Source: https://justitiecurata.ro/civil-society-vs-minister-iordache-on-the-case-of-emergency-ordinances/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 14:41:49+00:00

Document:
The signatory organizations consider unacceptable that normative acts of such importance as those regarding collective pardons for criminal sentences or amending the Criminal Codes are secretly drafted and included on the Government’s agenda without effective consultation of the Romanian society. There was no opportunity for the civil society, representatives of the judiciary system and other interested parties to formulate a point of view, or indeed to know what is going on. Such practices throw Romania back to the early, authoritarian stages of the post-Communist transition and are incompatible with the normal practice in EU member states.
Granting collective pardon through an emergency ordinance (EO) is unprecedented in Romania’s post communist history. Previously, this happened only by acts of Parliament, after proper debates in plenum which allowed the majority and the opposition to present arguments pro and against, as is the normal practice in democracies.
The statements of mr Iordache, Minister of Justice, regarding the impact of the measure – that it would affect 2300-2500 persons currently incarcerated in the Romanian penitentiary system, i.e. less than 10% of the total – appear disingenuous: this will not solve the problem of overcrowding. Rather, the measure is more likely to benefit people convicted for serious offences such as corruption-related crimes, abuse in office, crimes directed against the judicial process and electoral crimes.
Reading the draft EOs, published on the website of MoJ only after the Government meeting of Jan 18th, it is clear that certain crimes are excluded from the general pardon measure provided by art. 1 of the EO. However, these exceptions do not include serious crimes as those mentioned above (see the Annex for the full list). This means that individuals convicted to 5 years of prison or less will be pardoned as a result. Suspended sentences and fines are mentioned expressis verbis for pardoning, which raise another question mark over the declared goals: obviously such sanctions have nothing to do with the overcrowding of jails, but a lot to do with the personal cases of some top politicians.
There is also a partial pardoning (sentences are cut in half), but with no specifics about the nature of the crime committed; upon release the convicts are not subject to the obligation to cover the damages within one year, as in the case of the absolute pardon mentioned before. All convicts, no matter what the crime was, would benefit from this partial pardon if they are over 60 years of age, or if they are suffering from a disease in a terminal phase, or if they have children under 5 years of age or if they are pregnant.
With respect to the EO amending the Criminal Codes, the stated goal is to implement recent Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence. This looks more like a pretext because (i) not all relevant decisions are reflected in the proposed amendments, and (ii) the problematic amendments are in no way related to the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. For example, making investigations for abuse in office dependent on the submission of a complaint would practically make prosecutions for abuse in office impossible where the victim is the state. When the suspects are leaders of public institutions, which happens often, it is very unlikely that they will submit complaints against themselves. What is more, a threshold of 200.000 RON (approx. 50.000 EURO) operates as de facto decriminalization of offences that fall under this threshold.
Reducing the penalty for abuse in office from 2-7 years and the interdiction to exercise the right to occupy a public position (as the law provides now), to 6 months-3 years or a fine (as proposed by the emergency ordinance), would proportionally diminish the statute of limitation period and risk closing some of the pending cases. In conclusion, the amendments proposed regarding the offence of abuse in office leave it largely empty of meaning and block investigations for crimes against the state.
The offence of negligence in office is decriminalized without any explanation or reference to jurisprudence.
The conflict of interests is made ineffective by making it conditional upon the “undue” nature of the benefits realized. Until now this provision was meant to sanction the situation when a public official obtained, by using their public position, benefits for themselves or close associates. This is not the first time when we witness attempts to decriminalize the conflict of interests by introducing the words “undue benefits”. Decision no. 2/2014 of the Constitutional Court says that this is unconstitutional. Coming back with the same amendments, once declared unconstitutional, is in itself unconstitutional.
In the Criminal Procedure Code, restricting the validity of effective regret to only six months after the crime was committed is unreasonable. People will no longer report crimes to the investigators and the efficiency of criminal investigations will be reduced. If the intention is to introduce time limits, the international practice should serve as a guide; these matters were analysed in the GRECO reports.
We demand the Ministry of Justice to stop the current fast track procedure for these amendments, make public the existing data on overcrowding in Romanian jails and engage the social actors in a rational debate to search for viable solutions together.
 Effective regret allows prosecutors to waive criminal responsibility for individuals who took part in criminal conduct if they cooperate with the investigators.
than 6 months and no more than 2 years of imprisonment or by a fine.
(2) Failure to report shall not be punishable when committed by a family member.
facilitated the criminal action against the perpetrator or the other persons involved in the commission of the offense, shall not be punishable.
months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment or by a fine.
than 6 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment or by a fine.
person, shall be punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 5 years of imprisonment.
