Anda di halaman 1dari 15

Demnitatea persoanei umane. Tendine i perspective n dreptul penal i n dreptul procesual penal The dignity of the human person.

Trends and perspectives in criminal law and criminal procedure law Rezumat: Sfritul anului 1990 a marcat introducerea n Codul de procedur penal a principiului respectrii demnitii umane, ca opunndu-se tuturor procedurilor care ar viza s transforme un om n lucru, care ar tinde s-l dezumanizeze. Respectarea demnitii umane presupune n mod obligatoriu asigurarea c n procesul penal, omul este tratat ca o persoan n sens deplin, ca membru al familiei umane. n acest material, vom analiza principalele modificri aprute privind demnitatea profesiei, probele, mijloacele de prob i pedepsele. Din aceast perspectiv, Noul Cod de Procedur Penal i Noul Cod Penal aduc mai multe elemente de noutate i mbuntiri. Cuvinte cheie: respectarea demnitii persoanei umane umane; Noul Cod Penal; Noul Cod de Procedur Penal; Curtea European a Drepturilor Omului. 1.Preliminarii. n vederea realizrii scopului su, procesul penal este cluzit de anumite principii fundamentale ce fixeaz cadrul politico-juridic n conformitate cu care trebuie s aib loc reacia societii fa de cei care ncalc legea penal 1. Principiul respectrii demnitii umane a fost introdus n Codul de Procedur penal prin legea nr. 32/19902, n urma aderrii Romniei la Convenia mpotriva torturii i a altor pedepse ori tratamente cu cruzime, inumane sau degradante3. Astfel, art. 51 din Codul de Procedur Penal actual, sub denumirea marginal Respectarea demnitii umane prevede: Orice persoan uman care se afl n curs de urmrire penal sau de judecat trebuie tratat cu respectarea demnitii umane. n continuare, dispune: Subjecting ... to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is punishable by law"; the definition of the torture in the conventional text is taken entirely in art. 2671 of the Penal Code. 2.Conceptul demnitii persoanei umane. Demnitatea este un concept complex i multifaetat, motiv pentru care a suscitat interesul filosofilor i juritilor din toat lumea. n cele ce urmeaz, vom realiza o prezentare succint a opiniilor exprimate pe marginea acestui subiect.n dreptul german, G. Drig consider demnitatea ca fiind esena omului, adic, adaug acesta, o valoare proprie mereu prezent, ceva peren i indispensabil4. Pentru Nipperday, ar fi vorba de o valoare intrinsec i independent, esenialul, natura omului prin definiie 5. Stern spune c demnitatea nseamn valoarea existenial a oricrui om, individual, pentru sine nsui i c
1 2

I. Neagu, Drept procesual penal, Vol.I, Partea general, Tipografia Universitii Bucureti, 1979, p.41. Legea nr. 32/1990 pentru modificarea i completarea unor dispoziii ale Codului de Procedut Penal a fost publicat n M. Of., nr. 128 din 17 noiembrie 1990. 3 Convenia mpotriva torturii i a altor pedepse sau tratamente cu cruzime, inumane sau degradante a fost adoptat la New York la 10 decembrie 1980. 4 Gnter Drig, Kommentar zum GG, Art. 1, n Munz, Drig, Herzog, Grundgeset Kommentar, C.H.Beck, Mnchwen, 1976, nota 2 si 11. 5 Hans Carl Nipperday, Die Wrde des Menschen, n Franz L. Neuman, Hans Carl Nipperday, Ulrich Scheuner, Die Grundrechte. Handbuch der Theorie und Praxis des Grundrechte. Vol. II.Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, 1964, p123.

