The arrest procedure in accordance with the demands of the convention

Author:George Octavian Nicolae
Position:PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law, 'Nicolae Titulescu' University of Bucharest (e-mail: nicolae.georgeoctavian@yahoo.com).
Pages:159-165
LESIJ NO. XXIII, VOL. 1/2016
THE ARREST PROCEDURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
DEMANDS OF THE CONVENTION
George Octavian NICOLAE
Abstract
In order to ar rest an individual certain criminal procedur al formal and basic conditions must be
met. However, due to our country's ra tification of the Europea n Convention on Human Rights, besides
this criteria , it is also necessary that our domestic law be in accorda nce with the demands of article 5,
para graph 1, point "c" of "The Convention" and the jurisprudence regar ding it. The focus of this project
is on the analysis of the indissoluble link between our national criminal la w regulations regar ding the
arr est procedure and the demands of the European Convention for human r ights.
Keywords: the arr est procedure, European Convention on Human Rights, criminal law,
reasona ble suspicion, evidence.
1. Introduction
Pre trial detention constitutes the most
intrusive preventive measure in the
Romanian penal procedure.
For this reason, the Criminal
Procedure Code clearly states the conditions
which have to be met and when the
authorities can choose it.
In order to conduct a proper analysis of
this institution, certain notions have to
defined and grasped such as the standard of
proof, reasonable suspicion and the threat to
the public.
Also, the judge who is asked to grant
an arrest warrant, must account for article 5
of the E uropean Co nvention For Human
Rights (ECHR), provisions which offer
certain procedural and mandatory guaranties
for the accused.
PhD Candidate, Faculty of Law, “Nicolae Titu lescu” University of Bucharest (e-mail:
nicolae.georgeoctavian@yahoo.com).
2. Content
According to art. 202 Criminal
Procedure Code (C.p.p.), pr eventive
measures, which i nclude the arrest
procedure, may be adopted if there is
evidence or indications which point to the
reasonable suspicion that a person has
committed a crime and are necessary to
ensure nor mal criminal proceedings,
preventing the accused to skip trial or to
prevent new crimes.
In order to arrest an individual during
criminal prosecution, reasonable suspicion
should emerge from the evidence that the
defendant perpetrated an offence and the
conditions art. 223 letter. (a), (b), (c) or (d),
Criminal Procedure Code, should be met.
However, in order for pre-trial
detention, only a reasonable suspicion that
the accused person has comitted an offence
from the list mentioned in art. 223 paragraph
(2) of C.p.p. is necessary, or that an offence

To continue reading

Request your trial