evidence has been brought, that the report, complaint or evidence is not real.
imprisonment or by a fine.
exceed the penalty provided by the law for the offense committed by the perpetrator.
3) Aiding and abetting committed by a family member shall not be punishable.
penalty provided by the law for the offense committed by the perpetrator.
3) When this offense is committed by a family member it shall not be punishable.
are the subject of the criminal trial.
other judicial proceedings, shall be punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 5 years of imprisonment. If the intimidation or corruption act is in itself an offense, the rules for multiple offenses shall apply.
victim or for which reconciliation occurs, does not constitute an offense.
essential acts or circumstances in relation to which they are heard, shall be punishable by no less than 6 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment or by a fine.
imprisonment of 10 years or more shall be punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 5 years of imprisonment.
having given evidence in a criminal, civil or other proceeding of the ones set out in Art.
the penalty shall be increased by one-third.
or documents, for the purposes of preventing the judicial authorities to find out the truth in a judicial proceeding shall be punishable by no less than 6 months and no more than 5 years of imprisonment.
no less than 3 months and no more than 1 year of imprisonment or by a fine.
and no more than 2 years of imprisonment or by a fine.
expert or interpreter, when a prohibition to do so is set out in the criminal procedure law, shall be punishable by no less than 1 month and no more than 1 year of imprisonment or by a fine.
criminal case, are disclosed or revealed, does not constitute an offense.
punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 3 months of imprisonment or by a fine.
than 2 years of imprisonment or by fine.
(2) In the case of the acts listed under lett. d) through g), criminal action shall be initiated based on a prior complaint filed by the victim.
stipulations, an ancillary or additional sentence or a security measure provided in Art.
fine, unless such act is a more serious offense.
against a legal entity as listed in Art. 141 shall be punishable by a fine.
law or based on another law.
g) jurors within foreign courts.
punishable by no less than 2 and no more than 7 years of imprisonment and the ban from exercising the right of holding public office.
(2) The attempt thereof shall be punishable.
(1) Use of offensive language toward another person by the one carrying out professional duties shall be punishable by no less than one month and no more than 6 months of imprisonment, or by a fine.
provided under par. (1) shall be penalized by the punishment stipulated in the law for that crime, whereas the special limits shall be increased by one-third.
punishable by no less than 2 and no more than 7 years of imprisonment and the ban from exercising the right to hold a public office.
the latter a situation of inferiority on grounds of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, religion, gender, sexual orientation, political membership, wealth, age, disability, chronic non-transmissible disease or HIV/AIDS infection.
rights or interests of a natural or legal entity shall be punishable by no less than 3 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment, or by a fine.
interest in that professional act shall be punishable by no less than 6 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment and the ban from exercising the right to hold a public office or to practice the profession or the activity in the exercise of which the action was committed.
to practice the profession or the activity in the exercise of which the action was committed.
under their duties, if such results in one of the consequences provided under Article 297, shall be punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 5 years of imprisonment, or by a fine.
committed an act or participated in making a decision that resulted, directly or indirectly, in a material gain for themselves, their spouses, for a relative or an affiliate, including those twice removed, or for another person with whom they were in business or labor relations for the past 5 years or from whom they had or have benefits of any nature, shall be punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 5 years of imprisonment and the ban from exercising the right to hold a public office.
(2) Par. (1) shall not apply to issuing, endorsing or adopting regulatory documents.
punishable by no less than 6 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment.
(3) If the actions provided under par. (1) and par. (2) were committed by a public servant holding the legal obligation to observe professional secrecy and the confidentiality of information they are privy to, the punishment shall be no less than 1 year and no more than 5 years of imprisonment and deprivation of certain rights.
(4) The unlawful revealing, broadcasting, presenting or transmitting to another person or to the general public the contents of a wiretapped conversation or communication, even when the perpetrator became aware of it by mistake or by chance, shall be punishable by no less than 3 months and no more than 2 years of imprisonment, or by a fine.
damage caused to the victim.
(6) The unlawful possession or manufacturing of specific wiretapping or communicationrecording devices shall be punishable by no less than 3 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment, or by a fine.
launched based on the preliminary report by the victim.
more than 7 years of imprisonment and the ban from exercising certain rights.
more than 2 years of imprisonment, or by a fine.
responsibilities, if it affects the interests or the activity of a person, shall be punishable by no less than 3 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment, or by a fine.
month and no more than 1 year, or by a fine.
committed against an undercover investigator, a protected witness or a person included in the Witness Protection Program, the punishment shall be no less than 2 and no more than 7 years of imprisonment and if a crime against life was committed with direct intent, shall be punishable by no less than 5 and no more than 12 years of imprisonment.