este o caracteristic indispensabil a fiinei sale6. n schimb, pentru P. Saladin, este o valen specific a umanitii7. Mai recent, Hberle vorbete despre demnitate ca despre natura omului8 i Seifert face referire la ea ca la nsi esena persoanei, n special spiritualitatea i substana9. n dreptul englez, David Feldman distinge trei nivele la care opereaz demnitatea: demnitatea ataat ntregii specii umane, demnitatea grupurilor n cadrul speciei umane i demnitatea anumitor indivizi umani. Autorul distinge urmtoarele implicaiile legale ale diferenierii: demnitatea speciei ca ntreg necesit reguli care difereniaz ntre oameni i alte specii i care protejeaz acest statut special i integritatea oamenilor; demnitatea grupurilor n cadrul speciei exclude discriminarea ntre grupuri pe temeiuri nerelevante i le permite s-i afirme drepturile i s-i continuie tradiiile. La nivelul indivizilor, demnitatea necesit dreptul de a lua propriile decizii i de a contribui la deciziile luate de alii care i afecteaz propria via. n plus, la nivelul grupului social i individului, demnitatea uman are dou aspecte. Aspectul subiectiv se refer la sensul aprecierii de sine al unei persoane, care este de obicei asociat cu formele de comportament care comunic acest sens altora. Aspectul obiectiv are n vedere atitudinea statului sau a altora fa de un individ sau grup, de obicei n lumina normelor sociale sau a ateptrilor.10 n doctrina rus11, se arat c n conceptul demnitii exist un aspect obiectiv (un concept de valoare a unei persoane) i un aspect subiectiv, i anume sentimentul sau nelegerea acestei valori morale a persoanei n general sau a unei anumite persoane. n al doilea rnd, aspectul obiectiv al conceptului poate conine alte trei aspecte: demnitatea uman, adic demnitatea persoanei n general, indiferent de anumite caliti sau trsturi; demnitatea personal, adic valoarea unui anumit individ care este dat de calitile lui pozitive, culturale i fizice; i demnitatea conectat la apartenena la o anumit categorie social sau grup. La toate acestea, se adaug si un alt aspect: un comportament moral, un mod demn de via.

Klazs Stern i Michael Sachs, Das Staatsrecht der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Vol. III. , C.H. Beck, Mnchen, 1988, p.6 i urm. 7 Peter Saladin, n Grundrechtesreform in rechtsvergleichender Sicht, n Auf dem Weg zur Menschenwrde und Gerechtigkeit. Festschrift fr Hans. R. Klecatsky. Dargeboten zum 60 Lebensajahr von L. Adamovich und P. Pernthaler, Vol. II, Wilhelm Braumler-Universitts Verlagsbuchhanlung, Wien, 1980, p.850. 8 Peter Hberle, Die Menschenwrde als Grundlage der staatlichen Gemeinschaft, n Josef Isensee i Paul Kirchof, Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepublick Deutshland, Band I, Grundlagen von Staat und Verfassung, CF Mller Juristischer Editorial, Heildelber, 1987, p.860. 9 Josef Seifert, Die vierfache Quelle der Menschenwrde als Fundament der Menschenrechte, n Ziemsche, Landgheid, Wilms i Haverkate, Staatsphilosophie und Rechtpolitik, Festschright fr Martin Kriele zum 65. Geburtstag, C.H. Beck, Mnchen, 1997, p.172. 10 David Feldman, Civil liberties in England and Wales, Oxford, 2002, p.125. 11 F.M. Rudinsky, Civil human rights in Russia. Modern problems of theory and practice, Transaction Publisher, 2007, p104.

