Court, to guarantee the right to review court decisions adopted based on an act that has been declared unconstitutional. At the same time, it is necessary to put forward new proposals for legal regulation of the analysed area, optimal for the rule of law and ensuring the right to a fair trial. The purpose of the study is to clarify certain features and consequences of declaring legal acts unconstitutional to further ensure the rights of citizens and make proposals for amendments to the legislation. The methodological basis of the study is the dialectical and materialist method, general and special methods of legal science, in particular, system and structural, comparative law, logical and legal (dogmatic). The scientific originality lies in a comprehensive clarification of the features of the legal consequences of declaring legal acts unconstitutional and making proposals for regulatory settlement of identified problems in the conditions of Ukrainian law enforcement. According to the findings, the importance of guaranteeing the normative and practical connection between the content of the act and its impact on the damage to anyone, the proportionality of ways to compensate, and the range of legal relations in which such damage can be compensated

The objective of this study is to present our arguments on the unconstitutionality of para. (1) of the sole article of the Government Emergency Ordinance no. 4/2012 on certain temporary measures to strengthen the regulatory framework necessary for the application of certain provisions of Title VII of the Law no. 247/2005 on the reform in the fields of property and justice, as well as certain related measures. Considering that the deprivation of the main and accessory effects of the right of ownership, guaranteed by the Romanian Constitution and established by law, requires an express regulation and cannot be a consequence of the interpretation of an unclear rule, we consider that the provisions of para. (1) of the sole Article of the aforementioned normative act does not comply with the constitutional requirements of precision, clarity and predictability, as they are liable to be applied contrary to the constitutional provisions protecting both the separation and balance of state powers and the main and accessory effects of the right to property.

From the time of the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) until today, there have been occasional but continuous attacks on the territory, the population, and sovereignty of Bosnia and Herzegovina. No matter how the agreements of the Novi Pazar Convention, the Sangermen Peace Treaty, the Vidovdan Constitution, or the Zavnobih principles were violated and circumvented, the attack on the independent, sovereign, and complete BiH, a country of equal peoples and others, ie citizens, continued with equal intensity after the 1990s. XX century until today. The paper presents the continuity of fraud in terms of legal regulations, ie the legal order of Bosnia and Herzegovina. We are witnessing continuous unconstitutional and illegal activities in BiH, and whose political mentors and tutors almost always came from outside BiH, while the concrete action was carried out and is still carried out by certain Bosnian Serb and Croat political entities who often behave completely servilely concerning the national policies of neighboring countries: Croatia and Serbia, but also certain international factors due to the consequences of Islamophobia are often willing to ignore the rule of law and human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, what they jealously protect in their countries. The example of promoting the unconstitutional Day of the Republika Srpska entity and the overall state of legal unfoundedness and political hysteria created around it testifies to the claim that the political destiny of this country is still largely conditioned by local servility, and not by correct political-partnership relations with Serbia and Croatia. Given this, it is quite certain that the constitutional consistency and consociational model of democracy as well as the principle of the constituency of the people, although a big noose around the neck of this country on the path to a civil state and full realization of human rights, is extremely important legal and political support in Bosniak and all other patriotic forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which should be used properly in an insincere and ill-intentioned environment. The work in front of you contains two interrelated parts, the first part which refers to several historically important legal documents, from the end of the 19th century, which are mala fide the activity of different subjects, who initially proclaimed them and even stood behind them, played or derogated fraus legis, and the second part indicates the continuity of these actions, both domestically and internationally when it comes to the current time and recent history of political and legal relations in BiH.

