Anunţă-mă când se modifică Fişă act Comentarii (0) Trimite unui prieten Tipareste act

DECIZIE Nr

DECIZIE   Nr. 22 din 10 februarie 1998

referitoare la exceptia de neconstitutionalitate a dispozitiilor art. 159 alin. 7 teza a III-a din Codul de procedura penala

ACT EMIS DE: CURTEA CONSTITUTIONALA

ACT PUBLICAT IN:            MONITORUL OFICIAL  NR. 161 din 23 aprilie 1998


SmartCity3


    Mihai Constantinescu   - presedinte
    Costica Bulai          - judecator
    Viorel Mihai Ciobanu   - judecator
    Nicolae Popa           - judecator
    Lucian Stangu          - judecator
    Florin Bucur Vasilescu - judecator
    Romul Petru Vonica     - judecator
    Victor Dan Zlatescu    - judecator
    Ioan Griga             - procuror
    Maria Bratu            - magistrat-asistent

    Pe rol, pronuntarea asupra exceptiei de neconstitutionalitate a dispozitiilor art. 159 alin. 7 din Codul de procedura penala, invocata de Parchetul de pe langa Tribunalul Municipiului Bucuresti in Dosarul nr. 2.342/1997 al Tribunalului Municipiului Bucuresti - Sectia a II-a penala.
    Dezbaterile au avut loc in sedinta publica din data de 19 ianuarie 1998, in prezenta lui Petre Corneliu si in lipsa celorlalte parti, pentru care procedura de citare a fost legal indeplinita, si sunt consemnate in incheierea din aceeasi data, cand, avand nevoie de timp pentru a delibera, Curtea a amanat pronuntarea pentru data de 3 februarie si apoi pentru data de 10 februarie 1998.

    CURTEA,
avand in vedere actele si lucrarile dosarului, constata urmatoarele:
    Prin Incheierea din 1 iulie 1997 Tribunalul Municipiului Bucuresti - Sectia a II-a penala a sesizat Curtea Constitutionala cu exceptia de neconstitutionalitate a prevederilor art. 159 alin. 7 din Codul de procedura penala, invocata de Parchetul de pe langa Tribunalul Municipiului Bucuresti in Dosarul nr. 2.342/1997 al acestei instante.
    In motivarea exceptiei se sustine ca aceste dispozitii contravin prevederilor art. 23 din Constitutie, "care stabilesc ferm ca arestarea se poate face numai pentru o durata de cel mult 30 de zile". In acest sens, se arata ca, intrucat, potrivit art. 159 alin. 7 din Codul de procedura penala, recursul suspenda executarea incheierii prin care s-a respins prelungirea arestarii, pana la judecarea acestuia, in cazul in care recursul nu poate fi solutionat pana la expirarea mandatului de arestare, efectul suspensiv se produce si dupa data expirarii acestui mandat.
    Exprimandu-si opinia, instanta arata ca aplicarea dispozitiilor art. 159 alin. 7 din Codul de procedura penala a condus la solutii contradictorii, asa cum rezulta din practica Curtii de Apel Bucuresti. Pentru exemplificare, instanta analizeaza solutiile pronuntate in trei cauze, din care deduce urmatoarele aspecte:
    - cand solutionarea recursului are loc inainte de expirarea duratei arestarii inculpatului, prevazuta in mandatul Parchetului sau in incheierea instantei, situatia nu contravine prevederilor art. 23 din Constitutie;
    - daca insa solutionarea recursului are loc dupa expirarea duratei arestarii, devin incidente dispozitiile art. 159 alin. 7 teza a III-a din Codul de procedura penala, inculpatul ramanand in arest si dupa expirarea duratei arestarii, ceea ce este contrar art. 23 din Constitutie.
    Instanta subliniaza, totodata, imperfectiunile reglementarilor privind arestarea preventiva din Codul de procedura penala in vigoare si necesitatea unei reformulari a normelor incidente, pentru a se evita orice confuzie si, mai ales, contrarietatea cu Constitutia.
    In opinia instantei, ipoteza solutionarii recursului impotriva incheierii de respingere a prelungirii arestarii, inainte de expirarea duratei mandatului de arestare, nu este realista, deoarece termenele prevazute in Codul de procedura penala sunt la limita posibilitatilor practice de incadrare in ele.
    In concluzie, instanta opineaza pentru neconstitutionalitatea art. 159 alin. 7 teza a III-a din Codul de procedura penala.
    In vederea solutionarii exceptiei de neconstitutionalitate, s-au cerut, in conformitate cu dispozitiile art. 24 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 47/1992, republicata, punctele de vedere ale presedintilor celor doua Camere ale Parlamentului si al Guvernului Romaniei.
    Guvernul Romaniei, in punctul sau de vedere, arata ca art. 159 alin. 7 teza a III-a din Codul de procedura penala reprezinta unul dintre temeiurile legale ale arestarii, dispozitie inscrisa in interesul desfasurarii instructiei penale. Se sustine ca aceste dispozitii sunt in concordanta cu prevederile art. 23 alin. (2) si ale art. 49 alin. (1) din Constitutie, precum si cu dispozitiile art. 149 alin. 1 din Codul de procedura penala.
    In concluzie, se arata ca aplicarea dispozitiilor art. 159 alin. 7 teza a III-a din Codul de procedura penala nu ar ridica probleme, daca instantele, precum si organele de urmarire penala ar respecta dispozitiile Codului de procedura penala referitoare la cauzele cu arestati. Respectandu-se termenele legale, ar fi posibil ca recursul impotriva incheierii de respingere a prelungirii arestarii sa fie judecat si solutionat inainte de expirarea duratei mandatului de arestare.
    Presedintii celor doua Camere ale Parlamentului nu au comunicat punctele lor de vedere.