months and no more than 1 year of imprisonment, or by a fine.
Article 304, in case they were committed with basic intent.
the approvals or the guarantees required for the award of funding obtained or guaranteed from public funds, if it results in the unjust award of such funds, shall be punishable by no less than 2 and no more than 7 years of imprisonment.
punishable by no less than 1 year and no more than 5 years of imprisonment.
stipulations, of the destination of funds resulting from the funding obtained or guaranteed from public funds.
(3) The attempt thereof shall be punishable.
special limits of the punishment stipulated in the law shall increase by one-half.
(1) Preventing, by any means, the free exercise of the right to elect or be elected shall be punishable by no less than 6 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment.
and no more than 7 years of imprisonment and a ban on the exercise of certain rights.
vote or not to vote for a certain list of candidates or for an independent candidate shall be punishable by no less than 6 months and no more than 3 years of imprisonment and a ban on the exercise of certain rights.
included in the category of goods mentioned in par. (1).
or by a fine and a ban on the exercise of certain rights.
counterfeit, or to the use of counterfeit ballots.
less than 1 and no more than 5 years of imprisonment.
and a ban on the exercise of certain rights.
(1) The act of opening a ballot box before the time established for the closure of elections shall be punishable by no less than 1 and no more than 3 years of imprisonment or by a fine and a ban on the exercise of certain rights.
list or on the supplementary voting list of individuals who do not belong on such list.
imprisonment and a ban on the exercise of certain rights.
to alterations in the national computer system required to establish the election results.
is punished according to art. 289 or 291 of the Criminal Code, whose limits are increased by a third.
c) using subsidies for other purposes than those they had been granted for, as well as using the credits guaranteed from public funds or which are to be reimbursed from the public funds, for other purposes.
Art. 11– (1) The offence of a person who has the obligation to supervise, to control, to reorganize or to liquidate a private economic agent, and carries out any task, mediates or facilitates for it the carrying on of certain commercial or financial operations or participates with capital to such economic agent, if the deed is of such nature as to bring him/her directly or indirectly undue advantages, then, it is an offence and it shall be punished with imprisonment from 1 to 5 years and the interdiction of certain rights.
(2) If the offence stipulated in paragraph (1) has been committed within a period of 5 years from the cessation of the task, it shall be punished with imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years or a fine.
b) using, in any way, directly or indirectly, the information that is not meant for publicity or allowing the access of unauthorized persons to this information.
Art. 13– The offence of the person who has a leadership position in a party or in a political formation, in a trade union or in an employer’s organization or a foundation who uses his/her influence or authority for the purpose of obtaining for himself/herself or for somebody else money, goods or other undue advantages, shall be punished with imprisonment from 1 to 5 years.
Art 131*)– Regarding the offence of blackmail provided by art. 207 of the Criminal Code, if it involves one of the persons provided by art. 1, the special limits of the punishments are increased by a third.
Art 132*)– Regarding the offences of abuse of office or usurping the position, if the civil servant obtained for himself/herself or for somebody else money, goods or other undue advantages, the special limits of the punishments are increased by a third..
Art. 15– The attempt to commit the offences provided by the present section shall be punished.
Art. 16– If the offences provided by the present section constitute more severe offences, according to the Criminal Code or to other special laws, these are punished under the terms and with the sanctions established by those laws.
Art. 31– (1) The non-observance of the obligations provided for in the Art. 25 represents an offence and it is punished with prison from 6 months to 3 years or with a fine, if the deed does not represent a more serious offence.
(2) If the deed provided in para (1) is intentionally committed, the punishment is from 3 months to 2 years or a fine.
[Art. 25 – (1) The personnel of the Office must not disseminate the information received during the activity other than under the conditions of the law. This obligation is also valid after the cessation of the function within the Office, for a five-years period.
(2) The persons referred to in the Art. 10 and their employees must not transmit, except as provided by the law, the information related to money laundering and terrorism financing and, must not warn the customers about the notification sent to the Office.
(3) Using the received information in personal interest by the employees of the Office and of the persons provided for in the Art. 10, both during the activity and after ceasing it, is forbidden.
c) providing information between persons referred to in article 10 (e) and (f), from European Union’s Member States or European Economic Area, or from third states which impose equivalent requirements, similar to those provided for by the present Law, persons that carry on their professional activity within the framework of the same legal entity or the same structure in which the shareholders, management or compliance control are in common.
(5) When the European Commission adopts a decision stating that a third state do not fulfill the requirements provided for by the para (4) (b) (c) and (d), the persons referred to in article 10 and their employees are obliged not to transmit to this state or to institutions or persons from this state, the information held related to money laundering and terrorism financing.

References: art. 1
 Art. 141
 art. 289

Art. 11

Art. 13

Art 131
 art. 207
 art. 1

Art 132

Art. 15

Art. 16

Art. 31
 Art. 25
 Art. 10
 Art. 10