Under the pretext of covid-19, the collective dimension of the freedom of worship was suspended in Portugal, through a declaration of state of emergency, between March 19 and May 2 2020. This was a gross violation of art.19, paragraph 6, of the Constitution, according to which the state of emergency cannot affect the freedom of religion. The very declarations and renewals of the state of emergency were not based on the legally required scientific advise, as the National Public Health Council (the Government's advisory body on public health matters) was silenced. In fact, lockdowns had several exceptions, but none contemplated religious activities, which was a subversion of the constitutional hierarchy of fundamental rights. When there was no state of emergency, the Government continued to limit fundamental rights through administrative regulations, invoking impertinent legal rules. The reaction of the public authorities to the covid-19 situation constituted a social paradigm shift, without previous scientific support, against the rule of law and with increasingly tragic effects. It was a trend with totalitarian tones - and, as it is well known, hostility to the free exercise of religion is typical of totalitarianism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the possibility of recognizing the formal unconstitutionality of section II and paragraph 2 of Article 216-A of Law 6.015 / 73 (Public Registers Law), for violation of the provisions of Article 65, sole paragraph of the Constitution Federal, by the Judge Corregidor of the Serve of the property usucapiendo. This expectation finds support in the diffuse control of constitutionality, adopted in the Brazilian legal system, in Article 5, paragraph XXXV, of the Federal Constitution, which enshrines the so-called 'principle of inafasability of judicial decisions' and Article 97 of the same law, which Requires the observance by the courts, for diffuse control, of the "constitutional clause of reservation of plenary", corroborated with Article 948 of the Civil Procedure Code (Law 13.105 / 2015), which governs the procedure. The diffuse control of constitutionality allows any and all judges or courts, from any instance, to exercise the power-duty to supervise the strict compatibility between the legislation and the Federal Constitution. Such a mechanism would allow the Corregidor Judge, in the exercise of his discretionary power, to elect the partial inapplicability of the provision, in the specific case, rendering a decision limited in scope to the parties and with ex tunc effects, in the interest of doubt, As permitted in Paragraph 7 of Article 216-A of the Public Registers Law. On a continuous basis, it would determine the registration of the property, regardless of the express agreement of the owner, as long as convinced of the Author's right and characteristics of the property and meeting the other requirements listed in the legal text. The result sought in this study, based on the methodological research carried out, is to emphasize that the aforementioned device, as presented, probaly not will have the intended practical application, but it is apt to become an insurmountable obstacle to the detrimentalization of the adverse possession (Usucapio) process. However, if the issue of formal unconstitutionality is met by the Judiciary, It may be possible a more optimistic view of the country's legislative disparities. Ultimately, invoke the reflection of the legal operators regarding the total discrepancy between the predicted device Legal and current trends in the laws of most contemporary societies, which, adapting to the new needs, are promoting the extrajudicialization of the processes, referring them to the analysis of tabelionates, registries and other auxiliaries of the Justice, leaving to the charge of the magistrates, only the most relevant and contradictory issues, in order to better solve the problems of the legal world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims at proving that the dismissal, terminative interlocutory decision rendered in the first phase of the rite of the jury, which departs on an interim basis the competence of the Council of Judgment for trial of criminal case, presents contradictions to constitutional order that ensures maximum effectiveness of fundamental rights. The study demonstrates that the decision violates the principles of guarantee of the individual in criminal proceedings, as the state of innocence, the sealing of 'bis in idem', sealing of judgment in expired term, besides violating the legal security of res judicata. Finally, it shows the need for recognition of its unconstitutionality presenting a more adequate legal remedy in the event of doubt on the recognition phase of accusationis judicium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Neutrosophic Computing & Machine Learning is the property of Multimedia Larga and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai, Iurisprudentia is the property of Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Istanbul Law Review / İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası is the property of Istanbul Law Review / Istanbul Hukuk Mecmuasi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Novo Gama municipality, Goiás, through the Law 1516/2015, prohibited the teaching of gender identity in its municipal schools, as well as the circulation of materials dealing with the subject referred. It did not take long for the Federal Supreme Court to recognize the local rule unconstitutionality, in the judgment of ADPF no. 457, for offending several textualized norms in the Federal Constitution, among them the dignity of the human person, equality, and the constitutional principles of education, provided for in art. 206. In addition, the aforementioned court understood that the rule of the municipality in Goiás strengthens the heteronormativity, which is the premise that only the "heterosexual way of being" is correct. Furthermore constitutional transgressions, it is also clear that Law 1516/15, by Novo Gama, goes against Rousseau's ideals, especially with regard to the concept of the common good, which should guide the State's political decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]