Grounds for releasing Nastase: a model convict

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Judges have presented their grounds for the decision to release Adrian Nastase from jail. They state Nastase was a model convict.

“Analyzing the request in light of the legal provisions concerning release on parole (Article 59, Article 60 Paragraph 2), the court rules that the convict that has served the amount of jail time stipulated by law, that is disciplined, hard working and shows serious signs of reformation (main conditions) can be released, considering his prior legal record too (secondary condition). Using these legal criteria in the situation resulting from the documents included in this case, the court deems that by executing the mandatory part of his jail time the convict has earned the right to be released on parole, the court set to decide, on the basis of the other criteria established by law, if releasing him on parole is opportune,” the motivation of the decision to release former premier Adrian Nastase on parole reads. Judges also point out that Nastase was the author of a scientific paper – “Romania’s representation at the European Union in the context of internal and European regulations.” “The aforementioned text shows that the writing of a paper that entails intellectual effort is assimilated to physical labour, the requirement being for the paper to be scientific and to be published. The legal norm does not present any condition on who establishes the scientific or non-scientific character of the paper, the only requirement being for the paper to be published, a requirement that is met in this case, the aforementioned paper being published by the Official Journal in 2013. Concerning the paper’s scientific character, the court deems that this aspect is on the one hand established by the author through the theme tackled, in this case international law, European law and constitutional law. On the other hand, determining the scientific character and implicitly the value of the paper and of the opinions expressed by the author (…) is to be done by experts in the field, through critique (reviews, press articles or articles published in relevant publications etc.) or academic debates. In this case the court notes that the decision to lower the convict’s jail time by 45 days was taken in line with the aforementioned legal rulings, in the context in which the commission’s report and characterization, authentic documents issued by a state authority that is presumed legal and sound, point out that the scientific paper was written from August 10 to December 24, 2012. That things are so is proven by the approval of the requests filed by the convict on August 10 and 21, requests through which he was allowed, in line with the proposals made by the Jilava Penitentiary’s commission in line with Article 59 Paragraphs 1 and 3 of Law number 275/2006, to work on the paper 8 hours per day (40 hours per week) and then 10 hours per day (50 hours per week). It also has to be noted that the moment the penitentiary’s administration took note that the paper will be written the convict signed a commitment according to which the paper will not break copyright laws,” the motivation reads.