Standardele: între dorinţa de flexibilizare a dreptului şi rigorile statului de drept
Standards: between the desire to adapt the law and the limits imposed by the rule of law

Summary/Abstract: From the point of view of specificity, legal prescriptions could be divided into rules (prescriptions with an increased degree of precision) and standards (open ended prescriptions that could adapt to a large spectrum of practical cases). This paper tries to open a debate on the necessary distinction between rules and standards in Romanian law. Following a brief introduction of the legal theories that justifies the categorization of normative techniques between the two classes the author analyses the way the standards complies with the requirement of quality of the law imposed under article 1 para (5) of the Romanian Constitution. The analysis focusses on the particular characteristics of the standards and it offers interpretative arguments allowing the standards to be controlled by using different criteria than those employed to censor the rules. If one would ask a standard to observe an absolute clarity criterion, this would collapse all standards into rules in order to comply with the requirements of the rule of law as constitutional standard (!). Starting from this paradoxical intuition, this paper essays to plead for a specific constitutional analysis for each type of prescription.

• Details
• Contents