The High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) announced on Thursday that it notified the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) about the amendments brought to Law no.303/2004 on the statute of judges and prosecutors. The PNL has filed a similar notification.
On Thursday, the National Liberal Party (PNL) lodged with the Constitutional Court a notification of unconstitutionality regarding the amendments brought to Law no.303/2004 on the statute of judges and prosecutors.
Apart from PNL House lawmakers, the document is also signed by USR House lawmakers.
“Following the re-examination of the legislative initiative, as a result of Court Decision no.252/2018, we notified the CCR about the unconstitutionality of six of the normative acts thus adopted. The notification comes after the PSD-ALDE coalition imposed legislative solutions of very low quality, at historic lows, some of the norms also crossing the limits of the re-examination and being unclear and unpredictable for future enforcement. Thus, four normative acts were modified by crossing the legal limits of the re-examination, the criticised provisions were not the object of the constitutionality control and supplementing them did not represent legislative correlation, nor were they in an indissoluble connection with the provisions declared to be unconstitutional,” the PNL notification reads.
According to the source, Parliament has crossed over the limits established by the Constitutional Court decision, by also modifying other provisions that were not indissolubly linked with the provisions declared to be unconstitutional, in violation of Article 147, Section 4, of the Constitution.
“Likewise, five normative acts do not observe the requirements of clarity, precision and predictability of the norm, imposed by Article 1, Section 5, of the Constitution, the texts being unconstitutional as a result of their impracticability in the future enforcement,” the signatories add.
The Liberals point out that Article 3, Section 12, of Law no.303/2004 – “the prosecutors appointed by the Romanian President enjoy stability” – exceeds the CCR decision, the provisions of Article 3 not being the object of its constitutionality control, and supplementing it does not represent legislative correlation, nor is the Article in an indissoluble link with provisions declared to be unconstitutional.
In what concerns the definition of the judicial error, the Liberals consider that “the lawmaker did not individualise the elements, circumstances or situations that would bound the notion of judicial error, the regulation maintaining its clearly abstract character.” Likewise, terms such as “clear infringement” or “serious impact,” although appropriate for theoretical explanations, are not appropriate for use in the legislative process,” the mentioned source adds.