CONTESTAREA, ÎN PROCEDURA CAMEREI PRELIMINARE, A ÎNCHEIERII JUDECĂTORULUI DE DREPTURI ŞI LIBERTĂŢI PRIN CARE S-A ADMIS MĂSURA DE SUPRAVEGHERE TEHNICĂ
CHALLENGING, IN THE PRELIMINARY CHAMBER PROCEEDINGS, THE DECISION OF THE JUDGE OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS TO ALLOW TECHNICAL SUPERVISION

Summary/Abstract: The premise of the article is the combined interpretation of court decisions regarding the rights of the defendant in the preliminary chamber procedure and the provisions concerning the lack of remedies against the technical surveillance measures taken by the judge for rights and liberties during the criminal investigation phase. Thus, some courts have considered that the judge's decision on the admission of a surveillance warrant cannot be reviewed in the preliminary chamber procedure because the legislator has provided that this decision is made in chambers, without the defendant's participation, and is not subject to appeal. According to the courts, the lack of appeal provided by the law determines that this decision cannot be examined for its validity and legality by the judge in the preliminary chamber. We disagree with this opinion, and throughout this thesis, we will present and argue the contrary opinion, namely that the judge's decision on the admission of a surveillance warrant can be reviewed by the judge in the preliminary chamber in terms of legality and validity. We mention that subsequently, there has been an amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which establishes a special procedure for reviewing this decision, a review conducted exclusively by the High Court of Cassation and Justice.

• Details
• Contents