16 Elena Giorgiana Simionescu

Analele Universitii Constantin Brncui din Trgu Jiu, Seria tiine Juridice, Nr. 3/2011

Annals of the Constantin Brncui University of Trgu Jiu, Juridical Sciences Series, Issue 3/2011

187

RECIDIVA INTERNAIONAL

N REGLEMENTAREA NOULUI COD

PENAL

Lect. univ. Elena-Giorgiana

SIMIONESCU Departamentul tiine Juridice

Facultatea de Administraie Public i Studii Politice Comparate

Universitatea Constantin Brncui din Trgu-Jiu

Abstract: Recidivism is enshrined in most

international criminal legislations. The admission relapse involves international recognition of the foreign judgments and is determined by the necessity of international cooperation against recidivism.

Cuvinte cheie: Noul Cod penal, recidiv

internaional, recidivist, recidivism, termenii recidivei, sistem sancionator.

Studiul recidivei legale, al recidivei socio-criminologice a constituit i constituie temeiul unor ample cercetri extrem de importante pentru politica penal i practica judiciar, deoarece, n ultima vreme, destule voci susin c pedeapsa i-a pierdut rolul intimidant, iar prevenia penal, dei rmne unul din postulatele inevitabile ale oricrui sistem penal, pare s fie tot mai mult o speran, dac nu o iluzie, recidivismul fiind un indiciu i un efect al crizei sistemului punitiv penal1.

Ca atare, recidivismul ar trebui s constituie obiectul preocuprilor instituiilor legislative i judiciare n rescrierea codurilor pentru adecvarea tratamentului penal al recidivitilor, pornind de la ideea c repetarea delincvenei acestora reprezint rzbunarea nchisorii mpotriva justiiei, revan suficient de redutabil pentru a-i lsa pe judectori fr glas.

Neavnd intenia de a analiza recidiva socio-criminologic, dar plecnd de la definiia

INTERNATIONAL RELAPSE IN THE

REGULATION OF THE NEW

CRIMINAL CODE

Assistant Professor Elena-Giorgiana

SIMIONESCU Juridical Sciences Department

Faculty of Public Administration and Compared Political Studies

Constantin Brncui University of Trgu-Jiu

Abstract: Recidivism is enshrined in most

international criminal legislations. The admission relapse involves international recognition of the foreign judgments and is determined by the necessity of international cooperation against recidivism.

Key words: New Criminal Code,

international relapse, recidivist, recidivism, relapse terms, penalty system.

The study of legal relapse, of socio-criminological relapse has been the basis for very important comprehensive researches for criminal policy and judicial practice, because many voices have stated lately that penalty has lost the intimidating role and criminal prevention, although it remains one of the postulates inevitable to any penal system, seems to be rather a hope than an illusion, recidivism being also an effect of the crisis of the criminal punishing system16.

Therefore, recidivism should be the subject of legislative and judicial institutions concerns in rewriting the codes for making recidivists penal treatment adequate, starting from the idea that their delinquency repetition is the revenge of prison against justice, a requital redoubtable enough to let the judges speechless.

Without the intention to analyze socio-criminological relapse, but starting from the definition of legal relapse, as a form



188

recidivei legale, ca form a pluralitii de infraciuni, stare de agravare a pedepsei, constnd n situaia n care dup o condamnare definitiv, executat sau nu, cel condamnat svrete din nou o infraciune, cu ndeplinirea condiiilor reglementate de art. 40-41 noul C.p., privind termenii recidivei, am remarcat modalitile recidivei, n raport cu variaiunile la care sunt supui cei doi termeni.

Un important criteriu, n funcie de care recidiva poate fi naional (teritorial) i internaional, l reprezint apartenena instanei care pronun sentina de condamnare2. Recidiva este naional cnd prima condamnare se pronunat de o instan naional (pentru o infraciune prevzut i pedepsit de legea statului respectiv). Recidiva este internaional cnd pot constitui termeni ai recidivei i condamnrile pronunate de o instan strin3. Ambele modaliti sunt prevzute n legislaia penal romn.

Problema dac trebuie s se in seama la stabilirea recidivei de infraciunea svrit n strintate, a fost ridicat pentru prima dat n Italia, ns Curtea de Casaie din Napoli a respins aceast idee. Totodat, jurisprudena francez i german, precum i vechea legislaie italian au refuzat condamnrilor strine efectul recidivei. n prezent, recidiva internaional este consacrat de majoritatea legislaiilor penale, dnd expresie n aceast materie cooperrii internaionale a tuturor rilor n prevenirea recidivismului. Ea a fost adoptat n urma reco-mandrilor Conferinei penale internaionale (Roma, 1928), la care s-a votat o rezoluie n acest sens, statundu-se c oricine ar comite o infraciune n ara X, dup ce a fost condamnat n strintate pentru o infraciune prevzut de asemenea de Legea X, va fi considerat ca recidivist n condiiile i n cazurile stabilite de prezentul cod, pentru recunoaterea efectelor judecilor respective fcute n strintate.

Recidiva internaional presupune, aadar, existena unui termen reprezentat de hotrrea definitiv de condamnare la pedeapsa nchisorii, pronunat sau executat n strintate, i un al doilea termen reprezentat de

of plurality of offences, a state of penalty aggravation, consisting in the case in which after an final conviction, executed or not, the convicted commits an offence again, in compliance with the conditions regulated by art. 40-41 new Criminal Code, regarding the relapse terms, we have noticed the forms of relapse in relation to the variations of the two terms.

