Explore the vast range of titles available.

The crime of false testimony is one of the crimes which are traditionally found in our criminal legislation, the judicial practice recording also specific situations which required the application of the incrimination text which defined this crime. It can be considered that we are dealing with a crime which can no longer present any difficulties in relation to the interpretation and application of the incrimination norm with regard to the particular deeds committed. However, many elements are still encountered with respect to the interpretation of the incrimination norm, which generate different solutions of application, a fact which –in accordance with the rigors of the criminal law- is not to be desired. This study approaches two of these issues, namely the juridical significance of the refusal of the person heard as a witness to give any statements in such capacity and, on the other hand, the possibility of the realization of a formal concurrence of crimes when the person summoned as a witness, through his/her false or incomplete statement intends to create a situation more favorable to a person regarded by the factual situation.

The crime of false testimony is one of the crimes which are traditionally found in our criminal legislation, the judicial practice recording also specific situations which required the application of the incrimination text which defined this crime. It can be considered that we are dealing with a crime which can no longer present any difficulties in relation to the interpretation and application of the incrimination norm with regard to the particular deeds committed. However, many elements are still encountered with respect to the interpretation of the incrimination norm, which generate different solutions of application, a fact which -in accordance with the rigors of the criminal law- is not to be desired. This study approaches two of these issues, namely the juridical significance of the refusal of the person heard as a witness to give any statements in such capacity and, on the other hand, the possibility of the realization of a formal concurrence of crimes when the person summoned as a witness, through his/her false or incomplete statement intends to create a situation more favorable to a person regarded by the factual situation.

Associate prof. dr. Mirela Gorunescu notes in her study that the manner in which it has been outlined the notion of „law” that ensures the compliance with the standard of predictability and clarity can sustain some discussions in relation to the rigour that must be had in view for the compliance with the principle of legality of incrimination in criminal matters, as well as the principle of separation of powers.

This study addresses the particularly complex problem caused by one of the offense that can be committed in the capital market. Naturally, the article also includes an introductory analysis of the field and the regulation of the capital market, aspects that complement the premise of all offenses defined by the Law no. 297/2004, but examines in particular one of the incrimination texts regulated by the same normative act. It is about article 279 paragraph b) and article 245 of the Law no. 297/2004 which, without having a marginal designation, was intended to define the offense of unlawful use of the privileged information.

This study deals with the issues related to the regulation included in Article 262 of the new Criminal Code of Romania. The author notes that, as compared to the regulation prior to the entry into force of the new Criminal Code, the taking over in this Code of the norm of incrimination previously included in Article 70 of the Government Emergency Ordinance No 105/2001 on the state border of Romania has been preferred as a reflection of the importance given to the social value of the regime of the state border. At the same time, it is pointed out that the norm in the Code in force is subject to completion by provisions included in other normative acts, inferior to the law, as in the Government Emergency Ordinance No 194/2002 on the regime of foreigners in Romania.

Pursuant to the provisions of art. 538 et seq. CPP, individuals who consider themselves to be victims of manifest miscarriages of justice or in cases of unlawful deprivation of liberty may bring an action against the Romanian State through the Ministry of Public Finance for damages for the unlawful deprivation of liberty they have suffered. This study will attempt to analyse the conditions of admissibility of such claims, arising from unlawful deprivation of liberty, and to present elements of material and non-material damage that could be covered by the court. But even if such actions were to be admitted and the court were to grant the claims referred to by the persons entitled, could the non-material damage be fully compensated, given that several fundamental human rights have clearly been infringed? The issue is also approached from the perspective of the ECtHR rich case-law on this matter, which we consider relevant to the present topic.

Thus, in her study, Associate Professor Doctor Mirela Gorunescu has discussed the principle of separation of powers in the State from a theoretical perspective and has emphasized the importance of ensuring the independence of justice both from an institutional point of view and with regard to each magistrate who carries out the act of justice.

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 538 et seq. of the Romanian Code of Criminal Procedure, individuals who consider themselves to be victims of manifest miscarriages of justice or in cases of unlawful deprivation of liberty may bring an action against the Romanian State through the Ministry of Public Finance for damages for the unlawful deprivation of liberty they have suffered. This study will attempt to analyse the conditions of admissibility of such claims, arising from unlawful deprivation of liberty, and to present elements of material and non-material damage that could be covered by the court. But even if such actions were to be admitted and the court were to grant the claims referred to by the persons entitled, could the non-material damage be fully compensated, given that several fundamental human rights have clearly been infringed? The issue is also approached from the perspective of the rich case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on this matter, which we consider relevant to the present topic.

The new Criminal Code of Romania regulates in Title XI of its Special Part the crimes against the combat capability of the military forces. Under this title, Chapter I is dedicated to the crimes committed by the military and defines the crime of unjustified absence. In this study, the author analysed the specific elements of this crime, including: the specific legal object - military discipline, the field of the active subject and the essential requirements imposed by its objective side.

It is more and more difficult nowadays that the private life of a person to remain out of other people intervention and out of public visibility. In this context, the present paper is concentrated of a new criminalization included in The New Romanian Penal Code - article 226 from this law. It is about the violation to the right to private life which is for the first time incriminated by the Romanian Penal Code.