JUSTICE

CSM – negative opinion on amendment of Justice laws forwarded by Catalin Radulescu (sources)

The Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM)’s plenary sitting gave a negative opinion on Thursday on the legislative proposals for the amendments of the Justice laws forwarded by several deputies upon Catalin Radulescu’s initiative, sources from CSM told AGERPRES.

* According to the statement of the reasons of the legislative proposal for the amendment of Law no. 303/2004 regarding the Statute of judges and prosecutors, “the President, Vice-President and presidents of sections of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, as well as the Prosecutor General with the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, his first deputy and deputy, the Prosecutor General of the National Anti-corruption Prosecutor’s Office, his deputies, the chief prosecutors of these Prosecutor’s Offices as well as the chief-prosecutor of the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT) and their deputies should be nominated by Romania’s Senate, given that the latter exercises a representativeness mandate granted by the people as holder of national sovereignty.”

The document also shows that the proposal should come from the Justice Minister, as representative of the ministry watching over the observance of judiciary, as one of the three fundamental state powers, the CSM’s opinion being also necessary, as representative of the magistracy.

The draft also provides for the Senate to be able to turn down the nominations, the removal from office also being carried out by the Senate, upon the proposal of the Justice minister, with CSM’s opinion.

* As regards the amendments brought to Law no. 304/2004, the initiators propose, among other things, the amendment of article 24, which is due to have the following content””Art.24 – (1) The formation of 5 judges solve the appeals and requests in judgment in first instance by the Criminal division of the High Court of Cassation and Justice and also rule in other causes granted to them by law, as well as disciplinary court. (2) The appeal provided for in paragraph 1 can only be declared in favour of the defendant.”

* The amendments brought to Law 317/2004 refer to article 70, paragraph 1: “The inspectors with the Judicial Inspection are appointed by the chief-inspector, upon contest, for a 9-year mandate, from amidst judges and prosecutors with at least 12 seniority in magistracy, who have at least a rank of court of appeal or Prosecutor’s Office attached to the court of appeal and have had the “very good” rating at the last three assessments.”

Related posts

Reactions to CCR’s decision in Kovesi case . DNA voices concern over prosecutors’ independence status being affected. US Embassy: This is Romania’s domestic issue. PNL’s Orban: CCR ruling is looking like a coup d’etat. German Embassy: We are carefully following events

Nine O' Clock

Strategic Management Council adopts Monitoring Report on Strategy for Development of the Judiciary 2015-2020

Nine O' Clock

Lower Chamber MPs to vote on Ghita’s fate: Chamber’s Judicial Committee allows him to be detained, not arrested