Post by account_disabled on Jan 2, 2024 0:28:33 GMT -5
AIon Marmuric Lupu and Florin Piersic Lupu in File no. number in old format of the Bucharest Court of Appeal Criminal Division II and which forms the subject of the Constitutional Court File no. .D. . At the roll call the authors of the exception appear in person assisted by the lawyer Iulian Crea with a power of attorney on file. . The case being in the state of trial the president gives the floor to the lawyer of the authors of the exception who request the declaration of unconstitutional provisions of the law to the extent that they allow.
The detention and arrest of minor defendants considering that art. of the Country Email List Criminal Code which regulates the consequences of the criminal liability of minors does not provide punishments as criminal sanctions but only educational measures as criminal law sanctions so that in practice it is not possible to execute educational measures in the followup phase or of court the educational measures being executed according to art. et seq. of the Code of Criminal Procedure after the conviction remains final.
Thus he considers that the criticized legal provisions violate the provisions of art. para. and of the Constitution since the new Penal Code allows with respect to minor defendants only the taking of custodial or noncustodial educational measures without the possibility of a punishment. . The representative of the Public Ministry submits conclusions to reject as unfounded the exception of unconstitutionality. In this sense it shows that although the sanctioning regime applicable to the minor differs from that applicable to the adult however regarding the possibility of arresting the minor defendant his private interest must be balanced with the public interest. the arrest of the minor defendant and in the case of solving the criminal case by taking an educational measure depriving of freedom.
The detention and arrest of minor defendants considering that art. of the Country Email List Criminal Code which regulates the consequences of the criminal liability of minors does not provide punishments as criminal sanctions but only educational measures as criminal law sanctions so that in practice it is not possible to execute educational measures in the followup phase or of court the educational measures being executed according to art. et seq. of the Code of Criminal Procedure after the conviction remains final.
Thus he considers that the criticized legal provisions violate the provisions of art. para. and of the Constitution since the new Penal Code allows with respect to minor defendants only the taking of custodial or noncustodial educational measures without the possibility of a punishment. . The representative of the Public Ministry submits conclusions to reject as unfounded the exception of unconstitutionality. In this sense it shows that although the sanctioning regime applicable to the minor differs from that applicable to the adult however regarding the possibility of arresting the minor defendant his private interest must be balanced with the public interest. the arrest of the minor defendant and in the case of solving the criminal case by taking an educational measure depriving of freedom.