n dreptul romn, n literatura legal din anii 7012, ntr-o opinie reluat i n prezent, demnitatea era un atribut nscut, care este onoarea, la care se adaug alte nsuiri de ordin etic, dobndite n timpul vieii omului, care formeaz laolalt reputaia unei persoane. Respectarea demnitii umane presupune respectarea garaniilor sale, care se afl ntr-o evoluie permanent. 3.Demnitatea magistrailor. Codul deontologic al magistrailor conine n capitolul V Demnitatea i onoarea profesiei de magistrat dispoziii amnunite privind standardele de comportament al magistrailor pentru ca conduita acestora s fie conform cu demnitatea i onoarea profesiei. Acetia sunt datori s se abin de la orice acte sau fapte de natur s compromit demnitatea lor n funcie i n societate i trebuie s aib o comportare adecvat n relaiile cu justiiabilii, cu colegii, cu reprezentanii celorlalte organe de stat i cu ntregul corp social (art.21). Fa de toate persoanele care particip, indiferent n ce calitate, la procedurile judiciare, magistraii nu pot manifesta prejudeci n legtur cu rasa, sexul, religia, naionalitatea, statutul socio-economic i cultural al acestora. Magistraii au datoria de a proteja egalitatea cetenilor n faa legii, de a respecta i apra demnitatea, integritatea fizic i moral a celor care particip la procedurile judiciare, n orice calitate particip la aceste proceduri (art.2). n fine, vom preciza c potrivit art.276 din Noul Cod Penal, intitulat Presiuni asupra justiiei, se pedepsete cu nchisoare de la 3 luni la un an sau cu amend, fapta persoanei care, pe durata procedurii judiciare n curs, face declaraii nereale referitoare la svrirea de ctre judector sau de ctre organele de urmrire penal, a unei infraciuni sau a unei abateri disciplinare grave legate de instrumentarea cauzei, n scopul de a le influena sau intimida. 4.Demnitatea persoanei umane, probele i mijloacele de prob . Obinerea probelor trebuie s fie fcut conform unor procedee corecte, ce sunt n armonie cu valorile morale la care este ataat societatea, printre acestea numrndu-se i demnitatea persoanei umane. Pe plan general, cu privire la aceast problem, Noul Cod de Procedur Penal n art. 101, intitulat Principiul loialitii administrrii probelor prevede: 1. Este interzis a se ntrebuina violene, ameninri ori alte mijloace de constrngere, precum i promisiuni sau ndemnuri n scopul de a obine probe. 2. Nu pot fi folosite metode sau tehnici de ascultare care afecteaz capacitatea persoanei de a-i aminti i de a relata n mod contient i voluntar faptele care constituie obiectul probei, nici mcar dac persoana i d consimmntul. n plus, probele obinute prin tortur i prin alte mijloace nelegale nu pot fi folosite n cursul procesului penal (art. 102). Pe de alt parte, Noul Cod Penal prevede c infraciunea de cercetare abuziv (art. 280) const n ntrebuinarea de promisiuni, ameninri sau violene mpotriva unei persoane urmrite sau judecate ntr-o cauz penal, de ctre un procuror sau un judector, pentru a o determina s dea sau s nu dea declaraii, s dea declaraii mincinoase ori s i retrag declaraiile, precum i n producerea,
12

V. Dongoroz, S. Kahane, I. Oancea, N. Iliescu, C. Bulai, R. Stnoiu, V. Roca, Explicaii teoretice ale Codului penal romn, vol. III, Ed. Academiei, Bucureti, 1971, p.403. Mai recent, M. Basarab, V. Paca, Ghe. Mateu, Tiberiu Medeanu, C. Butiuc, M. Bdil, R. Bodea, P.Dungan, V. Mirian, R. Manca, C. Mihe, Codul penal comentat, Vol. II, Partea special, Ed. Hamangiu, 2008, p.342.

falsificarea ori ticluirea de probe nereale de ctre un organ de cercetare penal, un procuror sau un judector. n jurisprudena Curii Europene a Drepturilor Omului, o cauz important care a atras atenia este Jalloh contra Germaniei 13. Faptele erau urmtoarele: patru poliiti l-au vzut pe reclamant, cel puin n dou ocazii diferite, scond un scule de plastic din gur i dndu-l unei alte persoane contra unei sume de bani. Bnuind c era vorba de stupefiante, poliitii l-au prins n timp ce l nghiea pe ultimul. n scopul de a provoca evacuarea saculeului, i-au administrat un vomitiv, n mod forat, n mediu spitalicesc cu ajutorul unei sonde gastrice, suspectul regurgitnd dou capsule care au fost reinute ca element de prob. Instanele germane au concluzionat absena unei incompatibiliti de principiu a procedeului cu respectul demnitii umane. Reclamantul s-a adresat Curii Europene,invocnd nclcarea articolului 3 din textul convenional. n plus, el estima c utilizarea elementelor de prob obinute cu nclcarea respectului demnitii umane, au adus atingere dreptului la un proces echitabil. CEDO a observat c utilizarea n cadrul unei proces penal de elemente de prob obinute cu nerespectarea art. 3 ridic ntrebri serioase n ceea ce privete echitatea procedurii, nainte de a concluziona c aceast utilizare ca prob a stupefiantelor strns prin administrarea cu fora a unui vomitiv reclamantului a determinat inechitatea ntregului proces. Un reputat autor francez spunea: Percheziia apare ca fiind deosebit de atentatorie, nu numai pentru libertatea, dar de asemenea i mai ales n ceea ce privete demnitatea persoanei vizate. Fr ndoial c atingerea este minim i nu va fi resimit ca vexatorie dac vizeaz numai bagajele, servietele sau poetele; ea devine mai indiscret atunci cnd ia forma unei palpri rapide a hainelor. Atingerea adus independenei fiinei umane, demnitii sale, respectiv pudorii devine insuportabil atunci cnd agentul autoritii impune o dezbrcare, parial sau total, a persoanei vizate i atingerea este adus la paroxismul su dac investigaia corporal este mpins prea departe i se aseamn cu o explorare medical14. Un element de noutate pe care l aduce Noul Cod de Procedur penal este c prevede n art. 156 (2) c percheziia se efectueaz cu respectarea demnitii umane, fr a constitui o ingerin disproporionat n viaa privat. Pe aceeai linie, n art. 166 (Efectuarea percheziiei corporale) se arat c organul judiciar este obligat s ia msuri ca percheziia s fie efectuat cu respectarea demnitii umane. Operaiunea nu trebuie s pun persoana ntr-o postur vexatorie i trebuie s fie ntotdeauna practicat de o persoan de acelai sex cu cea percheziionat. n acest sens, procesul verbal de percheziie trebuie s cuprind, printre altele, numele, prenumele i calitatea celui care efectueaz percheziia, data i ora de ncepere i de terminare, cu menionarea oricrei ntreruperi intervenite, locul i condiiile n care a fost gsit suspectul sau inculpatul. Un progres l constituie reglementarea examinrii fizice (art. 190 din Noul Cod), n mod detaliat. Datorit caracterului grav intruziv al msurii examinrii fizice interne a corpului unei persoane, legiuitorul a prevzut

