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

DECIZIE Nr

DECIZIE   Nr. 82 din  8 martie 2001

referitoare la exceptia de neconstitutionalitate a dispozitiilor art. 56 alin. 3 si 4, art. 57 alin. 1 si art. 60 alin. 1 din Codul de procedura penala

ACT EMIS DE: CURTEA CONSTITUTIONALA

ACT PUBLICAT IN: MONITORUL OFICIAL  NR. 293 din  4 iunie 2001


SmartCity3


    Lucian Mihai       - presedinte
    Costica Bulai      - judecator
    Kozsokar Gabor     - judecator
    Ioan Muraru        - judecator
    Lucian Stangu      - judecator
    Romul Petru Vonica - judecator
    Iuliana Nedelcu    - procuror
    Maria Bratu        - magistrat-asistent

    Pe rol se afla solutionarea exceptiei de neconstitutionalitate a dispozitiilor art. 56 alin. 3 si 4, art. 57 alin. 1 si art. 60 alin. 1 din Codul de procedura penala, exceptie ridicata de Anton Sommert in dosarele nr. 1.318/2000 si nr. 1.319/2000 ale Curtii Supreme de Justitie - Sectia penala.
    Dezbaterile au avut loc in sedinta publica din 1 martie 2001, fiind consemnate in incheierea din acea data, cand Curtea, la cererea autorului exceptiei, a amanat pronuntarea la data de 6 martie 2001 si apoi la data de 8 martie 2001.

