DNA: One should reject `en bloc` draft amendments to laws of justice

Anticorruption prosecutors believe that without consulting the magistrates and in the absence of some impact studies, one should reject "en bloc" the draft amendments to the laws of justice, by giving a negative opinion for the entire legislative package from the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM). 

"In view of the legislative proposals submitted to the Chamber of Deputies for the modification and completion of the laws of justice (Statute of Judges and Prosecutors, Law on Judicial Organization, Law on CSM), at the request of the Superior Council of Magistracy, the prosecutors of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) formulated and submitted an opinion to the CSM. Thus, in principal, the anticorruption prosecutors consider that, without the prior consultation of the magistrates, without a proper explanation of the reasons and without impact studies, one should have a firm position of rejecting en bloc the drafts by giving a negative opinion to the entire legislative package," reads a DNA release issued on Wednesday to STIRIPESURSERO. 

On the other hand, anticorruption prosecutors have formulated a series of critical views and punctual comments on the three draft laws. 

Regarding the draft amendment to Law 303/2004, referring to the procedure for the dismissal of the prosecutor general, the chief prosecutors of DNA, DIICOT and the newly established magistrate investigation department, as well as their deputies by the Prosecutor's Section of the CSM, which can start investigations on its own or at the proposal of the minister of justice, the anticorruption prosecutors consider that it is not justified. 

DNA prosecutors also disagree with the proposals regarding the duration of 6 years between the moment of admission to the National Institute of Magistracy and establishing in the profession, referring to the procedure for the appointment of chief prosecutors by the Prosecutor's Section of the CSM, at the proposal of the minister of justice, modifying the legislation on the liability of magistrates or the possibility for magistrates to be appointed to public dignity positions and then return to magistracy. 

As to the draft amendment to Law 304/2004, the anticorruption prosecutors consider that the establishment of the Directorate for the Investigation of Criminal Offenses of Judges and Prosecutors is not justified, because it would induce the idea that there is an issue of criminality among magistrates, which requires a special competence. 

Anticorruption prosecutors criticize also the proposals on exercising the control over prosecutors by the minister of justice, which would lead to the subordination of prosecutors by a member of the executive power, or the right of the minister of justice to request information on the activities of the prosecutor's offices and to give written instructions on the measures to be taken to prevent and combat crime effectively. 

Regarding the draft amendment to Law 317/2004, DNA prosecutors consider that there is no reasonable explanation for which the Judicial Inspection should be reorganized. Neither the proposal to facilitate the revocation of the elected members of the CSM is considered timely, as it could constitute "an unallowed pressure" on those concerned.