13 14

Cauza Jalloh contra Germaniei, decizia Marii Camere din 11 iulie 2006, cerere nr. 54810/00. A. Vitu, Dignit de la personne et procs penal, n P. Pedrot, Ethique, droit et dignit de la personne, Ed. Economica, 1999, p.388.

c trebuie s fie efectuat cu respectarea vieii private i a demnitii umane i doar de un medic, asistent medical sau de o persoan cu pregtire medical de specialitate. 5. Demnitatea persoanei umane, mass-media i procesul penal. Particularitatea procesului penal rezid i n aceea c este posibil o umilire i o stigmatizare a prilor n ochii opiniei publice. Cum remarca K. Tsatsos, stigmatul moral, nsoit de murmurul obscur c cineva este imoral, poate leza mult mai profund dect orice decizie judectoreasc dat pe baza regulilor de drept. Acolo unde se menine tradiia, dincolo de sanciunile aplicate de stat, exist de asemenea sanciunile aplicate de societate. Unele ui rmn nchise anumitor indivizi. Amintirea subzist n ceea ce privete greeli vechi pe care legea penal le-a prescris, dar nu i legea moral15. n prezent, este expres i clar prevzut n Decizia nr. 220/2011 privind Codul de reglementare a coninutului audiovizual16 c este interzis difuzarea de imagini sau de nregistrri cu persoane aflate n stare de reinere, arest sau care execut o pedeaps privativ de libertate, fr acordul acestora (art. 42 (1)). Art. 44 prevede: (1) Nu pot fi difuzate nregistrri realizate i puse la dispoziia furnizorilor de servicii media audiovizuale de ctre autoritile poliieneti sau judiciare, indiferent de suportul informatic utilizat, fr acordul persoanelor care sunt victime ale acestor infraciuni, fr acordul familiilor acestora sau, dup caz, al reprezentanilor legali. (2) Nu poate fi dezvluit n nici un mod identitatea persoanelor care sunt victime ale infraciunilor privitoare la viaa sexual; se excepteaz situaiile n care victimele i-au dat acordul scris, sub condiia respectrii limitelor de identificare stabilite prin acord. n ceea ce privete minorul cu vrsta de pn la 14 ani, victim a unui abuz sexual, dac este acuzat de comiterea unei infraciuni sau n calitate de martor, este interzis difuzarea oricror indicii care ar putea s duc la identificarea sa (art. 4(1)).Dac minorul este victima unor alte infraciuni sau a fost supus unor abuzuri fizice sau psihice, difuzarea de declaraii este posibil numai cu acceptul minorului, precum i cu acordul scris al prinilor, al altui reprezentant legal ori, dup caz, al persoanei n grija creia se afl minorul (art. 4(2)). De asemenea, minorul cu vrsta cuprins ntre 14 i 16 ani, care este acuzat de comiterea unei infraciuni sau este victim a unei infraciuni, poate fi prezentat n programele de tiri, n emisiuni de dezbateri sau reportaje audiovizuale, numai dac sunt ntrunite cumulativ condiiile: exist consimmntul scris al su; existena n prealabil a consimmntului scris al prinilor sau al reprezentantului legal; este asistat pe parcursul transmisiei sau al nregistrrii de ctre un printe ori de ctre reprezentantul legal, respectiv de ctre avocat n cazul cercetrii penale sau al arestrii (art. 6(1)). n fine, conform dispoziiilor art. 6(2), n cazul minorului, cu vrsta cuprins ntre 16 i 18 ani, dac este acuzat de comiterea unei infraciuni, sunt necesare acordul su explicit i asistarea de ctre avocat dac este cercetat penal, reinut sau arestat, n timp de, dac este victim sau martor la comiterea unei infraciuni, sunt necesare acordul explicit al su i eliminarea oricror elemente care pot duce la identificarea minorului, la solicitarea acestuia, a prinilor sau a reprezentantului legal.
15 16