    CURTEA,
examinand incheierea de sesizare, punctul de vedere al Guvernului, raportul intocmit de judecatorul-raportor, concluziile procurorului, sustinerile partii prezente si dispozitiile legale atacate, raportate la prevederile Constitutiei si ale Legii nr. 47/1992, republicata, constata urmatoarele:
    In temeiul art. 144 lit. c) din Constitutie si al art. 23 din Legea nr. 47/1992, republicata, Curtea este competenta sa se pronunte asupra exceptiei cu care a fost legal sesizata.
    Textul art. 159 alin. 7 din Codul de procedura penala, care face obiectul exceptiei de neconstitutionalitate, este urmatorul:
    "Incheierea prin care s-a hotarat asupra prelungirii arestarii poate fi atacata cu recurs de procuror sau de inculpat. Termenul de recurs este de 3 zile si curge de la pronuntare, pentru cei prezenti, si de la comunicare, pentru cei lipsa. Recursul declarat impotriva incheierii prin care s-a dispus prelungirea arestarii preventive nu este suspensiv de executare, iar recursul declarat impotriva incheierii prin care s-a dispus respingerea prelungirii arestarii preventive este suspensiv de executare".
    Cu ocazia dezbaterii, partea prezenta, Petre Corneliu, a invocat si neconstitutionalitatea art. 140 alin. 2 si a art. 159 alin. 10 din Codul de procedura penala. Cu privire la acest aspect Curtea nu se poate pronunta, intrucat, conform si practicii sale constante, o exceptie de neconstitutionalitate nu poate fi ridicata direct in fata Curtii Constitutionale, art. 144 lit. c) din Constitutie referindu-se in mod expres numai la exceptiile "ridicate in fata instantelor judecatoresti".
    Desi incheierea de sesizare se refera la art. 159 alin. 7 din Codul de
procedura penala, atat din opinia instantei, cat si din sustinerile partilor rezulta ca sunt avute in vedere numai prevederile tezei a III-a a acestui alineat, asupra caruia Curtea urmeaza sa se pronunte. In cuprinsul acestor prevederi sunt avute in vedere doua ipoteze: prima, referitoare la recursul impotriva incheierii de prelungire a arestarii, precizandu-se ca, in acest caz, recursul nu are efect suspensiv, si a doua, referitoare la recursul impotriva incheierii de respingere a cererii de prelungire a arestarii, cand are un asemenea efect.
    In ceea ce priveste recursul declarat impotriva incheierii prin care s-a dispus prelungirea arestarii preventive, este evident ca acesta nu poate avea efect suspensiv, intrucat, prin ipoteza, cel arestat este sub imperiul mandatului prelungit prin hotararea judecatoreasca atacata. Daca recursul ar avea efect suspensiv, ar insemna sa afecteze executarea unui mandat prelungit de instanta, ceea ce este contrar prevederilor art. 23 alin (4) din Constitutie, potrivit caruia prelungirea arestarii se aproba de instanta judecatoreasca.
