[ad_1]
The Romanian Constitutional Court determined that “the legislator has exceeded his margin of appreciation in the legislative process” with respect to the taxation of pensions for the service of magistrates. The constitutional judges published, this Thursday, the reason for the decision by which they admitted the notifications made by the Ombudsman’s Office and the Superior Court of Cassation and Justice, establishing that the Law on the new system of taxation of service pensions, which provides for the taxation of 85% of pensions. the amount of 7,000 lei is unconstitutional.
“The Court reiterates that both the Constitution and the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court that develops the principle of independence of justice enshrined in article 124 paragraph 3) and article 145 of the Basic Law guarantee only the service pensions of those who exercised the quality as judge, judge in Constitutional Court, prosecutor or associate magistrate in the Superior Court of Cassation and Justice or in the Constitutional Court for the entire period imposed by law, so that whoever has had a career in these professions, not the pension service from other professional categories, assimilated or assimilated seniority, according to current legal provisions ”, is specified in the motivation consulted by Agerpres.
The Court finds that, although the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court has been constant on these issues, the legislator, by adopting the Law that modifies and complements Law 227/2015 of the Fiscal Code, ignored what was previously established and annulled all pension services regulated by Law 303. / 2004, provided that the legislator is free to grant, modify or suppress the additional component of the service pension, depending on the financial possibilities of the state, only with regard to pensions that do not enjoy constitutional protection.
The legislator must respect the benefit of the service pension.
In conclusion, considering the constitutional milestones regarding the service pension of magistrates, the Court finds that the legislator has exceeded his margin of appreciation in the legislative process, therefore the provisions of article 1341 subsection 3 letter b) and c ) introduced in the Tax Code by the Law that modifies and complements Law 227/2015 of the Tax Code are unconstitutional, violating the constitutional provisions of article 1 paragraph (3) that establishes the principle of the rule of law, article 124 paragraph (3 )) on the independence of the judiciary, article 142-145 on the status of judges of the Constitutional Court, as well as those of article 147 paragraph 4) on the general binding effect of the decisions of the constitutional court ”, explain the judges.
For the sake of identity, says the RCC, in view of the aforementioned Judgment 297 of March 27, 2012, the Court finds that the provisions of Article 134 index 1 subsection (3) letter a) introduced in the Fiscal Code by law subject to control violate the constitutional provisions in regard to account advisers.
Therefore, according to the constitutional judges, the Court determines that the legislator must respect the benefit of the service pension regulated by Law 303/2004, Law 47/1992 and Law 94/1992 of judges, magistrates of the Constitutional Court, prosecutors, deputy magistrates of the Superior Court. of Cassation and Justice and of the Constitutional Court and of the Accountants, only this service pension being within the scope of constitutional protection.
“At the same time, the legislator has the obligation to adopt the appropriate legislative measures to achieve a necessary adaptation of the pension service in relation to the reason and purpose of its constitution”, mentions CCR.
Publisher: BP