G. Theotokas, Penses et positions, II, p.1326 i urm., apud. K.E. Beys, p.312. Decizia nr. 220 din 24 februarie 2011 privind Codul de reglementare a coninutului audiovizual, text actualizat n baza actelor normative modificatoare, publicate n Monitorul Oficial al Romniei, Partea I, pn la 28 iulie 2011, n vigoare ncepnd cu data de 28 iulie 2011.

Reglementrile nou-introduse n Noul Cod de Procedur Penal vor fi de un real folos n direcia mbuntirii proteciei demnitii persoanei umane n procesul penal. Cu privire la publicitatea edinei de judecat, art. 352 (3) prevede c instana poate declara edina nepublic pentru tot cursul sau pentru o anumit parte a judecrii cauzei, la cererea procurorului, a prilor sau din oficiu, dac judecarea n edin public ar putea aduce atingere unor interese de stat, moralei, demnitii sau vieii intime a persoanei, intereselor minorilor sau ale justiiei 17. Ca noutate, potrivit art. 352 (4), instana poate declara edina nepublic la cererea unui martor dac prin audierea sa n edin public s-ar aduce atingere siguranei ori demnitii sau vieii intime a acestuia sau a membrilor familiei sale. Legiuitorul a considerat util s prevad, n art. 352 (9), c pe durata judecii, instana are posibilitatea s interzic publicarea i difuzarea, prin mijloace scrise sau audiovizuale, de texte, desene, fotografii sau imagini de natur a dezvlui identitatea persoanei vtmate, a prii civile, a prii responsabile civilmente, n condiiile prevzute de alineatele (3) i (4). 6. Demnitatea persoanei umane i pedeapsa. n literatura de specialitate, se admite constant c una dintre funciile pedepsei este cea de exemplaritate. Se consider, cu ntreptit temei, c fermitatea, promptitudinea, intrasigena cu care este pedepsit infractorul exercit o influen benefic asupra celorlai membrii ai societii care astfel vor fi determinai s nu svreasc infraciuni18. Unicul element pe care vreau totui s-l subliniez este c demnitatea persoanei umane interzice transformarea pedepsei n spectacol public. Aduc atingere demnitii persoanei toate acele tratamente n care individul este redus la un simplu obiect n minile puterii publice19. Aadar, aplicarea unei pedepse extrem de dure unui individ determinat nu trebuie justificat pe seama ideii de a intimida pe toi ceilali s comit o astfel de fapt. Or, dac art. 52 din Codul penal actual prevede c Scopul pedepsei este prevenirea svririi de infraciunii, menionm, cu titlu de exemplu, art. 25 din Constituia Spaniei potrivit cruia Pedepsele privative de libertate i msurile de siguran au ca scop reeducarea i reinseria n societate i nu pot cuprinde msura muncii forate, condamnatul la pedeapsa nchisorii bucurndu-se, n timpul executrii, de drepturile fundamentale definite n acest capitol, cu excepia celor care sunt n mod expres limitate prin hotrrea de condamnare, de natura pedepsei i de legea penitenciar. Schimbarea major de optic, nceput prin adoptarea noilor coduri, penal i de procedur penal, este continuat prin Proiectul de lege privind executarea pedepselor i a msurilor dispuse de organele judiciare n cursul procesului penal, unul din elementele de noutate foarte importante aduse fiind stabilirea odat cu regimul de executare a pedepsei a unui program de resocializare, adaptat persoanei condamnate n funcie de conduita, personalitatea, vrsta, starea de sntate i
17 18