    In acelasi sens sunt si prevederile pct. 4 al art. 1 din Conventia pentru apararea drepturilor si libertatilor fundamentale ale omului, potrivit carora orice persoana arestata are dreptul de a fi judecata de o instanta judecatoreasca, care sa decida asupra legalitatii privarii sale de libertate. Asa cum s-a statuat de Curtea Europeana a Drepturilor Omului prin Hotararea din 29 noiembrie 1988, in cazul Brogan si altii contra Regatului Unit, dreptul celor arestati de a se adresa judecatorului constituie un recurs de habeas corpus, care permite autoritatii judecatoresti sa cenzureze motivele arestarii. In consecinta, numai instanta judecatoreasca poate dispune asupra legalitatii arestarii, ceea ce exclude, de plano, ca recursul partii sa poata avea un efect suspensiv. De aceea, dispozitiile din prima parte a tezei a III-a din alin. 7 al art. 159 din Codul de procedura penala sunt constitutionale.
    In ceea ce priveste caracterul suspensiv al recursului impotriva incheierii prin care s-a respins cererea de prelungire a arestarii, situatia este alta. Efectul suspensiv al recursului nu poate fi considerat neconstitutional, cat timp nu se depaseste durata arestarii anterioare, deoarece, prin ipoteza, aceasta durata nu a fost infirmata de instanta judecatoreasca, ci numai nu a fost prelungita de aceasta. Daca s-ar interpreta ca efectul suspensiv are ca urmare faptul ca si dupa expirarea duratei arestarii potrivit mandatului emis anterior cel arestat nu este pus in libertate, ar insemna sa se confere unui act procedural, cum este cererea de recurs, un asemenea efect, ceea ce este contrar art. 23 alin. (4) din Constitutie. Conform prevederii constitutionale mentionate, arestarea se poate face numai in temeiul unui mandat, iar prelungirea ei, numai de catre instanta judecatoreasca, ceea ce exclude ca un asemenea efect sa fie consecinta exercitarii caii de atac a recursului. Aceeasi este solutia si in considerarea prevederilor pct. 3 din conventia europeana mai sus mentionata, care instituie obligatia ca arestatul sa fie adus de indata inaintea unui judecator sau a altui magistrat spre a fi judecat, ceea ce, de asemenea, exclude posibilitatea ca starea de arest sa fie consecinta exercitarii caii de atac a recursului. Dreptul de a fi judecat in legatura cu arestarea de catre instanta judecatoreasca constituie, in conceptia conventiei, un drept al omului, iar, potrivit art. 20 alin. (2) din Constitutie, prevederile conventiei au prioritate fata de reglementarile interne.
    In concluzie, exercitarea caii de atac a recursului nu poate avea efectele unei hotarari judecatoresti de prelungire a arestarii, cu atat mai mult cu cat priveste o hotarare judecatoreasca prin care s-a respins prelungirea arestarii. De aceea, efectul suspensiv al recursului este constitutional numai in limitele duratei mandatului de arestare, emis anterior fie de catre un procuror, fie de catre instanta judecatoreasca, iar aceasta durata nu poate fi mai mare de 30 de zile, dupa cum prevede art. 23 alin. (4) din Constitutie, fara a distinge intre arestarea in faza urmaririi penale sau in faza anchetei judecatoresti.
    In acelasi sens este si Decizia Curtii Constitutionale nr. 60 din 25 mai 1994, definitiva ca urmare a Deciziei nr. 20 din 15 februarie 1995, publicate in Monitorul Oficial al Romaniei, Partea I, nr. 57 din 28 martie 1995, care, desi se refera la o alta prevedere legala, a statuat, de principiu, ca masura arestarii nu poate depasi 30 de zile, ceea ce se aplica si pentru prelungirea acestei masuri.

