{"id":1535,"date":"2016-02-16T15:18:44","date_gmt":"2016-02-16T15:18:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.chirita-law.com\/?p=791"},"modified":"2025-12-29T09:47:40","modified_gmt":"2025-12-29T07:47:40","slug":"mandatele-de-supraveghere-tehnica-nu-pot-fi-executate-de-servicii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/mandatele-de-supraveghere-tehnica-nu-pot-fi-executate-de-servicii\/","title":{"rendered":"Mandatele de supraveghere tehnic\u0103 nu pot fi executate de servicii."},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Curtea Constitu\u021bional\u0103, cu majoritate de voturi, a admis excep\u0163ia de neconstitu\u0163ionalitate \u015fi a constatat c\u0103 sintagma \u201eori de alte organe specializate ale statului\u201d din cuprinsul dispozi\u0163iilor art.142 alin.(1) din Codul de procedur\u0103 penal\u0103 este neconstitu\u0163ional\u0103. Curtea a constatat c\u0103 textul criticat contravine prevederilor constitu\u0163ionale cuprinse \u00een art.1 alin.(3) conform c\u0103rora Rom\u00e2nia este stat de drept, \u00een care drepturile \u015fi libert\u0103\u0163ile fundamentale ale cet\u0103\u0163enilor sunt garantate. De asemenea, sintagma supus\u0103 controlului nu respect\u0103 condi\u0163iile de calitate inerente unei norme legale, sub aspectul clarit\u0103\u0163ii, preciziei \u015fi previzibilit\u0103\u0163ii, \u00eentruc\u00e2t nu permite subiec\u0163ilor de drept s\u0103 determine care sunt organele specializate ale statului abilitate s\u0103 realizeze m\u0103surile dispuse prin mandatul de supraveghere tehnic\u0103, m\u0103suri cu un grad ridicat de intruziune \u00een via\u0163a privat\u0103 a persoanelor.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Comunicatul de presa integral este disponibil la\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.ccr.ro\/files\/statements\/Comunicat_de_presa,_16_februarie_2016.pdf\">http:\/\/www.ccr.ro\/files\/statements\/Comunicat_de_presa,_16_februarie_2016.pdf<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Curtea Constitu\u021bional\u0103, cu majoritate de voturi, a admis excep\u0163ia de neconstitu\u0163ionalitate \u015fi a constatat c\u0103 sintagma \u201eori de alte organe specializate ale statului\u201d din cuprinsul dispozi\u0163iilor art.142 alin.(1) din Codul de procedur\u0103 penal\u0103 este neconstitu\u0163ional\u0103. Curtea a constatat c\u0103 textul criticat contravine prevederilor constitu\u0163ionale cuprinse \u00een art.1 alin.(3) conform c\u0103rora Rom\u00e2nia este stat de drept, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,84],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1535","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-drept-penal","category-white-collar-infractiuni-economice"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1535","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1535"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1535\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1535"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1535"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1535"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}