Sunt preluate prevederile art. 290 (2) din Codul de Procedur Penal actual. n acest sens, Constantin MItrache, Cristian Mitrache, Drept penal romn. Partea general, Editura Universul Juridic, 2007, p.191. 19 Pentru detalii privind Objectkformel, a se vedea Laure Jeannin, Le principe de dignit en droit allemant. Linterprtation et le rengorcement de la valeur axiologique des droits fondamentaux, n coord. Charlotte Girard i Stphanie Hennette-Vauchez, La dignit de la personne humaine. Recherche sur un processus de juridicisation, P.U.F., 2005, p.159.

posibilitile de reintegrare social ale celui condamnat, intitulat individualizare administrativ a regimului de executare a pedepsei privative de libertate20. ntr-o opinie, se consider c individualizarea pedepsei poate constitui o atingere adus demnitii umane, datorit vagului care o nconjoar. Se apreciaz c, lipsa realelor explicaii ale judectorilor cu privire la motivele alegerii lor, ar afecta demnitatea condamnailor deoarece, individualizarea poate fi resimit ca arbitrar, ct timp parametrii care o conduc sunt puin vizibili21. Noul Cod Penal aduce clarificri importante sub acest aspect, reglementnd mult mai riguros criteriile generale de individualizare a pedepsei. Potrivit art. 74, stabilirea cuantumului pedepsei se face n raport cu gravitatea infraciunii svrite i cu periculozitatea infractorului, care se evalueaz dup urmtoarele criterii: a) mprejurrile i modul de comitere a infraciunii, precum i mijloacele folosite; b) starea de pericol creat pentru valoarea ocrotit; c) natura i gravitatea rezultatului produs ori a altor consecine ale infraciunii; d) motivul svririi infraciunii i scopul urmrit; e) natura i frecvena infraciunilor care constituie antecedente penale ale infractorului; f) conduita dup svrirea infraciunii i n cursul procesului penal; g) nivelul de educaie, vrsta, starea de sntate, situaia familial i social22. Pedeapsa cu moartea este sau nu compatibil cu demnitatea uman? Examenul jurisprudenei C.E.D.O. pune n eviden faptul c judectorul european s-a pronunat doar n ceea ce privete condiiile de pronunare sau de punere n aplicare a pedepsei capitale, lsnd netranat problema compatibilitii n sine a pedepsei cu demnitatea uman. Aceast idee c pedeapsa cu moartea este atentatorie la demnitatea uman a fost deseori subliniat n doctrin, dar s-au exprimat i opinii n sens contrar23. n schimb, Curtea Constituional a Africii de Sud a precizat ntr-o manier lipsit de echivoc c pedeapsa cu moartea implic, prin nsi natura sa, o negare a umanitii persoanei executate care este degradat deoarece lipsete persoana condamnat n ntregime de demnitatea sa i o trateaz ca pe un obiect care trebuie eliminat de

20

n funcie de aceste criterii, persoanele condamnate sunt incluse n programe de instruire colar, formare profesional, desfsurare de activiti educative, culturale, terapeutice, de consiliere psihologic, asisten social i derularea de activiti productive. 21 A se vedea R. Koering-Joulin i J.-F. Seuvic n Droits fondamentaux et droit criminal, n Les droits fondamentaux. Une nouvelle catgorie juridique, AJDA, 1998, numr special, p.121 i G. Levasseur, De la minimisation de lenqute de personnalit la gnralisation du pouvoir discrtionaire, RSC 1961, p.83. 22 Referitor la aceeai problem, vom aminti dispoziiile art. 72 (1) din Codul penal n vigoare: La stabilirea i aplicarea pedepselor se ine seama de dispoziiile prii generale a acestui Cod, de limitele de pedeaps fixate n partea special, de gradul de pericol social al faptei svrite, de persoana infractorului i de mprejurrile care atenueaz sau agraveaz rspunderea penal. 23 de exemplu, R. Vouin, Larticle de la mort, RSS, 1966, p.559. Cest nier la dignit de la personne humaine que la croire inapte commettre ventuellement de grands crimes, de vrais crimes, qui justifient le chtiment supreme, car la sagesse populaire soutient que lhomme doit avoir le courage de subir la mort quand il a celui de la donner. Ele manifeste en cela un sens reel de la dignit de la personne humaine.