An important criterion, depending on which relapse can be national (territorial) and international, is represented by the court that rules the conviction sentence17. Relapse is national when the first conviction is sentenced by a national court of law (for an offence provided and punished by the law of the state). Relapse is international when convictions sentenced by a foreign court of law can be terms of relapse18. Both methods are provided by the Romanian criminal legislation.

The problem whether an offence committed abroad shall be taken into consideration in determining relapse, was raised in Italy for the first time, but Napoli Court of Cassation rejected this idea. At the same time, French and German jurisprudence refused the effect of relapse to foreign convictions. At present, international relapse is established by most of penal legislations, giving expression to the international cooperation of all the countries in preventing recidivism in this matter. It was adopted as a result of the recommendations of the International Criminal Conference (Rome, 1928), where a resolution was voted in this matter, stating that anyone commits an offence in country X, after having been sentenced abroad for an offence committed also by law X, shall be considered recidivist under the conditions and in the cases established by this code, for recognizing the effects of judgements made abroad.

International relapse supposes therefore, the existence of a term represented by the final sentence to the penalty of imprisonment, sentenced or executed abroad,



189

svrirea din nou a unei infraciuni n ar sau n alte locuri, unde legea naional este incident, intervenit dup condamnarea primei pedepse n strintate.

n cazul n care s-a executat n strintate o condamnare pentru o fapt prevzut i de legea penal romn, iar hotrrea condamnatorie strin a fost recunoscut potrivit dispoziiilor art. 115-121 din Legea nr. 302/2004 privind cooperarea judiciar internaional n materie penal, cu modificrile i completrile ulterioare4, instana romn poate s in seama la stabilirea strii de recidiv de condamnarea pronunat n strintate i pedeapsa executat5.

Hotrrea de condamnare pronunat n strintate se poate referi, fie la un cetean strin care a svrit o infraciune n strintate contra unui cetean romn, fie la un cetean romn sau apatrid, domiciliat n ara noastr care a fost judecat i condamnat pentru o infraciune comis pe teritoriul unui stat strin.

n noul C.pen., cadrul legal al recidivei internaionale se regsete n dispoziiile alin. 3 al art. 41, reglementare care stipuleaz c pentru stabilirea strii de recidiv se va ine seama i de hotrrea de condamnare pronunat n strintate pentru o fapt prevzut i de legea penal romn, dac hotrrea de condamnare a fost recunoscut potrivit legii.

Din analiza acestor dispoziii se desprind urmtoarele caracteristici ale recidivei internaionale:

a) Caracterul obligatoriu, ntruct legea prevede c pentru stabilirea strii de recidiv, se ine seama i de hotrrea de condamnare pronunat n strintate, spre deosebire de actuala reglementare care avea un caracter facultativ, fapt dedus din folosirea sintagmei se poate ine seama.

Agravarea statutului juridic al condamnatului este determinat de modalitatea de apreciere de ctre organele competente romne a pericolului social concret al infraciunii comise. Aceasta este un atribut al organelor judiciare romne care, dup analiza coninutului infraciunii pentru care infractorul a

and a second term represented by a new commission of an offence in the country or in other places, where national law is incidental, occurred after sentencing the first penalty abroad.

If a conviction was executed abroad for an offence provided also by the Romanian criminal law, and the foreign sentence was recognized according to art. 115-121 of Law no. 302/2004 regarding international judicial cooperation in criminal matters, as further amended and completed19, the Romanian court can take into consideration the conviction sentenced abroad and the executed penalty in determining the state of relapse20.

The conviction decision sentenced abroad can refer either to a foreign citizen that committed an offence abroad against a Romanian citizen, either to a Romanian or stateless citizen, residing in our country judged and sentenced for an offence committed on the territory of a foreign state.

In the new Criminal Code, the legal framework of international relapse can be found in the provisions of par. 3 of art. 41, which stipulates that in order to determine the state of relapse, the conviction decision sentenced abroad for an offence provided also by the Romanian criminal law will be considered, if the conviction decision was recognized according to the law.

The analysis of these provisions reveals the following characteristics of international relapse:

a) Compulsoriness, because the law provides that for determining the state of relapse, the conviction decision sentenced abroad shall be considered, unlike the current facultative regulation resulted from the use of the phrase can be considered.

The aggravation of the convicts judicial status is determined by the way in which the relevant Romanian authorities appreciate the actual social danger of the offence committed. This is an attribute of Romanian judicial authorities which, after analyzing the content of the offence for



190

fost condamnat sau obligat s execute pedeapsa n strintate, hotrsc dac intervenia condamnrii sau executarea pedepsei ar trebui s reprezinte primul termen al recidivei internaionale6. Dac sunt ndeplinite condiiile recunoaterii hotrrii potrivit legii romne, instana judiciar este obligat s rein starea de recidiv a condamnatului.

b) Dubla incriminare, n sensul c fapta pentru care s-a pronunat o hotrre de condamnare n strintate trebuie s fie incriminat i de legea romn.

