Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_147107 AI generated

Decriminalization of evasion from safety measures: Inapplicability of new code's complementary penalty evasion to abrogated 1969 Code prohibitions

Case Number ICCJ_147107
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice, acting as the Complete Panel for Resolving Questions of Law in Criminal Matters, ruled that the act of evading the execution of a safety measure (prohibition from staying in certain localities) under the former 1969 Penal Code does not fulfill the elements of the crime of evasion from the execution of a complementary penalty under Article 288(1) of the current Penal Code, thereby effectively finding the act decriminalized or non-punishable under the new legislation. This decision resolved a reference from the Bucharest Court of Appeal regarding whether evasion of the old code's safety measure is prosecutable as evasion of the new code's specific complementary penalty (defined in Article 66(1)(l)) following the abrogation of the 1969 Code on February 1, 2014. The decisive legal basis rests on the principle of typicity, establishing that the specific legal nature of the former "safety measure" under Article 112(d) of the 1969 Penal Code is not equivalent to the "complementary penalty" under Article 66(1)(l) of the 2014 Penal Code, thus precluding the application of Article 288(1).

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Decriminalization of evasion from safety measures: Inapplicability of new code's complementary penalty evasion to abrogated 1969 Code prohibitions: This decision resolved a reference from the Bucharest Court of Appeal regarding whether evasion of the old code's safety measure is prosecutable as evasion of the new code's specific complementary penalty (defined in Article 66(1)(l)) following the abrogation of the 1969 Code on February 1, 2014. The decisive legal basis rests on the principle of typicity, establishing that the specific legal nature of the former "safety measure" under Article 112(d) of the 1969 Penal Code is not equivalent to the "complementary penalty" under Article 66(1)(l) of the 2014 Penal Code, thus precluding the application of Article 288(1).

Keywords

AI generated
penalties and measures offences causing public danger safety regulations violation principle of equivalence exemption from punishment principle of dual criminality

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală
Procedural rule cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is binding from the date of publication in the Official Monitor.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 2/2019
Evading security measure under former Penal Code not typified as non-execution of criminal sanction; referral admitted and de-criminalization established
Decizia nr. 30/2015
Ruling that redefinition of "very serious consequences" in the new Penal Code does not constitute partial decriminalization of fraud under the 1969 Code
Decizia nr. 54/RC/2016
Trafficking convictions under the 1969 Penal Code: Non-decriminalization of unstructured criminal group and preference of old law over new code for global penalty calculation
Decizia nr. 796/2016
Conflict between 1968 and 2014 Penal Codes in penalty consolidation: preservation of new complementary prohibitions under the more favorable old regime
Decizia nr. 1228/2015
Merging criminal sentences under the 1969 Penal Code and correcting the duration of complementary penalties for prohibited rights.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală

Procedural rule cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is binding from the date of publication in the Official Monitor.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

R O M Â N I A

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

COMPLETUL PENTRU DEZLEGAREA UNOR CHESTIUNI DE DREPT ÎN MATERIE PENALĂ

Minuta deciziei nr. 2 Dosar nr. 3002/1/2018

Şedinţa din data de 30 ianuarie 2019

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E:

Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Bucureşti – Secţia a II-a penală, în dosarul nr. 24590/300/2017, prin care se solicită pronunțarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea chestiunii de drept, dacă: “Fapta de sustragere de la executarea măsurii de siguranţă prevăzută în art. 112 lit. d) din Codul penal anterior (din 1969) („interzicerea de a se afla în anumite localităţi") se regăseşte în incriminarea de la art. 288 alin. (1) din Codul penal (sub forma sustragerii de la executarea pedepsei complementare a interzicerii exercitării dreptului de a se afla în anumite localităţi stabilite de instanţă, pedeapsă prevăzută de art. 66 alin. (1) lit. l) din Codul penal), sau a fost dezincriminată ca urmare a abrogării Codului penal anterior la data intrării în vigoare a Legii nr. 187/2012 (respectiv, 1 februarie 2014)?”

Stabilește că „Fapta de sustragere de la executarea măsurii de siguranță prevăzută în art. 112 lit. d) din Codul penal anterior (din 1969) nu realizează condiţiile de tipicitate ale infracţiunii prevăzute de art. 288 alin. (1) din Codul penal.”

Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 30 ianuarie 2019.