IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dcu/journl/v8y2014i2p5-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Constitutionality Of The Different Treatment Between State And Citizens On The Exemption From Bail

Author

Listed:
  • Agata Mihaela Popescu
  • Ionita Cochintu

Abstract

The right of access to justice is one of the most important fundamental rights elevated to constitutional principle, as laid down in Article 21 of the Constitution, which provides that "any person can go to court to protect the rights, freedoms and interests legitimate, no law may restrict the exercise of this right, the parties having the right to a fair trialand settlement of cases in a reasonable time. But, like any law, access to justice is subject to certain limitations, not an absolute right, and in consideration of special circumstances may be considered special rules of procedure, as well as ways to exercise procedural rights. Under the constitutional provisions of Article 126, the legislature may establish general rules of procedure, but may establish certain rules derogating from the common procedure. These are the general rules which set bail, but also that certain entities exempt from the payment. In this paper we try to present reasons why the legislature has resorted to such measures and considerations taken into account by the constitutional court has ruled that it is constitutional exemption from the payment of public institutions established by way of bail.

Suggested Citation

  • Agata Mihaela Popescu & Ionita Cochintu, 2014. "The Constitutionality Of The Different Treatment Between State And Citizens On The Exemption From Bail," FIAT IUSTITIA, Dimitrie Cantemir Faculty of Law Cluj Napoca, Romania, vol. 8(2), pages 5-9, october.
  • Handle: RePEc:dcu:journl:v:8:y:2014:i:2:p:5-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fiatiustitia.ro/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/177-Article-Text-333-2-10-20150602.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dcu:journl:v:8:y:2014:i:2:p:5-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dimitrie Cantemir Faculty of Law Cluj Napoca, Romania (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://fiatiustitia.ro .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.