Textul condiioneaz luarea n considerare a hotrrii de condamnare pronunate n strintate de mprejurarea ca fapta svrit s fie prevzut i de legea romn ca infraciune, iar hotrrea de condam-nare (pronunat n strintate) s fie recunoscut de instana romn. Recunoaterea unei hotrri penale strine, indiferent pe ce cale e fcut, nu este posibil dac textul integral al acesteia, mpreun cu principalele acte care au stat la baza soluiei nu sunt mai nainte cunoscute de instana de judecat, sau dup caz, de procuror; numai astfel pot fi examinate i verificate competena instanei strine, compatibilitatea hotrrii cu ordinea public din Romnia, eficiena juridic a unui act ntocmit de o autoritate strin.

c) Recunoaterea hotrrii de condamnare de ctre instana romn. Recunoaterea se poate face pe cale incidental n cadrul unui proces penal n curs sau pe cale principal, de ctre instana de judecat sesizat n acest scop7. Dac hotrrea de condamnare pronunat n strintate a fost recunoscut i luat n considerare, starea de recidiv se stabilete potrivit condiiilor de existen a recidivei prevzute n Codul penal romn; acelai lucru i n ceea ce privete condiiile de sancionare. n ipoteza n care hotrrea pronunat n strintate nu a fost recunoscut i totui s-a pronunat condamnarea unui inculpat, reinndu-se n sarcina sa starea de recidiv, soluia este nelegal.

Recidiva internaional este compus din doi termeni: primul, reprezentat de hotrrea definitiv de condamnare la pedeapsa nchisorii

which the offender was sentenced or forced to execute the penalty abroad, decide whether the intervention of conviction or the execution of the penalty should be the first term of international relapse21. If the conditions of recognition are fulfilled according to the Romanian law, the court of law has to consider the convicts state of relapse.

b) Double incrimination, meaning that the offence for which a conviction decision was sentenced abroad has to be also incriminated by the Romanian law.

The text conditions the consideration of the conviction decision sentenced abroad by the circumstance that the committed action be provided also by the Romanian law as an offence, and the conviction decision (sentenced abroad) be recognized by the Romanian court. The recognition of a foreign criminal decision, irrespective of its form, is not possible unless its complete text, together with the main documents that formed the basis for the solution are not known by the court of law or as the case may be, by the district attorney; this is the only way to examine and check the jurisdiction of the foreign court, decision compatibility with the Romanian public order, the judicial efficacy of a document drawn-up by a foreign authority.

c) Conviction decision recognition by the Romanian court. Recognition is incidental within a penal lawsuit or principal by the court of law notified for these purposes22. If the conviction decision sentenced abroad was recognized and considered, the state of relapse shall be established according to the existence conditions of relapse provided by the Romanian criminal law; the same applies also for punishing conditions. If the decision sentenced abroad has not be recognized and a defendant has been convicted, considering its state of relapse, the solution is illegal.

International relapse consists of two terms: the first represented by the final sentence to imprisonment for more than 1



191

mai mare de 1 an, pronunat sau executat n strintate i cel de-al doilea termen, constituit de svrirea din nou a unei infraciuni intenionate n ar, intervenit dup condamnarea sau executarea primei pedepse n strintate.

Pentru existena primului termen al recidivei internaionale se impune ndeplinirea urmtoarelor condiii:

a) S existe una sau mai multe condamnri penale definitive cu nchisoarea mai mare de 1 an (deteniune pe via) sau s se fi executat o asemenea pedeaps n strintate, nainte de svrirea din nou a unei infraciuni intenionate n ar, de ctre acelai infractor, indiferent n ce calitate, ca autor, instigator sau complice, conform art. 174 noul C.pen. cu privire la svrirea unei infraciuni;

Numai dac exist o hotrre de condamnare definitiv pentru infraciunea svrit, aceasta se poate constitui ca prim termen al recidivei. Este definitiv hotrrea care nu mai poate fi atacat pe cile ordinare de atac. Svrirea unei infraciuni n intervalul de timp, ct se gsete n desfurare procesul, nu va constitui recidiv, ci un concurs de infraciuni.

Nu poate constitui prim termen al recidivei o condamnare definitiv la pedeapsa amenzii, indiferent de cuantumul acesteia i nici condamnarea la pedeapsa nchisorii, dac aceasta este de un an sau mai mic8.

Pedeapsa prevzut n hotrrea de condamnare poate fi aplicat de instan pentru o singur infraciune sau pentru un concurs de infraciuni. n acest din urm caz, pedeapsa rezultant trebuie s fie mai mare de un an, chiar dac pedepsele stabilite pentru infraciunile concurente, luate separate, nu depesc nici una durata de un an.

Se remarc condiiile referitoare la termenii recidivei, limitele primului termen cresc pentru a califica drept recidivist numai acea persoan condamnat care a svrit noi infraciuni de un anumit grad de pericol social9: pedeapsa concret stabilit de instan i aplicat pentru primul termen trebuie s fie nchisoarea mai mare de 1 an sau deteniunea pe via i nu nchisoarea mai mare de 6 luni, aa

year, sentenced or executed abroad and the second term, consisting in a new intentional offence in the country occurred after the conviction and execution of the first penalty abroad.

