COMPLIANCE WITH THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS BY LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE IN ROMANIA

Purpose: The paper highlights the status of compliance of the Romanian legislation and jurisprudence with the European Convention on Human Rights in situations related to criminal charges. Design/Methodology/Approach: Considering the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights against Romania, the paper identifies situations where such decisions led to a change of relevant legislation or jurisprudence. Findings: Innumerous situations legislation improved as a consequence of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. Total duration of preventive arrest and short terms for revising the necessity of the measure, the possibility to complain in front of a court of law against the acts of the prosecutor, equality of parties in the criminal procedure, the right to representation or legal aid of the defendant, the necessity of giving reason to court decisions were some of the issues where cases like Maszini vs. Romania (2000), Vasilescu vs. Romania (1998) brought a change in the Romanian law or jurisprudence. New jurisprudence was created after the cause Anghel vs. Romania (2007) concerning the autonomous notion of "criminal charge". Other situations connected with criminal charges, where the protection of rights was improved referred to art. 8, art. 10 and art. 2 of ECHR. Originality/Value: Although studies have been made on particular decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, no general evaluation of the influence of the decisions of the European Court for Human Rights upon the evolution and the current status of Romanian legislation and jurisprudence, in the field of criminal law, was made.