The High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ – Supreme Court) Chairman, Cristina Tarcea, said on Tuesday that Law 304, recently promulgated by President Klaus Iohannis, mentions texts from laws 303 and 317 which are not in force. Tarcea said that, if no organisational measures are implemented, the law will not work.
“Yesterday (on Monday) Law 304 came into force, it does not include transitory provisions and I am very curious if something will be done in order to make the legal provisions come into force, as long as this bill mentions texts from amendments to the Laws 317 and 303 which are not in force yet. I notice that nobody is interested,” Cristina Tarcea said on Tuesday.
“If no organisational measures are made, although in force, the bill will not work,” she added, ziare.com informs.
President Klaus Iohannis signed on Friday the promulgation decree for the law on amending and completing Law 304/2004 on judicial organisation. The head of state stated that he has no other means to challenge the normative act and he is forced to promulgate it, adding that the course of the law is not yet completed.
One of the main amendments brought to Law 304 is the setting up of a directorate to investigate prosecutors and judges.
The season for revocations has arrived
ICCJ Chairman, Cristina Tarcea, said ‘the season for revocations’ has arrived at the High Court and, as politicians can operate more difficult when it comes to judges, then the manipulation machine has been put to work. Tarcea was replying to Justice Minister’s criticism lately.
“Let’s be honest and say it plainly. Probably you are aware too that the revocation season has arrived at ICCJ. As politicians can operate more difficult when it comes to judges, the manipulation machine has been put to work. I am accused of making pressures on judges, because I requested them that, during the judiciary holiday, to complete the reasoning for the outstanding sentences. I stress it, the outstanding sentences. Why do I call it manipulation? You are aware that, on March 1, CSM analysed the candidacy for reinvestment of the former chairman of the criminal section, one of the reasons CSM rejected it was that he did not notify the Judicial Inspectorate regarding an outstanding decision. Should I understand that CSM put pressure on judges?” Tarcea asked.
She added that the second argument is that, two days before her announcement on outstanding decisions, the Judicial Inspectorate had asked all courts, including the High Court, to submit the outstanding decisions situation.