    CURTEA,
avand in vedere actele si lucrarile dosarului, retine urmatoarele:
    Prin Incheierile din 20 iunie 2000, pronuntate in dosarele 1.318/2000 si nr. 1.319/2000, Curtea Suprema de Justitie - Sectia penala a sesizat Curtea Constitutionala cu exceptia de neconstitutionalitate a dispozitiilor art. 56 alin. 3 si 4, art. 57 alin. 1 si art. 60 alin. 1 din Codul de procedura penala, exceptii ridicate de Anton Sommert.
    In motivarea exceptiilor de neconstitutionalitate se sustine ca aceste prevederi legale sunt neconstitutionale, intrucat contravin dispozitiilor din Legea fundamentala cuprinse in: art. 16 alin. (1) care reglementeaza egalitatea in drepturi a cetatenilor, fara privilegii si fara discriminari; art. 20 alin. (1) si (2) care reglementeaza interpretarea si aplicarea dispozitiilor constitutionale privind drepturile si libertatile cetatenilor in concordanta cu tratatele internationale privind drepturile omului la care Romania este parte, iar daca exista neconcordante intre acestea si legile interne, au prioritate reglementarile internationale; art. 22 alin. (1) care reglementeaza garantarea dreptului la viata, la integritate fizica si psihica a persoanei; art. 24 alin. (1) care reglementeaza garantarea dreptului la aparare; art. 31 alin. (1) care reglementeaza dreptul persoanei de a avea acces la orice informatie de interes public; art. 123 alin. (1) si (2) care reglementeaza baza legala a infaptuirii justitiei si, respectiv, independenta judecatorului si art. 128 care reglementeaza folosirea cailor de atac impotriva hotararilor judecatoresti.
    Totodata autorul exceptiei considera ca textele legale criticate vin, de asemenea, in contradictie cu art. 6, 7, 8, 10, 12 si cu art. 20 alin. (2) din Declaratia Universala a Drepturilor Omului, precum si cu art. 1, 6, 13 si 17 din Conventia pentru apararea drepturilor omului si a libertatilor fundamentale, fara a se dezvolta insa motivele pentru care aceste neconcordante sunt invocate.
    Curtea Suprema de Justitie - Sectia penala, exprimandu-si opinia, considera exceptia ca fiind neintemeiata, apreciind ca dispozitiile legale criticate sunt constitutionale.
    In conformitate cu dispozitiile art. 24 alin. (1) din Legea nr. 47/1992, republicata, incheierea de sesizare a fost comunicata presedintilor celor doua Camere ale Parlamentului si Guvernului, pentru a-si exprima punctele de vedere asupra exceptiei de neconstitutionalitate ridicate.
    Guvernul, in punctul sau de vedere, arata ca "instituirea unei proceduri speciale in cazul judecarii cererii de stramutare, procedura care nu contravine nici unei prevederi constitutionale, se explica prin aceea ca stramutarea unei cauze penale nu numai ca nu afecteaza cu nimic judecarea in fond a procesului, ci stramutarea se face tocmai in scopul de a se asigura conditii mai bune de judecata, daca instanta suprema sau, dupa caz, procurorul general ori ministrul justitiei detine unele date ca judecatorii cauzei penale nu pot fi impartiali, fiind interesati in pronuntarea unei anume solutii". In consecinta, se apreciaza ca exceptia de neconstitutionalitate este neintemeiata.
    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, sustinerile partii prezente, concluziile procurorului, dispozitiile legale criticate, raportate la prevederile Constitutiei, precum si dispozitiile Legii nr. 47/1992, retine urmatoarele:
    Curtea Constitutionala a fost legal sesizata si este competenta, potrivit dispozitiilor art. 144 lit. c) din Constitutie, precum si ale art. 1 alin. (1), ale art. 2, 3, 12 si 23 din Legea nr. 47/1992, republicata, sa solutioneze exceptia de neconstitutionalitate ridicata.
    Prevederile legale criticate au urmatoarea redactare:
    Art. 56 alin. 3 si 4
    "Suspendarea judecarii cauzei poate fi dispusa de presedintele Curtii Supreme de Justitie la primirea cererii, sau de catre Curtea Suprema de Justitie dupa ce aceasta a fost investita.
    Cererea facuta de ministrul justitiei sau de procurorul general suspenda de drept judecarea cauzei.";
    Art. 57 alin. 1
    "Presedintele Curtii Supreme de Justitie cere, pentru lamurirea instantei, informatii de la presedintele instantei ierarhic superioare celei la care se afla cauza a carei stramutare se cere, comunicandu-i totodata termenul fixat pentru judecarea cererii de stramutare.";
    Art. 60 alin. 1
    "Curtea Suprema de Justitie dispune, fara aratarea motivelor, admiterea sau respingerea cererii."
    Textele constitutionale invocate sunt:
    Art. 16 alin. (1)
    "Cetatenii sunt egali in fata legii si a autoritatilor publice, fara privilegii si fara discriminari.";
    Art. 20
    "(1) Dispozitiile constitutionale privind drepturile si libertatile cetatenilor vor fi interpretate si aplicate in concordanta cu Declaratia Universala a Drepturilor Omului, cu pactele si cu celelalte tratate la care Romania este parte.
    (2) Daca exista neconcordante intre pactele si tratatele privitoare la drepturile fundamentale ale omului, la care Romania este parte, si legile interne, au prioritate reglementarile internationale.";
    Art. 22 alin. (1)
    "Dreptul la viata, precum si dreptul la integritate fizica si psihica ale persoanei sunt garantate.";
    Art. 24 alin. (1)
    "Dreptul la aparare este garantat.";
    Art. 31 alin. (1)
    "Dreptul persoanei de a avea acces la orice informatie de interes public nu poate fi ingradit.";
    Art. 123
    "(1) Justitia se infaptuieste in numele legii.
    (2) Judecatorii sunt independenti si se supun numai legii.";
    Art. 128
    "Impotriva hotararilor judecatoresti, partile interesate si Ministerul Public pot exercita caile de atac, in conditiile legii."