ctre stat24. n dreptul nostru, aceast problem nu s-a pus, pedeapsa cu moartea fiind abolit prin decretul nr. 6/1990 i nlocuit cu pedeapsa deteniunii pe via25. 7. Concluzie. Demnitatea persoanei umane este din ce n ce mai mult prezent n legislaia statelor i n jurispruden. Principalul su neajuns const n utilizarea de ctre legiuitori i judectori ca sabie cu dou tiuri 26. Analiza din perspectiva dreptului comparat pune n eviden acest aspect: utilizarea argumentului demnitii poate s conduc la soluii diametral opuse. Problemele apar n ce privete definiia demnitii, care sunt actele care sunt neconforme cu demnitatea i care sunt implicaiile pentru rolul statului. S-a exprimat inclusiv opinia c trebuie adoptat o lege care cuprind dispoziii care sunt n mod special orientate spre crearea unui mod de respect general al demnitii, cu prevederea principiilor fundamentale ale politicii statului cu privire la protecia demnitii, obligaiile statului n crearea unui mod de respect general pentru demnitatea cetenilor, obligaiile cetenilor fa de stat i reglementarea rspunderii pentru nclcrile aduse demnitii. Nu s-a putut formula la un punct de vedere unitar. Opiniile exprimate au variat de la o susinere complet a proiectului pn la respingere total, punerea sub semnul ndoielii a necesitii de a adopta o astfel de lege, i mai ales, nu s-a putut ajunge la un numitor comun n ceea ce privete ce ar trebui s cuprind27.

The dignity of the human person. Trends and perspectives in criminal law and criminal procedure law The final of the year 1990 marked the introduction in the Code of criminal procedure of the principle of respect for human dignity, as opposed to the procedures that aim to convert a man into thing, which would tend to dehumanize him. The respect for human dignity necessarily requires protection by ensuring that in criminal process, the man is treated as a person in the fullest sense, that is as a member of the human family. We analyze the main changes to the dignity of the profession, evidences and penalties. From this perspective, the new Code of Criminal Procedure and the New Penal Code provide many new novelties and improvements. Key words: the respect for human dignity; the New Penal Code; the New Code of Criminal Procedure; the European Court of human rights
24

Statul contra Makewanyane, cauza nr. CCT/3/94, 1995, par. 26, citat n Erin Daly, Dignity rights. Courts, Constitutions, and the worth of the human person, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013, p.48. 25 Decretul nr. 6 din 7 ianuarie 1990 pentru abolirea pedepsei cu moartea, pentru modificarea i abrogarea unor prevederi din Codul Penal i alte acte normative, publicat n Monitorul Oficial nr. 4 din 8 ianuarie 1990. 26 Expresie folosit de David Feldman, Civil liberties in England and Wales, Oxford, 2002, p126. 27 F. M. Rudinsky, Civil human rights in Russia. Modern problems of theory and practice, Transaction Publishers, 2007, p.130.

1.Introduction. To achieve its goal, the criminal process is guided by certain fundamental principles that secure the political and legal frame in accordance with society's reaction to take place against those who violate the criminal law 28. The principle of respect for human dignity was introduced in the Code of Criminal Procedure Law. 32/199029, following the accession to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 30. Thus, art. 51 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, current marginal named "Respect for human dignity" provides: "Any human being who is under criminal investigation or on trial should be treated with respect for human dignity." Further, states: "Obedience ... torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is punishable by law "definition of torture in the text is taken entirely conventional in art. 2671 of the Penal Code. 2.The concept of human dignity. Dignity is a complex and multifaceted concept, so that was of interest to philosophers and lawyers worldwide. In what follows, we will make a brief presentation of opinions on this subject. In German law, G. Drig considers dignity as "human essence" that is, he adds, "an eigenvalue always present, some standing and indispensable"31. For Nipperday would be an "intrinsic and independent value, the essential, the human nature by definition" 32. Stern says that " dignity mean the essential value of any human individual, for himself" and "that is an essential feature of his being"33. Instead, for P. Saladin, is a "specific valence of humanity" 34. More recently, Hberle talks about dignity as "human nature"35 and Seifert refers to her as "the essence of the person, especially spirituality and substance"36.
28 29

