Entry into force of the Law no. 202/2010 regarding some measures to accelerate the settlement of the process, already raises a number of problems of interpretation. According to the Explanatory Memorandum [1] of Law 202/2010 states that: "Unlike the other laws, the Law no. 202/2010 comes into Romanian legislative with the aim of speeding criminal proceedings as well as to prepare the implementation of the new codes, some of the regulations contained in future coding being found in this law". In this respect, in the explanatory memorandum to the bill it was noted that "from the major failures of justice in Romania, the harshest criticism was the lack of celerity in solving cases." As often judicial procedures prove to be heavy, formal, expensive and lengthy it was recognized that judicial effectiveness of justice consists, largely, in the speed with which the rights and obligations enshrined in judgments are part of the juridical circuit, thus ensuring the stability of legal relations to be decided [2]. The introduction of simplified procedure of admission of guilt was justified in the explanatory memorandum, among others, by article 6 paragraphs 3 letter d) of the European Convention which guarantees the defendant the right to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses under the same conditions as witnesses against him. This right has a relative character; the defendant may give up his pursuit before an independent and impartial tribunal, and elect to be tried based on the evidence administrated in criminal prosecution. In this respect, the Strasbourg Court stipulated that the defendant has the opportunity to waive the right guaranteed by article 6 paragraph 3 letters d) of the European Convention and, consequently, he cannot claim that this right was violated, if the sentencing court based its decision on the statement made during prosecution of a witness (anonymously) in whose defendant waived hearing [3].
展开▼
