The Complaint before the Judge against the Prosecutor?s Resolutions or Writs for not Proceeding to Trial - Article278 (8), Letter c) C.C.P

• Author: Dragu Cretu, Angelica Chirila
• Position: Danubius University Galati, Faculty of Law - 'Danubius' University Galati, Faculty of Law
• Pages: 66-68

European Integration - Realities and Perspectives

2010

66

The Complaint before the Judge against the Prosecutor’s Resolutions or

Writs for not Proceeding to Trial – Article278 (8), Letter c) C.C.P

Dragu Creţu

1

, Angelica Chirilă

2

1

"Danubius" University Galati, Faculty of Law, dragu.cretu@univ-danubius.ro

2

"Danubius" University Galati, Faculty of Law, chirila_angelica@univ-danubius.ro

Abstract: It has been noticed in the doctrine a more pronounced current trend of “privatizing” the trial, this

aspect concerning a significant part of the foreign doctrine. It was proved that its most insidious form, and

undoubtedly the most dangerous, is not the tradi tional one, of the injured person’s prior complaint, but that

which is incident to the public prosecution itself. Romanian legislator gave up the prior c omplaint formulated

in the article 279. par. 2 letter A, C.C.P., repealing t hese provisions through the Law no. 356/2006, thus

eliminating the procedure of direct criminal proceedings. The complaint registered in t he article 278 C.C.P.

arousing lots of controversies, which allow al most unlimited access from the crime victim to publi c

proceeding. Generally, the complaint governed by the provisions of the ar ticle 275 and the next C.C.P . is, in

terms of legal nature, an appeal against criminal acts and measures of prosecution and a way to control their

legality. According to the law, any person whose legitimate rights were affected can lodge a complaint. The

law without prescribing a limitation period, the complaint can be lodged by any natural or legal pers on, if

there is evidence of harm of her legitimate interests.

Keywords: complaint; trial; public prosecution; notification

By the law, 356/2006 it was repealed the article 279 par. 2 letter a., by means of which the court’s

direct intimation was disbanded through prior complaint from the part of the injured party, but it has

still remained in force the proceeding condition, that of preclusion from starting the prosecution and

the criminal investigation.

Being connected to the promotion and the exercise of penal action, meaning to the activity of

arraignment, the prior complaint, besides being a condition for the judicial activity’s unfolding,

appears also as a special notification in the case of offenses subjected to this condition.

It has been noticed in the doctrine a more pronounced current trend of “privatizing” the trial, this

aspect concerning a significant part of the foreign doctrine. It was proved that its most i nsidious form,

and undoubtedly the most dangerous, is not the traditional one, of the injured person’s prior complaint,

but that which is incident to the public prosecution itself.

Romanian legislator gave up the prior complaint formulated in the article 279 paragraph 2 letter a,

C.C.P., repealing these provisions through the Law no. 356/2006, thus eliminating the procedure of

direct criminal proceedings. The complaint registered in the article 278 C.C.P. arousing lots of

controversies is that which allows almost unlimited access to the crime victim to public proceeding.

Generally, the complaint governed by the provisions of the article 275 and the next C.C.P. is, in terms

of legal nature, an appeal against criminal acts and measures of prosecution and a way to control

their legality. (Volonciu & Ţuculeanu, 2007) According to the law, any person whose legitimate rights