POSIBILE ASPECTE DE NECONSTITUŢIONALITATE ALE MĂSURII PREVENTIVE A ARESTULUI LA DOMICILIU PRIN RAPORTARE LA MĂSURA ARESTULUI PREVENTIV. STUDIU DE CAZ
POSSIBLE ASPECTS OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE PREVENTIVE MEASURE OF HOUSE ARREST IN RELATION TO THE MEASURE OF REMAND IN CUSTODY. CASE STUDY

Summary/Abstract: This paper examines the particular situation in which a preventive measure originally designed by the legislator as less severe — namely house arrest — may, in practice, prove to be more restrictive than pre-trial detention, traditionally regarded as the most intrusive measure affecting individual liberty. The analysis is grounded in the relationship between Article 23 of the Romanian Constitution, which safeguards personal freedom, and Article 53, which governs the conditions for restricting fundamental rights. It assesses the compatibility of house arrest with the principle of proportionality and with the Constitutional Court’s case law. The study highlights the distinct legal nature of house arrest, its differences from pre-trial detention, and the risks of disproportion that may arise in its practical enforcement, especially in cases involving electronic monitoring, prolonged duration, or limitations on social and professional rights. In light of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, the paper identifies potential constitutional shortcomings and suggests interpretative and legislative solutions aimed at restoring the balance between the legitimate purpose of preventive measures and the effective protection of individual liberty.

• Details
• Contents