    I. Principiul constitutional al liberului acces la justitie, prevazut la art. 21, are semnificatia ca acest drept trebuie asigurat la toate structurile judecatoresti - judecatorii, tribunale, curti de apel, Curtea Suprema de Justitie - si in privinta tuturor cailor de atac prevazute de lege. In aceste conditii, prin lege pot fi instituite reguli deosebite in considerarea unor situatii diferite. In consecinta, este dreptul exclusiv al legiuitorului de a stabili regula potrivit careia hotararea de stramutare nu este supusa nici unei cai de atac, deoarece prin aceasta instanta nu se pronunta asupra fondului, iar exercitarea unor cai de atac ar prelungi nejustificat judecarea definitiva a cauzelor.
    Nici dreptul la aparare, consacrat prin dispozitiile art. 24 alin. (1) din Constitutie, nu este incalcat, intrucat acesta se realizeaza cu prilejul judecarii pe fond a cauzei si al solutionarii cailor de atac. Mai mult, art. 59 alin. 2 din Codul de procedura penala prevede ca, atunci "Cand partile se infatiseaza, se asculta si concluziile acestora". In consecinta, de vreme ce nu se judeca fondul cauzei, nu se poate sustine ca interesele justitiabililor ar fi prejudiciate. In realitate faptele asupra carora este chemata sa se pronunte instanta competenta sa judece cererea de stramutare nu tin de pricina insasi, ci de asigurarea conditiilor pe care le implica normele procedurale, respectiv nepartinirea si obiectivitatea in solutionarea cauzei, conditii care vizeaza toate partile in proces, indiferent de calitatea lor procesuala.
    Asa fiind, sustinerea autorului exceptiei privind incalcarea dispozitiilor art. 24 alin. (1) si ale art. 128 din Constitutie nu poate fi primita si, in consecinta, sub acest aspect, exceptia nu este intemeiata, urmand sa fie respinsa.
    De altfel, Curtea Constitutionala a mai solutionat o exceptie care privea neconstitutionalitatea reglementarii institutiei stramutarii, insa in cadrul procesului civil. Astfel, prin Decizia nr. 92 din 11 septembrie 1996, publicata in Monitorul Oficial al Romaniei, Partea I, nr. 297 din 20 noiembrie 1996, in temeiul unor argumente similare celor avute in vedere in prezenta decizie, Curtea a respins exceptia.
    In legatura cu pretinsa incalcare a dispozitiilor art. 22 alin. (1) din Constitutie, in care se garanteaza dreptul persoanei la viata si la integritate fizica si psihica, Curtea retine ca referirea facuta de autorul exceptiei la acest text constitutional nu prezinta legatura cu obiectul litigiului, fiind evident ca stramutarea judecarii unei cauze de la o instanta la alta nu poate avea semnificatia unei masuri care sa pericliteze viata sau integritatea fizica ori psihica a celui ce solicita aceasta procedura. De aceea, si sub acest aspect, exceptia de neconstitutionalitate urmeaza sa fie respinsa.
    II. De asemenea nu poate fi primita nici critica referitoare la dispozitiile art. 56 alin. 4 din Codul de procedura penala, potrivit carora "Cererea facuta de ministrul justitiei sau de procurorul general suspenda de drept judecarea cauzei", in sensul ca acest text de lege ar incalca dispozitiile art. 16 alin. (1) si (2) din Constitutie. Curtea Constitutionala a decis in mod constant ca principiul egalitatii implica un tratament juridic egal pentru toti cetatenii aflati in situatii egale, fara discriminari si fara privilegii. In acelasi timp insa principiul egalitatii nu este lezat atunci cand legiuitorul stabileste un tratament juridic diferit in situatii diferite, conditiile de exercitare a aceluiasi drept putand fi diferite in raport cu situatiile specifice in care se afla titularul. In acest sens Curtea s-a pronuntat, de exemplu, prin Decizia nr. 4 din 16 ianuarie 1996, publicata in Monitorul Oficial al Romaniei, Partea I, nr. 58 din 19 martie 1996, si prin Decizia nr. 135 din 5 noiembrie 1996, publicata in Monitorul Oficial al Romaniei, Partea I, nr. 345 din 17 decembrie 1996.
    Curtea constata insa ca prevederea art. 56 alin. 4 teza intai din Codul de procedura penala, conform careia judecarea cauzei se suspenda de drept daca cererea de stramutare este facuta de ministrul justitiei, este neconstitutionala, si anume in raport cu principiul separatiei puterilor in stat. Este adevarat ca in Constitutie acest principiu nu este consacrat in terminis, dar, astfel cum a statuat Curtea in jurisprudenta sa (de exemplu, prin Decizia nr. 96 din 24 septembrie 1996, publicata in Monitorul Oficial al Romaniei, Partea I, nr. 251 din 17 octombrie 1996), existenta principiului separatiei puterilor in stat poate fi dedusa din ansamblul reglementarilor constitutionale, indeosebi din acelea avand ca obiect precizarea functiilor autoritatilor publice si a raporturilor dintre acestea.
    Intr-adevar ministrul justitiei, ca membru al Guvernului, care exercita conducerea generala a administratiei in domeniul justitiei, nu poate interveni in actul de justitie, aceasta avand semnificatia unei ingerinte a executivului in activitatea autoritatii judecatoresti.
    In ceea ce priveste reglementarea din teza a doua a textului de lege criticat, prin care se prevede ca cererea de stramutare facuta de procurorul general suspenda de drept judecarea cauzei, Curtea retine ca aceasta reglementare este constitutionala, atata timp cat art. 130 alin. (1) din Constitutie consacra pozitia speciala a Ministerului Public, care, "In activitatea judiciara, [...] reprezinta interesele generale ale societatii si apara ordinea de drept, precum si drepturile si libertatile cetatenilor". De altfel, institutia Ministerului Public este reglementata in Constitutie alaturi de "Instantele judecatoresti", in cadrul cap. VI ("Autoritatea judecatoreasca") din titlul III ("Autoritatile publice").
    III. Celelalte sustineri ale autorului exceptiei nu au relevanta in cauza, ele, de altfel, nefiind argumentate de catre acesta (asa cum este de exemplu, referirea la dreptul la informare sau enumerarea aleatorie a unor prevederi din diverse documente internationale).

