Modificãrile aduse pãrtii speciale a codului de procedurã penalã
Modifications brought to the Special Part of the Criminal Proceedings Code by Law no. 356/2006 and by Government’s Ordinance no. 60/2006

Summary/Abstract: Three years after the last ample modification (Law no. 281/2003), the Romanian Code of Criminal Proceedings meets a new major amendment through Law no. 356/ 2006, as part of the phenomenon of adaptation to the new contemporaneous concepts. Through its 228 amendments, Law no. 356/2006 represents the largest law of revision of the criminal proceedings Code ever since 1989. Nevertheless, following a criticized tradition, in the same day in which Law no. 356 had entered into force, Government’s Ordinance no. 60/2006 intervened directly over some legal texts which previously had been modified by Law no. 356. Starting from these fundamental coordinates, the study intends to investigate the amendments brought to the Special part of the Code of criminal proceedings, and to find the answer to the following question: if the Romanian system does not know a new criminal proceedings Code, does it know a new criminal procedure? The author offers a negative answer. She asserts that Law no. 356/2006 does not signify a substantial reform and does not put forward a new criminal procedure. The critical argument pregnant all throughout the study is that, in spite of the large number of amendments, Law no. 356/2006 is only responsible for minor modifications, not a major conceptual adjustment of the Romanian criminal proceeding. Moreover, the enactment of Government’s Ordinance no. 60/2006 consecutively to the one of Law no. 356/2006 labels this modification process of the Romania Code of Criminal Proceedings as being legislative instable, making it impossibly to coexist with a real reform in the given subject. In its introductory part, the study submits a comparative presentation of Law no. 356/2006 and Law no. 281/2003. The author shows that, as opposed to the general part of the Code, where Law no. 356/2006 has intervened to limit in a repressive way some dispositions of Law no. 281/2003, in the special part, the legislation of 2006 has mainly amended areas not touched in 2003, such as the hierarchical control in the Public Office, the first instance judgment, the superior courts judgment, the execution of criminal sentences. In other aspects, Law no. 356/2006 completes texts modified by Law no. 281/2003, performing tasks such as: the consolidation of the judiciary police subordination to the Public Office, the underlining of the jurisdictional character of solving complaints against the prosecutor’s resolutions, the transfer of ECHR decisions in internal law. Secondly, the author analyses the exceptional circumstances which could justify the enactment of Government’s Ordinance no. 60. She concludes that, by colliding with the dispositions of Law no. 356/ 20006, not all the provisions brought by the Ordinance are justified and this must by sanctioned by the Parliament, in the approval process of the Ordinance. In the second part of the article, the author puts forward an overview of the amendments brought to the special part of the cr

• Details
• Contents