The following conditions have to be fulfilled for the existence of the first term of international relapse:

a) There are one or more final penal convictions to imprisonment for more than 1 year (lifetime imprisonment) or such a penalty has been executed abroad, before a new intentional offence in the country, by the same offender, whether it is the author, instigator or accomplice, according to art. 174 new Criminal code regarding a new offence;

Only if there is a final decision for the offence committed, it can be the first time of relapse. It is considered final, the decision that cannot longer be appealed against by using the ordinary means of appeal. Committing an offence during the development period of the lawsuit, shall not be considered relapse, but rather a juncture of offences.

One cannot consider as the first term of relapse, a final conviction to the penalty of fine, irrespective of its amount or imprisonment, if it is of one year or shorter23.

The penalty provided in the conviction sentence can be applied by the court for only one offence or for a juncture of offences. In this latter case, the resulting penalty has to be longer than one year, even if the penalties established for juncture offences, taken separately, do not exceed one year.

We notice the conditions regarding the terms of relapse, the limitations of the first term increase in order to qualify as recidivist only the convicted person that has committed new offences that have the level of social danger24: the penalty determined by the court and applied for the first term has to be imprisonment longer than 1 year or lifetime imprisonment and not imprisonment for more than 6 months, as provided by the



192

cum se prevede n legea actual, iar pentru al doilea termen, pedeapsa prevzut de lege trebuie s fie nchisoarea mai mare de 1 an sau deteniunea pe via, la fel ca i reglementarea n vigoare.

Dei intenia autorilor codului, transmis i legiuitorului, a fost agravarea regimului sancionator al recidivei, prin majorarea duratei pedepsei nchisorii care poate constitui prim termen al recidivei la un an, practic se creeaz un regim mai favorabil pentru cei care au fost condamnai la pedepse mai mici de un an, nejustificat ns de evoluia statistic a numrului persoanelor cu antecedente penale care reitereaz comportamentul infracional10.

Dac legiuitorul noului Cod penal a prevzut la primul termen al recidivei ca pedeapsa concret stabilit de instan i aplicat pentru primul termen s fie nchisoarea mai mare de 1 an sau deteniunea pe via, acest fapt nu face dect s avantajeze pe viitor, chiar s ncurajeze la recidiv pe condamnaii la pedepse cu nchisoarea mai mic de un an (n actualul cod se iau n calculul recidivei condamnrile cu nchisoarea mai mare de 6 luni, care ndeplinesc i celelalte condiii legale). Din acest punct de vedere putem spune c noul Cod penal constituie legea favorabil i, dei este expresia politicii de aprare social actual, nu se justific n raport de imperativul preveniei generale i al cotelor recidivismului care nu va mai fi la reprezentat la valoarea lui real.

b) Hotrrea de condamnare s fi fost pronunat pentru o infraciune svrit cu intenie sau praeterintenie i s nu fie dintre acelea de care nu se ine seama la stabilirea strii de recidiv, conform art. 42 noul C.pen.

Aceast condiie este prevzut expres n textul art. 41 noul C.pen., dar ea rezult i din dispoziiile art. 42 lit. c noul C.pen., potrivit cruia la stabilirea strii de recidiv nu se ine seama de condamnrile privitoare la infraciunile svrite din culp. Prin prevederea acestei condiii a fost subliniat trstura caracteristic a recidivei, aceea de a exprima perseverena infracional a infrac-torului recidivist, perseveren care nu este posibil dect n cazul infraciunilor svrite

current law, and for the second term, the penalty provided by the law has to be imprisonment longer than 1 year or lifetime imprisonment, just like the regulation in force.

Although the intention of the code authors, sent to the lawmaker as well, was to aggravate the punishment system of relapse, by increasing the duration of the penalty of imprisonment that can be the first term of relapse to one year, a more favourable regime is practically created for the people convicted to penalties smaller than a year, not justified by the statistic evolution of the number of persons that have criminal records that reiterate criminal conduct25.

If the new Criminal Code lawmaker provided the first term of relapse as the penalty determined by the court and imprisonment longer than 1 year or lifetime imprisonment as the penalty for the first term, this only brings future advantages or even encourages convicts to penalties smaller than a year to relapse (the current code considers imprisonment longer than 6 months, that meet the other legal conditions as well in calculating the relapse). From this point of view, we can say that the new Criminal code is the favourable law and therefore it is the expression of the current social defence policy, not justified in relation to the imperativeness of general prevention and recidivism levels that will no longer be represented in its real value.

b) The conviction decision has to be sentenced for an intentional offence or oblique intent and does not have to be one of those that are not considered in determining the state of relapse, according to art. 42 new Criminal code.

This is expressly provided in the text of art. 41 new Criminal code, but it also results from the provisions of art. 42 letter c new Criminal code, according to which in determining the state of relapse, convictions regarding offences committed out of guilt are not considered. This provision underlines the characteristics of relapse, that of



193

cu intenie direct, indirect sau depit. Spre deosebire de reglementarea

actual, dispoziiile art. 42 ale noului C.pen. stipuleaz doar 3 cazuri de condamnri care nu atrag starea de recidiv, potrivit crora, la stabilirea strii de recidiv nu se ine seama de hotrrile de condamnare privitoare la: faptele care nu mai sunt prevzute de legea penal; infraciunile amnistiate; infraciunile svrite din culp.

Hotrrile de condamnare privitoare la infraciunile svrite n timpul minoritii nu mai pot constitui prim termen al recidivei, n mod explicabil, deoarece pentru minori s-au prevzut n noul Cod penal, doar msuri educative neprivative de libertate sau privative de libertate n locul pedepsei nchisorii (art. 115-116 noul C.pen.).

