3. Preliminary chamber procedure – brief considerations concerning the non-constitutionality of certain legal provisions Cover Image
  • Price 5.40 €

3. Procedura de cameră preliminară – scurte considerații privind neconstituționalitatea unor noi dispoziții legale
3. Preliminary chamber procedure – brief considerations concerning the non-constitutionality of certain legal provisions

Author(s): Mădălin Enache
Subject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence, Civil Law
Published by: Universul Juridic
Keywords: non-constitutionality; preliminary chamber; fair trial; right to defense;

Summary/Abstract: In the context of the acknowledgement of the partial non-constitutionality of the preliminary chamber procedure pursuant to the decisions of the Constitutional Court no. 599 of 21 October 2014 and no. 641 of 11 November 2014, it should be mentioned that, in so far as the situation stipulated in art. 345 para (3) is concerned, the Court has failed to apply this reasoning concerning the possibility granted to the prosecutor to correct the notification document, since the deprival of the defendant of the opportunity to knowledgeably and effectively express his opinion on the prosecutor’s response leads to the violation of the defendant’s right to a fair trial, by depriving him from the possibility to actually challenge the procedure. Thus, it is noted that in the hearing procedure before the court, the defendant’s (or any other party) right to defend himself is limited to the statement of a viewpoint (of new requests and objections) exclusively before the law court, verbally, hence without the possibility to submit a written memorandum, just as in the initial stage of this procedure and, in fact, just as it happens in the case of the Prosecutor’s Office [which must submit a written response, abiding by specific substance and form requirements, according to the provisions in art. 328 and art. 329, with the application of art. 286 para (1) of the criminal procedure Code]. This procedure violates the equality between the prosecutor and (mainly) the defendant, as a critical part of the right to a fair trial and to the effectiveness of the defense, because the latter does not benefit from the same rights and procedural facilities as the prosecution, mainly in terms of receiving a copy of the remade or supplemented notification document, against which a new request and objection memorandum may be lodged.

  • Issue Year: 2015
  • Issue No: 01
  • Page Range: 164-171
  • Page Count: 8
  • Language: Romanian
Toggle Accessibility Mode