    Pentru considerentele expuse, in temeiul art. 144 lit. c) si al art. 145 alin. (2) din Constitutie, precum si al art. 13 alin. (1) lit. A.c), al art. 23 si al art. 25 din Legea nr. 47/1992, republicata,

    CURTEA
    In numele legii
    DECIDE:

    Admite, in parte, exceptia de neconstitutionalitate, ridicata de Parchetul de pe langa Tribunalul Municipiului Bucuresti in Dosarul nr. 2.342/1997 al Tribunalului Municipiului Bucuresti - Sectia a II-a penala, si constata ca dispozitiile art. 159 alin. 7 teza a III-a din Codul de procedura penala sunt neconstitutionale in masura in care se interpreteaza in sensul ca efectul suspensiv al recursului, declarat impotriva incheierii prin care s-a dispus asupra prelungirii arestarii preventive, poate depasi durata de 30 de zile, prevazuta la art. 23 alin. (4) din Constitutie.
    Definitiva si obligatorie.
    Decizia se va comunica celor doua Camere ale Parlamentului si Guvernului.
    Pronuntata in sedinta publica din data de 10 februarie 1998.

                      PRESEDINTE,
               dr. Mihai Constantinescu

                               Magistrat asistent,
                               Maria Bratu



SmartCity5

COMENTARII la Decizia 22/1998

Momentan nu exista niciun comentariu la Decizia 22 din 1998
Comentarii la alte acte
ANONIM a comentat Legea 166 2014
    HOW TO GET YOUR EX LOVER BACK & HOW I GOT MY EX LOVER BACK MY TRUE LIFE STORY HOW I GOT MY EX LOVER BACK.I  want to thank Dr Omokpo for saving my marriage. My husband  treated me badly and left home for almost 3 month this got me sick and confused. Then I told my friend about how my husband has changed towards me. Then he told me to contact: dromokpo@gmail.com that he will help me bring my husband back to being a good man.Then I gave him a try. after 3 days of casting the spell my husband came back home and i forgive him and today we are living in joy and happiness If you are going through any relationship stress or  broken marriage situation  and you want your Ex lover,  Ex boyfriend, Ex girlfriend or Divorced husband or wife you can reach him via: dromokpo@gmail.com 
ANONIM a comentat OUG 96 2021
    GET YOUR EX LOVER BACK NOW OR GET YOUR BROKEN RELATIONSHIP, MARRIAGE RESTORED. I’m just upset that I have been in pain and crying for so long and many times. Thank you dromokpo@gmail.com I wished I would have found you earlier, you would have saved me from a lot of pain for the past five years my ex lover left me for another woman in just 2 days i contacted you Dr Omokpo you brought my broken relationship back I spent a small fortune enough to take my dream trip to South Carolina but what’s the point in taking a dream trip without the love of my life. Dr Omokpo has given me hope and his honesty is a breath of fresh air, I feel so good and heavy happiness in my heart to get my ex lover back. Who I thought he was gone forever. We are married now as I share my testimony with you. If you have broken relationship or broken marriage or you want to get your ex lover back kindly contact: dromokpo@gmail.com
ANONIM a comentat Decretul 1134 2016
    My Dear friends online, My name is Annisa Agung, And I live in Illinois USA, I have to give this miraculous testimony which is so unbelievable until now. I had a problem with my Ex husband 2 years ago, which led to our break up. I was not myself again, I felt so empty inside me, my love and financial situation became worse, until a close friend of mine told me about a spell caster who helped her in the same problem too. His name is Doctor OGEDEGBE. I whatsapp the spell caster and I told him my problem and I did what he asked of me, to cut the long story short. Before I knew what was happening, less than two days ago my husband gave me a call and told me that he was coming back to me. I was so happy to have him back. The most interesting part of the story is that I am pregnant. Thanks to Doctor OGEDEGBE  for saving my marriage and for also saving others' marriage too. Continue your good work, If you are interested to contact the great spell caster email address: dr.ogedegbe6@gmail.com or contact him on whatsapp +2348109374702
