EVOLUŢIA INSTITUŢIEI DE RELUARE A URMĂRIRII PENALE
Date
2019
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
CEP USM
Abstract
Articolul 287 din Codul de procedură penală prevede posibilitatea reluării urmăririi penale după adoptarea de
către
procuror a soluției de netrimitere a cauzei penale în instanţa de judecată.
Scopul studiului a fost să identificăm în ce măsură evoluţia legislativă a textului respectivului articol a înlăturat
controversele şi situaţiile confuze existente până la intrarea în vigoare a Legii nr.316 din 22.12.2017, care conţine ultimele
modificări de până acum, operate în raport cu instituţia reluării urmăririi penale.
Ar fi oare dispoziţiile actuale ale art.287 din Codul de procedură penală suficiente pentru a garanta principiul non bis in idem și,
pe de altă parte, pentru a asigura o anchetă eficientă? Este raţională sau nu excluderea procurorului de caz
din cercul persoanelor care pot anula o hotărâre de scoatere a persoanei de sub urmărire penală, de încetare a urmăririi
penale sau de clasare a cauzei penale? Acestea sunt chestiunile care, cu siguranţă, prezintă o importanţă teoretică, dar cu
un impact practic imediat.
Article 287 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides the possibility of the resumption of criminal prosecution after the adoption by the prosecutor of a decision not to send the criminal case to the court. The purpose of the study was to identify to what extent the legislative evolution of the text of the concerned article removed the confusing controversies and situations existent before the entry into force of the Law No. 316 of December 22nd, 2017, which contains the latest modifications up to date, made in relation to the institution of criminal prosecution resumption. Would the current provisions of the art.287 of the Code of Criminal Procedure be sufficient in order to guarantee the principle of non bis in idem on the one hand and, on the other hand, ensure an effective investigation? Is it rational or not to exclude the prosecutor of the case from the circle of persons that can cancel a decision of the liberation of the person from criminal prosecution, of the termination of criminal prosecution or cessation of criminal prosecution? These are matters that certainly present a theoretical importance, but with an immediate practical impact.
Article 287 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides the possibility of the resumption of criminal prosecution after the adoption by the prosecutor of a decision not to send the criminal case to the court. The purpose of the study was to identify to what extent the legislative evolution of the text of the concerned article removed the confusing controversies and situations existent before the entry into force of the Law No. 316 of December 22nd, 2017, which contains the latest modifications up to date, made in relation to the institution of criminal prosecution resumption. Would the current provisions of the art.287 of the Code of Criminal Procedure be sufficient in order to guarantee the principle of non bis in idem on the one hand and, on the other hand, ensure an effective investigation? Is it rational or not to exclude the prosecutor of the case from the circle of persons that can cancel a decision of the liberation of the person from criminal prosecution, of the termination of criminal prosecution or cessation of criminal prosecution? These are matters that certainly present a theoretical importance, but with an immediate practical impact.
Description
Keywords
urmărirea penală, procedura penală, judecător de instrucţie, procuror, investigative judge, prosecutor, criminal prosecution
Citation
VIZDOAGĂ, T., BODEAN, V. Evoluţia instituţiei de reluare a urmăririi penale. In: Studia Universitatis Moldaviae. Seria Științe sociale: Sociologie. Asistență Socială. Drept. Științe Politice. Revistă științifică. 2019, nr. 3(123). pp.94-97. ISSN 1814-3199.