Aart. para. and art. of the Code of Criminal Procedure exception raised by Drago George Blteanu in File no. of the Bucharest Court of Appeal Second Criminal Section. The exception forms the object of the Constitutional Court File no. .D. . At the roll call the author of the exception appears personally and assisted by Mr. Dragomir Gheorghe with a delegation submitted to the file. The other party is missing for which the subpoena procedure was legally completed. . The case being in a state of trial the president gives the floor to the lawyer of the author of the exception who informs the.
Court that File no. D which has a deadline of January . It shows that in Country Email List the mentioned file the exception of unconstitutionality has the same object as in File no. .D being raised by the same author. Under these conditions they request the constitutional contentious court to connect the two files pending before the Constitutional Court. . The representative of the Public Ministry requests the connection since the conditions stipulated by the provisions of art. para. from Law no. . It shows that this article must be interpreted in the sense that two or more cases can be.
Connected to the extent that they are pending before the constitutional court at the same procedural stage. Or the case referred to is already pending so we are not in the presence of two cases pending before the constitutional court at the stage of public debates. . The Court rejects the request to connect the two files and gives the word on the merits to the lawyer of the author of the exception. . The lawyer of the author of the exception requests its admission. Regarding the provisions of art. paragraph of the Code of Criminal Procedure considers that they are unconstitutional.
發表於 2023-12-27 19:19:04
