ANI Law Unconstitutionality Question Is Normal Step – Magistrate Council

The magistrate invoked a Constitutional Court decision regarding the publishing of wealth statements.

 

Thus, Barbulescu said the Council sent to the National integrity Agency tables with magistrates who legally filed their wealth and interest statements, published on the Council’s website as well, as well as the tables with the magistrates who failed to fill in these statements, or did so with delays.

 

According to Barbulescu, there are 900 magistrates who filed their wealth statements with delays, while one of them asked the Council to express a stance regarding the effects of Constitutional Court decision 453 on April 16, regarding articles of Law 115/1996 on the statement and control of the wealth of dignitaries, magistrates, people in control and leadership positions and public servants.

 

After analyzing the case in question, Barbulescu said the Council decided to notify the Ombudsman – as it has done on previous occasions – to establish if an unconstitutionality exception would be raised in the Constitutional Court regarding article 10 – letters e and f – which regulate the attributions of people appointed to implement the legal provisions regarding the wealth and interest statements concerning publicity.

 

In Barbulescu’s opinion, any of the 900 magistrates could have raised the unconstitutionality exception should the Integrity Agency note illegality and notify the Court of Appeal in this respect.

 

According to the National Integrity Agency law, any decision reached by the Agency can be challenged in court.

 

Romanian president Traian Basescu noticed that despite the lack of consistent progress under Lidia Barbulescu, the High Council of the Magistrates is seeking ways to block the activity of the National Integrity Agency, and not to apply the European Commission recommendations, said the presidency.