The President of the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR), Valer Dorneanu, told Thursday evening private television broadcaster Antena3, that the fundamental human rights cannot be affected by an emergency ordinance, and that the measures on the restriction of fundamental rights and freedoms to be valid, a law should have been drafted.

"The framework-law of the emergency ordinance - this article should have been followed by an organic law, regulating all the measures that the authorities must take - Parliament, Government. It did not happen. An emergency ordinance was issued, 1/99, which took place around the arrival of the miners, was, as some say, bungled, on the same day the ordinance was put together, the approvals were obtained, it was published in the Official Gazette. (...) Normally , in order to accomplish what the legislature did not do in '99, to pass a bill as a whole, this emergency ordinance has been issued, which has this limitation, this prohibition provided for in Article 115 para. 6, you cannot affect fundamental rights, and then these effects had to be given by law," said Dorneanu.

He specified that, by the decision of the CCR, it was Emergency Ordinance 34 that was declared unconstitutional, and not state of emergency.

He added that Article 93 of the Constitution gives the president the right to declare a state of emergency, which he did, but "This article, allow me to say it, not the Court, is slightly flawed. It says 'declare a state of emergency.' Is it a mere statement, or can the President take some measures?! It does not follow from Article 93, quite the opposite, it follows that the declaration of a state of emergency must be approved by Parliament, which must be convened and it follows that Parliament is the one to take some measures," Dorneanu said.

The Constitutional Court of Romania decided on Wednesday that the provisions of art. 28 of OUG 1/1999, which established the fines for non-compliance with the restrictions during the state of emergency, are lacking in clarity, precision and predictability, and the establishment of the deeds whose commission constitutes contraventions is left, arbitrarily, to the free assessment of the police officers.

Also on Wednesday, CCR decided that OUG 34/2020 for the amendment and completion of OUG 1/1999 regarding the state of siege and the state of emergency is unconstitutional, as a whole, specifying that the restriction of some fundamental rights and freedoms cannot be carried out by emergency ordinances, but by an organic law adopted in Parliament.

In the opinion of the CCR, OUG 34/2020 for the amendment and completion of OUG 1/1999 was adopted in violation of art.115 par. (6) of the Constitution, since through its normative content it aimed at restricting the exercise of certain fundamental rights and freedoms (the right to property, the right to work and social protection, the right to information, economic freedom).AGERPRES(RO - author: Daniel Alexandru Florea, editor: Antonia Nita; EN - author: Simona Iacob, editor: Maria Voican)