Totodat, condamnrile pentru care s-a mplinit termenul de reabilitare nu mai sunt prevzute n cuprinsul art. 42 din noul C.pen., deoarece se subnelege din textul de lege al art. 41 noul C.pen. c noua infraciune trebuie s fie svrit pn la reabilitare sau mplinirea termenului de reabilitare.

c) Fapta pentru care este pronunat n strintate o hotrre de condamnare trebuie s fie o fapt prevzut i de legea penal romn ca infraciune (s existe dubl incriminare);

d) Hotrrea de condamnare pronunat n strintate, pentru a constitui termen al recidivei, trebuie s fie recunoscut de o instan romn potrivit dispoziiilor art. 115-116 din Legea nr. 302/2004 privind cooperarea judiciar internaional n materie penal. Odat recunos-cut hotrrea pronunat n strintate i luat n considerare la stabilirea strii de recidiv, devin incidente dispoziiile Codului penal romn referitoare la condiiile de existen a recidivei i regimul sancionator al acesteia.

Cel de-al doilea termen al recidivei internaionale, din punctul de vedere al condiiilor impuse de lege, prezint urmtoarele particulariti:

a) Svrirea unei noi infraciuni n ar/n strintate, dup intervenirea condamnrii definitive pronunate n strintate/n ar (nainte de nceperea

expressing the recidivist offenders criminal perseverance, which is possible only in the case of direct, indirect, oblique intentional offences.

Unlike the current regulation, the provisions of art. 42 of the new Criminal code stipulate only 3 cases of convictions that do not result in the state of relapse, according to which, the determination of the conviction decisions will not be considered regarding: offences that are no longer provided by the criminal law; amnestied offences; offences committed out of guilt.

Conviction decisions regarding offences committed as a minor cannot be the first term of relapse, explicable because the new Criminal code provides for minors only educational measures that do not deprive of freedom or freedom depriving measures instead of imprisonment (art. 115-116 new Criminal code).

At the same time, convictions with fulfilled rehabilitation term are no longer provided by art. 42 of the new Criminal Code, because the law text of art. 41 new Criminal code provides that the new offence has to be committed before rehabilitation or before the rehabilitation term is fulfilled.

c) The action for which a conviction sentenced is ruled abroad has to be also provided by the Romanian criminal law as offence (double incrimination has to exist);

d) The conviction decision sentenced abroad for being the term of relapse, has to be recognized by the Romanian court according to the provisions of art. 115-116 of the Law no. 302/2004 regarding international judicial cooperation in criminal matters. Once the decision sentenced abroad is recognized and considered in determining the state of relapse, the provisions of the Romanian criminal code regarding the existence conditions of relapse and its punishment system have to be considered.

The second term of international relapse, from the point of view of the conditions established by the law, has the same characteristics:



194

executrii pedepsei n strintate/n ar, n timpul executrii acesteia sau n stare de evadare) sau dup terminarea executrii primei pedepse ori considerarea ei ca executat. Infraciunea poate fi n form de tentativ ori n form consumat, sau poate consta n participarea la svrirea acesteia ca autor, instigator sau complice, potrivit art. 174 noul C.pen.

Nu intereseaz, la stabilirea recidivei, dac infraciunea comis din nou este prevzut de Codul penal sau de o lege special, dup cum nici dac infraciunea este de aceeai natur sau de natur diferit cu prima infraciune, deoarece Codul penal romn a adoptat aa-numita recidiv general11.

De asemenea, cel de-al doilea termen al recidivei l poate constitui svrirea unei singure infraciuni sau a mai multor infraciuni. n noua reglementare s-a artat c, dac infractorul svrete mai multe infraciuni concurente, dintre care cel puin una se afl n stare de recidiv, cel de-al doilea termen al recidivei l constituie rezultanta unui concurs, spre deosebire de actuala reglementare cnd, n aceeai situaie, infraciunile, fiecare n parte vor forma cel de-al doilea termen al unei recidive distincte, dac ndeplinesc condiiile prevzute de art. 37 C.pen.12.

Prevederea este criticabil, deoarece legiuitorul noului C.pen., dnd ntietate aplicrii regulilor concursului de infraciuni, dup care d eficien reglementrii privitoare la starea de recidiv, nu face altceva dect s agraveze de dou ori pedeapsa, pe de o parte, prin aplicarea sporului concursului de infraciuni (de exemplu, 1/3 din totalul pedepselor stabilite, cnd exist numai pedepse cu nchisoarea), iar, pe de alt parte, prin totalizarea pedepselor rezultate.

Dac pentru infraciunile concurente, unele dintre ele nu ndeplinesc condiiile de a fi termeni ai recidivei, deoarece sunt comise din culp sau, dei sunt intenionate, pedeapsa prevzut de lege este mai mic de un an (pluralitate intermediar) i s-ar da eficien cadrului legal al concursului de infraciuni, ajungndu-se la o pedeaps global care

a) Committing new offences in the country/ abroad, after the final conviction sentenced abroad/in the country (before beginning to execute the penalty abroad/ in the country, during its execution or escaping) or after the end of the first penalty execution or its being considered as executed. The offence can be under the form of attempt or consummated, or it consists in the participation to its occurrence as author, instigator or accomplice, according to art. 174 new Criminal code.