ANONIM a comentat Legea 141 2018
    Aveți nevoie de un împrumut rapid și urgent cu o dobândă relativ scăzută, de până la 3%? Oferim împrumuturi pentru afaceri, împrumuturi personale, împrumuturi pentru locuințe, împrumuturi auto, împrumuturi pentru studenți, împrumuturi de consolidare a datoriilor etc. indiferent de scorul dvs. de credit. Avem garanția că oferim servicii financiare numeroșilor noștri clienți din întreaga lume. Cu pachetele noastre flexibile de creditare, împrumuturile pot fi procesate și transferate împrumutatului în cel mai scurt timp posibil, contactați-ne prin e-mail:(midland.credit2@gmail.com) și asistați la o experiență financiară care vă va schimba viața.
ANONIM a comentat Legea 243 2021
    I'm Rowe Lyndia from USA, i had a nice family; i was married for 11 years to my husband and all of a sudden, another woman came into the picture, the man that used to love me before started picking quarrels with me he was so abusive that when i try to tell him the truth about how i feel and what he is doing is not right for the family, he gets very angry and hits me with any thing he sees around him. but i still loved him with all my heart despite all he has done to me and i wanted him back at all cost. Then he filed for a divorce, my whole life was tearing apart and I didn't know what to do ...... he moved out of the house and abandoned me and the kids. So a very close friend of mine told me about trying a love spell to get my husband back. She also uses Priest Uduebor love spell to get back her divorce husband and told me they are very much happy with their relationship. So she introduced me to the spell caster, at first i was surprised and scared so i decided to give it a try reluctantly.......although i didn't believe in all those things, then when he did the special spells, i was so surprised, after four days my husband came back and was pleading for my forgiveness, he had realized his mistakes, i just couldn't believe it, anyway we are back together now and we are now one big happy family we use to be. I want to tell everyone who is looking for any solution to his or her problem, I advise you to kindly consult this spell caster, he is real, he is powerful and whatever the spell caster tells is what will happen, because all that the spell caster told me came to pass. You can kindly contact him on: his For an immediate response please contact me by. Email ifagbemileke236@gmail.com WhatsApp number (+2349030638317). He also cures all kinds of sickness and such as 1 LOVE SPELL 2 WIN EX BACK 3 FRUIT OF THE WOMB 4 PROMOTION SPELL 5 PROTECTION SPELL 6 BUSINESS SPELL 7 GOOD JOB SPELL 8 HIV AIDS 9 LOTTERY SPELL and COURT CASE SPELL. 10 CANCER 11 STROKE 12 Erectile Dysfunction
ANONIM a comentat OUG 96 2021
    Hello everyone, my name is Elisa Keily I am so overwhelmed with joy all thanks to Dr Raypower spell. my husband left me for another woman few years back and I was very devastated cause I never did anything wrong to him, I was left with my two kid and a job that pays little.i was almost giving up until I saw a testimony online about Dr Raypower and I decided to contact him.i explained my problem to him and he assured me I'll see a positive result after 24hurs, surprisingly my husband came back the day after the spell begging me to forgive him and promised to never leave. My husband has been back for 6 months now and we've never had any issues, am glad I didn't doubt Dr Raypower cause he sure can solve any problems with fast relief you can also contact him for help now Email: Urgentspellcast@gmail.com or Urgentspellcast@yahoo.com Website: https://urgentspellcast.wordpress.com/  WhatsApp: +14243308109
ANONIM a comentat OUG 96 2021
