[ad_1]
The emergency ordinance providing for the extension of the deadline within which the three-judge panels came into effect was approved by the government on Wednesday. Justice Minister Stelian Ion says that he analyzed all possible ways to solve this serious problem and concluded that there is no time to intervene legislatively in Parliament, because not all the legal deadlines for the law to enter into force would be met. on January 1, so the only option to avoid these problems was still the emergency ordinance. He says that this does not contradict the referendum by which it was decided not to adopt the GEO of justice, because it does not contain substantive norms, by which to amend the judicial institutions.
Single item
- (1) The provisions of art. 54 par. (2) of Law no. 304/2004 on the judicial organization, reissued, with subsequent amendments and terminations, regarding the appeal sentence in its entirety made up of 3 judges, it will be applied to appeals filed in processes initiated as of January 1, 2023. In processes initiated As of January 1, 2021 and until December 31, 2022 inclusive, appeals are judged in their entirety by 2 judges.
- (2) In criminal cases, the provisions of art. 54 par. (2) of Law no. 304/2004, republished, with subsequent modifications and terminations, regarding the appeal trial in its entirety made up of 3 judges, it will be applied to the appeal trial in cases that were registered in the first instance as of January 1, 2023. Appeals presented in criminal cases registered in the first instance, starting from January 1, 2021 and until December 31, 2022 inclusive, it is judged in a panel composed of 2 judges.
Stelian Ion says, in a message posted on Facebook announcing the adoption of this GEO, that the increase since January 1, 2020 in the number of judges who would judge appeals (3 judges instead of 2) would have had the effect of producing serious blocks in the functioning of the courts, overcrowding of the activity of the judges, with negative consequences in the duration of the resolution of the trials within a reasonable period of time.
It highlights that the request for this regulation came from the Superior Council of the Magistracy, with solid arguments, based on the analysis it carried out on the consequences of the application since 01.01.2021 of the provisions relating to the composition of the appeal panels of 3 judges. . Likewise, the draft emergency ordinance was approved favorably by the Superior Council of the Magistracy and the Legislative Council. Subsequently, on 12/28/2020, the SCM sent another address recalling the favorable opinion it gave for the adoption of a GEO and the need to intervene urgently to avoid negative consequences, says Stelian Ion.
It says it has looked for all possible ways to solve this serious problem and has come to the conclusion that no time is needed for legislative action in Parliament, because not all the legal deadlines would be met for the law to come into force. on January 1, so the only option to avoid these problems was still the emergency ordinance.
Is it in contradiction with the referendum on Justice?
Stelian Ion also affirms that this does not contradict the referendum of May 26, 2019 by which it was decided not to adopt the GEO on justice, because it does not contain substantive regulations, by which to amend the judicial institutions.
Their arguments:
- “The purpose of this referendum was to protect criminal law and the organization of the judiciary from unexpected and harmful interventions that, during the referendum, seemed imminent.
- A referendum organized with the clear objective of protecting the values protected by criminal law and protecting the judiciary from brutal interventions cannot be invoked for the opposite purpose.
- As the Constitutional Court clearly stated (Sentence no. 2/2019 validation of the referendum, DCC no. 28/2020, paragraph no. 47), the referendum organized on 05/26/2019 was a consultative referendum, with political effects, and, From the political point of view, the adoption of this emergency ordinance is an act of responsibility, in favor of the Judicial Power, exactly in the spirit of this referendum. I give a short relevant excerpt from the recent practice of the RCC mentioned above: [paragraful 48]; that “the result of the consultative referendum provides only a political orientation on the issues of national interest that were the object of the consultation. [u0006] the consultative referendum […] Regardless of the questions that are presented to the people and their subject matter, there remains a consultation with political effects ” [paragraful 52] and that the launch of the consultative referendum, the questions addressed to the people by the President, the use of the answers received by the public powers are subject to a political effect that, in turn, produces consequences in terms of political responsibility of the institutional actors involved and not in terms of their legal responsibility. [paragraful 73]. The Court concluded that the referendum on issues of national interest, initiated by the President of Romania in accordance with art. 90 of the Constitution, has an advisory character “.
- Due to its content, the GEO adopted today does not contain substantive regulations that modify judicial institutions (we did not repeal the SIIJ, for example, by the GEO), but rather only aims to extend the entry into force of provisions related to the good administration of Justice “.
Remember that, at the beginning of the pandemic, the Government had to approve another emergency ordinance that, formally, “seemed to contradict the referendum of 05/26/2020. It is GEO no. 28/2020 by which the Code was modified and completed. Penal. Then there were no comments, although the situation was identical, in relation to the referendum “.
“Of course, this legislative measure will be used in the political struggle in all senses. The truth is that the measure is absolutely beneficial and necessary for the Judiciary and all the constitutional conditions for its adoption by GEO are met,” he added. the new Minister of Justice.