It is not of interest, in determining the relapse, whether the offence committed again is provided by the criminal core or by a special law, or if the offence has the same nature or a different nature as the first offence, because the Romanian criminal code adopted the so-called general relapse26.

Also, the second term of relapse is the commission of only one offence or more offences. The new regulation shows that if the offender commits more offences, of which at least one is under the state of relapse, the second term of relapse the result of a juncture, unlike the current regulation when, in the same case, offences will separately comprise the second term of a distinct relapse, if they meet the conditions provided by art. 37 Criminal Code.27.

The provision is criticisable, because the new Criminal code lawmaker, applying first the rules of juncture of offences, and then applying the regulations regarding the state of relapse, only aggravates the penalty twice, by applying the juncture of offences (for instance, 1/3 of all the penalties, when there are only imprisonment penalties), and on the other hand, by cumulating the resulting penalties.

If in the case of concurrent offences, some of them do not fulfil the conditions to be terms of relapse, because they are committed out of guilt or, although they are intentional, the penalty provided by the law is smaller than a year (intermediary plurality) and a global penalty is achieved than succeeds the application of relapse, the does



195

succede apoi aplicrii regimului recidivei, fptuitorul apare ca recidivist n raport cu toate infraciunile i cu pedeapsa stabilit pentru faptele concurente, ceea ce ar duce la excluderea sa de la aplicarea graierii. Deci, n acest caz este necesar intervenia legiuitorului din dorina de a atrage atenia asupra problemei cu care instanele de judecat se vor confrunta.

b) Noua infraciune s fie svrit cu intenie sau praeterintenie i s nu fie dintre acelea de care nu se ine seama la stabilirea strii de recidiv, conform art. 42 C.pen.

Al doilea termen al recidivei poate fi, att o infraciune intenionat, ct i praeterintenionat. Datorit faptului c primum delictum din alctuirea infraciunii praeterintenionate este comis cu intenie, el st la baza rezultatului mai grav, dei acesta este produs din culp. n acest sens, s-a pronunat, att literatura juridic13, ct i practica judiciar.

O nou infraciune svrit din culp exclude existena celui de-al doilea termen al recidivei.

c) Pedeapsa prevzut de lege pentru infraciunea svrit din nou s fie nchisoare mai mare de 1 an sau deteniunea pe via, la fel ca i n reglementarea n vigoare.

Aceast condiie are drept scop restrngerea sferei recidivei la infraciunile mai grave, dei condiia gravitii infraciunii svrite este ndeplinit cu prisosin atunci cnd pedeapsa prevzut de lege este deteniunea pe via.

n cazul n care noua infraciune este pedepsit cu nchisoarea mai mare de un an sau cu amend, nu va exista recidiv postcondamnatorie dac instana va aplica pedeapsa amenzii. Dac instana a reinut dintre cele dou pedepse alternative amenda, o asemenea fapt nu poate intra n structura recidivei, punct de vedere mprtit diferit n reglementarea actual, ntruct legea are n vedere posibilitatea aplicrii amenzii pentru infraciunea ce constituie cel de-al doilea termen al recidivei, art. 39 alin. 4 C.pen.

n practica judiciar, cu privire la condiiile de existen ale recidivei, s-a decis c starea de recidiv exist de la data comiterii

appears as recidivist in relation to all the offences and with the penalty for concurrent actions, which results in its exclusion from amnesty. Therefore, in this case the lawmaker has to interfere due to the desire to draw attention on the problem that courts of law will be facing.

b) The new offence has to be intentional or oblique intent and not to be included in the offences considered in determining the state of relapse, according to art. 42 Criminal code.

The second term of relapse can be both intentional offence and intent oblique. Because the primum delictum in comprising the intent oblique is committed intentionally, it is the cause of the more severe result, although it is caused out of guilt. It is therefore consecrated both in judicial literature28, and judicial practice.

A new offence committed out of guilt excludes the existence of the second term of relapse.

c) The penalty provided by the law for the offence committed again has to be imprisonment longer than a year or lifetime imprisonment, like the regulation in force.

This has the purpose of restricting the sphere of relapse to more serious offences, although the condition of offence gravity is fulfilled when the penalty provided by the law is lifetime imprisonment.

If the new offence is punished with imprisonment for more than a year or with a fine, relapse after conviction will not exist if fine applies. If the court considered fine from the two alternative penalties, it cannot enter the structure of relapse, which is shared differently in the current regulation, because the law considers the possibility of fine for the offence which is the second term of relapse, art. 39 par. 4 Criminal code.

In judicial practice, regarding the existence conditions of relapse, it has been decided that the state of relapse has existed since the date of the offence which is the second term of relapse, not since the date of conviction sentenced for the offence29. The



196

infraciunii care constituie cel de-al doilea termen al recidivei, i nu de la data condamnrii pronunate pentru acea infraciune14. Soluia este corect, ns nu trebuie omis faptul c instana verific, n momentul condamnrii pentru infraciunea care constituie cel de-al doilea termen al recidivei, dac sunt ndeplinite condiiile legale ale acesteia, lund n considerare, bineneles, momentul svririi celei de-a doua infraciuni. Hotrrea pe care o pronun instana nu va avea caracterul constitutiv al strii de recidiv, ci numai constatator al acestei stri care a existat din momentul comiterii celei de-a doua infraciuni. Un infractor nu poate fi considerat n general recidivist, ci numai n raport cu infraciunea a crei pedeaps a fost agravat potrivit dispoziiilor legale privind starea de recidiv.

