The Court of Appeal finds that the summary reasoning of the first instance solution is based on the same reasoning as that of the Prosecutor’s Office and is based on the data provided by the civil party in the tax inspection report (an administrative act made by a non-judicial authority, which subsequently constitutes a civil party in trial). The first instance did not analyze the deficiencies of the prosecution’s reasoning, the insufficiency of evidence to support a indictment beyond reasonable doubt or any of the defendants’ defense.
The substantive court also did not address the mandatory effects that final judgments delivered by civil courts can have in criminal cases when dealing with prior issues that are unrelated to the typical nature of the act, in order to protect legal certainty and the right to a fair trial.
The clear character of the breach of the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt in establishing the existence of the facts which are the subject of the charge leads, in the Court’s view, to the conclusion that the delivery of an acquittal is an effective remedy to the restriction of the right to a fair trial by not motivating the decision of the first instance, following the assessment by the to the judicial review court of all the evidence administrated and the appeal against the full extent of the right of defense.
Attorney Igor Lacatus, Motec Stefan – Law Office, Romania
http://www.avocatmotec.ro/en/