     I want to use this opportunity to thank Dr Ilekhojie who help me to win a large sum. I have been playing the lottery for the past 5 years now and i have never won. Ever since then i have not been able to win and i was so upset and i needed help to win the lottery. so i decided to go online and search for help, there i saw so many good testimony about this man called Great Dr Ilekhojie of how he have cast lucky spell lotto for people to win the lottery. I contacted him also and tell him i want to win a lottery, he cast a spell for me which i use and i play and won a large amount in dollars. I am so grateful to this man. Just in-case you also need him to help you win, you can contact him through his email: gethelp05@gmail.com and send him a direct message on +2348147400259
ANONIM a comentat OUG 96 2021
    Hello everyone, I want to let the whole world know how Dr. Wale has restored my broken relationship with Wayne. We have been together for 3 years and he told me that he doesn’t love me like he used to. Things have not been good for about 4 months and he ended this about 2 weeks ago. I was miserable and just didn't want to go on anymore. I did text him right after this but he didn’t even respond to me. One day I was searching for a way to get him back on the Internet when I saw a post of a lady testifying of how a love spell caster called Dr. Wale helped her to get back her ex, I was so desperate to get mine back so I messaged him and explained my situation to him and he instructed me to do somethings which I did and 24 hours later my boyfriend Wayne came back kneeling and begging for my forgiveness and I forgive him and our relationship was back to normal again, if your Ex broke up with you or you have any problem then you problem has come to an end because Dr. Wale can solve all marriage and relationship problems. If you need his urgent help WhatsApp/Text him: +1(978) 406-9575 or Email: everlastingspellcast@gmail.com or view his website: https://everlastingspellcaster.website2.me/contact
ANONIM a comentat Decizia 2 2007
    GET YOUR EX LOVER BACK.VIA: dromokpo@gmail.com This is my testimony of life that I will tell everyone. I have been married for 25 years Another woman had a spell to get me away from my lover, My husband left me and the children and we suffered for 2 years until I saw post about where this man Dr Omokpo has helped so many people recover their broken marriages and relationships   to get their ex lovers back. I decided to send him a message about my broken marriage and family  about how my husband left me and  for him to help me bring back my loving husband home, This great man told me what to do and I followed him as he instructed. After 48 hours, as he told me, I saw a car enter the compound. I was shocked when I saw my husband. As I share my testimony with you my husband came back to me and the kids and that's why I'm happy to put all of you to meet this man for solutions to your problem and bring your lover back to you and mend your broken marriage or your relationship restored back to happiness as you wished. Contact this great man via: dromokpo@gmail.com
ANONIM a comentat Decizia 2 2007
    GET YOUR EX LOVER BACK.VIA: dromokpo@gmail.com This is my testimony of life that I will tell everyone. I have been married for 25 years Another woman had a spell to get me away from my lover, My husband left me and the children and we suffered for 2 years until I saw post about where this man Dr Omokpo has helped so many people recover their broken marriages and relationships   to get their ex lovers back. I decided to send him a message about my broken marriage and family  about how my husband left me and  for him to help me bring back my loving husband home, This great man told me what to do and I followed him as he instructed. After 48 hours, as he told me, I saw a car enter the compound. I was shocked when I saw my husband. As I share my testimony with you my husband came back to me and the kids and that's why I'm happy to put all of you to meet this man for solutions to your problem and bring your lover back to you and mend your broken marriage or your relationship restored back to happiness as you wished. Contact this great man via: dromokpo@gmail.com
Alte acte pe aceeaşi temă cu Decizia 22/1998
Coduri postale Prefixe si Coduri postale din Romania Magazin si service calculatoare Sibiu