18. Sechestrul dispus în faza de judecată. Cale de atac. Constituţionalitate
18. Seizure ordered in the judgement phase. Means of appeal. Constitutionality

Summary/Abstract: The seizure of assets as a measure of insurance, in order to guarantee one of the purposes stipulated in the provisions in art. 249 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not concern the „soundness” of a criminal accusation according to art. 6(1) of the Convention, so that it cannot be claimed that the existence of double jurisdiction degree against the insurance measure in the criminal trial stage applies. Or, the principle of the double jurisdiction degree supposes the right to claim the examination of the guilt statement or of the conviction by a superior jurisdiction, and not the safety or insurance measures taken in the criminal trial. However, the laws in force impose the judge taking the seizure measure in the judgement phase to summon, after such measure, the parties that could claim rights over the seized assets and to grant them the possibility to sustain their claims in an equitable procedure, so as to check the proportionality of the interference and to observe the good faith rights of the third parties, the judge subsequently ruling on their demands against the insurance measure proposal.

• Details
• Contents