Constitutional Court (CCR) has unanimously decided on Thursday that the law provision referring to the prosecutors and judges’ relocation to other courts or prosecution offices, to the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM), to the National Institute of Magistracy, to the Ministry of Justice (MJ) and to other public authorities, is unconstitutional, since it doesn’t mention which are the conditions in which the relocation period ends. The constitutional challenge was submitted in the case in which the former Secretary of State in the Ministry of Justice, Oana Schmidt Haineala, filed a complaint at the High Court of Cassation and Justice against the relocation to MJ, following the scandal related to GEO 13.
The CCR plenum debated on Thursday the constitutional challenge of the Art.58 par. (I) of the Law no.303/2004 on the statute of judges and prosecutors, republished in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no.826 since September 13, 2005, with subsequent amendments and completions, having the following content: “The Superior Council of Magistracy orders the relocation of judges and prosecutors, with their written consent, to other courts or prosecution offices, to the Superior Council of magistracy, to the National Institute of Magistracy, to the Ministry of Justice or its subordinated units, or to other public authorities, in any positions, including appointed positions of public dignity, at the request of these institutions, as well as to European Union institutions or to international organizations”.
“Following the debates, the Constitutional Court has unanimously admitted the constitutional challenge against the provisions of Art.58 par. (1) of the Law no.303/2004 and decided that the legislative solution which does not mention the conditions in which the relocation period of the judges or prosecutors ends is unconstitutional” reads a press release issued by CCR.
The Court held that the challenged legal text – which regulates the conditions of the judges and prosecutors’ relocation – does not mention also the conditions in which their relocation ends. “Depending on the judge or prosecutor’s career, both the relocation conditions and the conditions of the end of the relocation must be expressly provided by the statute of judges or prosecutors. The lack of an express text in the content of the Art.58 of the Law no.303/2004, which provides the conditions in which the relocation of judges or prosecutors ends, leads to the breach of Art.1 par. (5) of the Constitution, because the statute of judges and prosecutors must be regulated by the law” reads the quoted source.
The decision is final and generally binding and it will be communicated to the two Chambers of the Parliament, to the Government and to the court that notified the Constitutional Court, namely to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – the Department for Administrative and Fiscal Litigations. The arguments held by the motivation of the decision ruled by the Plenum of the Constitutional Court will be presented in the content of the decision, which will be published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I.