Existena recidivei se poate stabili pe orice cale, i nu numai dup copia cazierului judiciar15.

Identificnd elementele de noutate ale recidivei internaionale reglementate n noul Cod penal, rmne de vzut dac tratamentul sancionator propus i raportat la operaiunea de individualizare judiciar poate oferi un rspuns adecvat elementelor care pot pune probleme n practic. Bibliografie:

Antoniu G., Mitrache C-tin., Stnoiu R. M., Molnar I., Paca V., Filipa A., Ionescu I., Iliescu N., Basarab M. - Noul Cod penal. Comentat, vol. I (art. 1-56), Editura C.H.Beck, Bucureti, 2006.

Antoniu G., Bulai C., Griga I., Ivan Gh., Mitrache C-tin., Molnar I., Pascu I., Paca V., Predescu O. - Explicaii preliminare ale noului Cod penal. Vol. I - Articolele 1-52, Editura Universul Juridic, Bucureti, 2010.

Basarab M., Drept penal. Partea general, vol. II, ediia a IV-a, revzut i adugit, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 2001.

Basarab M., Paca V., Mateu Gh., Butiuc C., Codul penal comentat, vol. I, Partea general, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007.

Boroi Al., Nistoreanu Gh., Drept penal.

solution is correct, but we do not have to forget the fact that the court checks for the offence which is the second term of relapse, whether its legal conditions are fulfilled, taking of course into consideration the moment of committing the second offence. The decision sentenced by the court will not have the constitutive character of the relapse state, only establishing character of this state that has existed from the moment of committing the second offence. An offender cannot be generally considered a recidivist, except for in relation to the offence whose penalty was aggravated according to the legal provisions regarding the state of relapse.

The existence of relapse can be determined by any means, not by a copy of the criminal record certificate30.

Identifying the new elements of international relapse regulated by the new Criminal Code, we shall see whether the punishing treatment proposed and related to the operation of judicial individualization can give an adequate answer to the elements that can bring problems in practice.

Bibliography:

Antoniu G., Mitrache C-tin., Stnoiu R. M., Molnar I., Paca V., Filipa A., Ionescu I., Iliescu N., Basarab M. The new Criminal Code. Commented, vol. I (art. 1-56), C.H.Beck Press, Bucharest, 2006.

Antoniu G., Bulai C., Griga I., Ivan Gh., Mitrache C-tin., Molnar I., Pascu I., Paca V., Predescu O. Preliminary explanations of the new Criminal Code. Vol. I - Articles 1-52, Judicial Universe Press, Bucharest, 2010.

Basarab M., Criminal Law. General Part, vol. II, 4th edition revised and added, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 2001.

Basarab M., Paca V., Mateu Gh., Butiuc C., Commented Criminal code, vol. I, General part, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007.

Boroi Al., Nistoreanu Gh., Criminal



197

Partea general, ediia a IV-a, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2004.

Boroi Al., Drept penal. Partea general, conform noului Cod penal, Editura C.H.Beck, Bucureti, 2010.

Bulai C., Manual de drept penal. Partea general, vol. II, Editura All, Bucureti, 1997.

Buzea N., Infraciunea penal i culpabilitatea, Alba Iulia, 1944.

Cocain A., Recidiva n dreptul penal, ediie revzut i adugit, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 1995.

Dincu A., Drept penal. Partea general, vol. I, Bucureti, 1971.

Dongoroz V., Drept penal, reeditarea ediiei din 1939, Editura Societii Tempus i Asociaia Romna de tiine Penale, Bucureti, 2000

Grigora J, Individualizarea pedepsei, Editura Academiei, Bucureti, 1970.

Mateu Gh., Recidiva n teoria i practica dreptului penal, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 1997.

Mitrache C., Drept penal romn, partea general, Casa de editur i pres ansa S.R.L., Bucureti, 2002.

Oancea I., Drept penal, partea general, Editura Didactic i Pedagogic, Bucureti, 1971.

Pavel D., Codul penal comentat i adnotat. Partea special, vol. II, Editura tiinific i Enciclopedic, Bucureti, 1977.

Paca V., Msurile de siguran. Sanciuni penale, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 1998.

Paca V., Modificrile Codului penal, Legea nr. 278/2006, Comentarii i explicaii, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007.

Paca V., Reglementarea recidivei n noul Cod penal, Dreptul, nr. 9/2010.

Ptulea V., Regimul sancionator al recidivei n cazul revocrii concomitente a graierii condiionate i a liberrii condiionate, privind pedepse pronunate pentru infraciuni concurente, Dreptul, nr. 6/1991

Pvleanu V., Drept procesual penal, vol. II, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 2004.

Zolyneak M., Drept penal, vol. III,

law. General part, 4th edition, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2004.

Boroi Al., Criminal law. General part, according to the new Criminal Code, C.H.Beck Press, Bucharest, 2010.

Bulai C., Criminal law manual. General part, vol. II, All Press, Bucharest, 1997.

Buzea N., Criminal offence and culpability, Alba Iulia, 1944.

Cocain A., Relapse in criminal law, revised and completed edition, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 1995.