    Fata de cele de mai sus, 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, cu majoritate de voturi in ceea ce priveste dispozitiile art. 56 alin. 1 teza intai din Codul de procedura penala si cu unanimitate de voturi in privinta celorlalte dispozitii,

    CURTEA
    In numele legii
    DECIDE:

    1. Admite exceptia de neconstitutionalitate ridicata de Anton Sommert in dosarele nr. 1.318/2000 si nr. 1.319/2000 ale Curtii Supreme de Justitie - Sectia penala si constata ca sunt neconstitutionale dispozitiile art. 56 alin. 4 teza intai din Codul de procedura penala, referitoare la caracterul suspensiv al cererii de stramutare formulate de ministrul justitiei.
    2. Respinge exceptia de neconstitutionalitate a dispozitiilor art. 56 alin. 3, ale art. 56 alin. 4 teza a doua, ale art. 57 alin. 1 si ale art. 60 alin. 1 din Codul de procedura penala, exceptie ridicata de acelasi autor in aceleasi dosare.
    Definitiva si obligatorie.
    Decizia se comunica Guvernului si celor doua Camere ale Parlamentului.
    Pronuntata in sedinta publica din data de 8 martie 2001.

          PRESEDINTELE CURTII CONSTITUTIONALE,
                       LUCIAN MIHAI

                              Magistrat asistent,
                              Maria Bratu



SmartCity5

COMENTARII la Decizia 82/2001

Momentan nu exista niciun comentariu la Decizia 82 din 2001
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 82/2001
Coduri postale Prefixe si Coduri postale din Romania Magazin si service calculatoare Sibiu