Disputes During the State of Emergency (1)

Valerian Cioclei and Doru Cosmin Ursu reevaluate the impact and analyze the consequences of the President’s Decree on the Instituting of the State of Emergency and of the subsequent legal acts.

The debate deals with two topics: specific presentation of Chapter 5 (Justice Area) from Annex 1 of the mentioned President’s Decree, with special reference to art. 43, 46 and 47, on criminal justice and examination of the criminal substantive law, which are directly or indirectly connected to the State of Emergency.

Concretely, ZRVP specialists referred to articles 77 and 78 of the Criminal Law, to Emergency Ordinance no. 28 din 2020, which amends art. 326 of the Criminal Law  (false statements) and to art. 352 of the Criminal Law (hindrance of disease control), practically creating new incriminations. Last, but not least, ZRVP’s attorneys at law referred also to art. 404 of the Criminal Law (communication of false statements).

“Disputes During the State of Emergency” is a series of debates organized by ZRVP in partnership with Bizlawyer, on the challenges triggered by the functioning of institutions and disputes during the State of Emergency, which situation gets out of the usual pattern of the functioning of the rule of law and judicial power.