Dincu A., Criminal law. General part, vol. I, Bucharest, 1971.

Dongoroz V., Criminal law, re-publishing of the 1939 edition, Tempus Society Press and the Romanian Association of Criminal Sciences, Bucharest, 2000

Grigora J, Penalty individualization, Academy Press, Bucharest, 1970.

Mateu Gh., Relapse in the theory and practice of criminal law, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 1997.

Mitrache C., Romanian criminal law, general part, ansa Publishing House, Bucharest, 2002.

Oancea I., Criminal Law, General Part, Didactic and Pedagogic Press, Bucharest, 1971.

Pavel D., Commented and annoted criminal law. Special part, vol. II, Scientific and Encyclopaedic Press, Bucharest, 1977.

Paca V., Safety measures. Criminal penalties, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 1998.

Paca V., Criminal code amendments, Law nr. 278/2006, Comments and explanations, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007.

Paca V., Relapse regulation in the new Criminal Code, Law, nr. 9/2010.

Ptulea V., Punishing regime of relapse in the case of conditioned amnesty and probation concomitant revocation regarding penalties sentenced for concurrent offences, Law, nr. 6/1991



198

Editura Fundaiei Chemarea, Iai, 1993. Zolyneak M., Unele aspecte teoretice i practice ale recidivei, Revista romn de drept, nr. 6/1983

Pvleanu V., Criminal procedural law, vol. II, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 2004.

Zolyneak M., Criminal law, vol. III, Chemarea Foundation Press, Iai, 1993. Zolyneak M., Several theoretical and practical aspects of relapse, Romanian law magazine, nr. 6/1983

1 Paca V., Msurile de siguran. Sanciuni penale, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 1998, pp. 19-20. 2 Mateu Gh., op. cit., p. 231. 3 Tonislav E., Recidiva internaional n materie de droguri, Dreptul, nr. 4/2004, p. 138. 4 Legea nr. 302/2004 privind cooperarea judiciar internaional n materie penal, publicat n Monitorul oficial al Romniei, partea I, nr. 594 din 1 iulie 2004, a abrogat dispoziiile art. 519-521 din C.pr.pen., iar recunoaterea i executarea hotrrilor penale strine au loc, potrivit dispoziiilor cuprinse n art. 115-121 din aceast lege, care a fost modificat i completat prin Legea nr. 224/2006 i Ordonana de urgen nr. 103/2006. 5 Pascu I., Drept penal, partea general, Editura Hamangiu, Bucureti, 2007, p. 300. 6 Tnsescu I., Tnsescu C., Tnsescu G., op. cit., p. 112. 7 Pvleanu V., Drept procesual penal, vol. II, Editura Lumina Lex, Bucureti, 2004, p. 540. 8 Boroi Al., Nistoreanu Gh., Drept penal. Partea general, ediia a IV-a, Editura All Beck, Bucureti, 2004, p. 246. 9 Expunere de motive propus de echipa de specialiti, privind adoptarea noului Cod penal, disponibil pe Internet la adresa: http://www.just.ro. 10 Paca V., Reglementarea recidivei n noul Cod penal, Dreptul, nr. 9/2010, p. 13. 11 Bulai C., op. cit., p. 231. 12 Mitrache C., op. cit., p. 227. 13 Pavel D., Codul penal comentat i adnotat. Partea special, vol. II, Editura tiinific i Enciclopedic, Bucureti, 1977, p. 574. 14 Mateu Gh., op.cit , p. 207. 15 Trib. Sibiu, s. pen., dec. nr. 381/1978, nepublicat. 16 Paca V., Safety measures. Penal sanctions, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 1998, pp. 19-20. 17 Mateu Gh., op. cit., p. 231. 18 Tonislav E., International relapse in the matter of drugs, Law, nr. 4/2004, p. 138. 19 Law no. 302/2004 regarding international judicial cooperation in criminal matters published in The Official Gazette of Romania, part I, no. 594 from July 1st, 2004, abrogated the provisions of art. 519-521 of the Criminal procedure code, and foreign criminal decisions recognition and execution occur according to the provisions of art. 115-121 of this law, was amended and completed through Law no. 224/2006 and Emergency Ordinance no. 103/2006. 20 Pascu I., Criminal Law, general part, Hamangiu Press, Bucharest, 2007, p. 300. 21 Tnsescu I., Tnsescu C., Tnsescu G., op. cit., p. 112. 22 Pvleanu V., Criminal procedural law, vol. II, Lumina Lex Press, Bucharest, 2004, p. 540. 23 Boroi Al., Nistoreanu Gh., Criminal law. General part, 4th edition, All Beck Press, Bucharest, 2004, p. 246. 24 Presentations of reasons proposed by the team of experts, regarding the adoption of the new Criminal Code, available on the Internet at: http://www.just.ro. 25 Paca V., Regulation of relapse in the new Criminal code, Law, no. 9/2010, p. 13. 26 Bulai C., op. cit., p. 231. 27 Mitrache C., op. cit., p. 227. 28 Pavel D., Criminal Code commented and annoted. Special part, vol. II, Scientific and Encyclopaedic Press, Bucharest, 1977, p. 574. 29 Mateu Gh., op.cit , p. 207. 30 Trib. Sibiu, s. pen., dec. nr. 381/1978, not published.

Documents

16 Elena Giorgiana Simionescu