I. Neagu, Criminal Procedure Law, vol I, General Part, Printing University of Bucharest, 1979, p.41. Law no. 32/1990 for the amendment of certain provisions of the Code of Criminal proceeding was published in the Official Gazette, No. 128 of 17 November 1990. 30 The Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was adopted in New York on December 10, 1980 31 Gnter Drig, Kommentar zum GG, Art. 1, n Munz, Drig, Herzog, Grundgeset Kommentar, C.H.Beck, Mnchwen, 1976, note 2 and 11. 32 Hans Carl Nipperday, Die Wrde des Menschen, in Franz L. Neuman, Hans Carl Nipperday, Ulrich Scheuner, Die Grundrechte. Handbuch der Theorie und Praxis des Grundrechte. Vol. II.Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, 1964, p. 123. 33 Klazs Stern and Michael Sachs, Das Staatsrecht der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Vol. III. , C.H. Beck, Mnchen, 1988, p.6 i following. 34 Peter Saladin, n Grundrechtesreform in rechtsvergleichender Sicht, in Auf dem Weg zur Menschenwrde und Gerechtigkeit. Festschrift fr Hans. R. Klecatsky. Dargeboten zum 60 Lebensajahr von L. Adamovich und P. Pernthaler, Vol. II, Wilhelm Braumler-Universitts Verlagsbuchhanlung, Wien, 1980, p.850. 35 Peter Hberle, Die Menschenwrde als Grundlage der staatlichen Gemeinschaft, in Josef Isensee i Paul Kirchof, Handbuch des Staatsrechts der Bundesrepublick Deutshland, Band I, Grundlagen von Staat und Verfassung, CF Mller Juristischer Editorial, Heildelber, 1987, p.860. 36 Josef Seifert, Die vierfache Quelle der Menschenwrde als Fundament der Menschenrechte, n Ziemsche, Landgheid, Wilms i Haverkate, Staatsphilosophie und Rechtpolitik, Festschright fr Martin Kriele zum 65. Geburtstag, C.H. Beck, Mnchen, 1997, p.172.

In English law, David Feldman distinguishes three levels at which dignity operate: the dignity attached to the whole human species, human dignity within the species groups and the human dignity of the individuals. The author distinguishes the following legal implications of the differentiation: the dignity of the species as a whole requires rules that differentiate between humans and other species and protect their special status and integrity of the people; dignity of ehe groups within the species exclude the discrimination between groups on grounds irrelevant and allows them to assert rights and to continue their traditions. At the level of the individuals, dignity requires the right to make their own decisions and to contribute to the decisions made by others that affect their lives. In addition, at the level of the social group and of the individual, human dignity is twofold. The subjective aspect Refers to the meaning of a person's selfassessment, which is commonly associated with forms of behavior that communicate this to others. The objective aspect involves the attitude of the state or others against an individual or a group, usually in the light of social norms or expectations37. The Russian doctrine38 shows that the concept of dignity has an objective aspect (a concept of the value of a person) and a subjective aspect, namely the feeling or the understanding of the moral values of the person in general or of the specific individuals. Secondly, the objective aspect of the concept can contain three aspects: human dignity, meaning the dignity of the person generally, regardless of certain qualities or traits; the personal dignity, which is the value of an particular individual beeing given by his positive, cultural and physical qualities, and dignity linked to membership of a particular social class or group. To this, add another aspect: moral conduct, a dignified life. In Romanian law, according to the opinion expressed in the legal literature of the 70s 39, in an opinion resumed today, dignity was "an innate attribute, which is honor, plus other ethical qualities acquired during human life, which together form a person's reputation. " Respect for human dignity requires respect for its guarantees, which are constantly evolving. 3. The dignity of the magistrates. The Code of Ethics of the magistrates contained in Chapter V The dignity and the honor of the magistrate" detailed provisions on standards of conduct of judges so that their conduct is consistent with the dignity and the honor of the profession. They are obliged to refrain from any acts or facts likely to compromise their dignity in function and in society and must have appropriate behavior in dealing with litigants, with colleagues, with representatives of other government agencies and the entire social body (Article
37 38

David Feldman, Civil liberties in England and Wales, Oxford, 2002, p.125. F.M. Rudinsky, Civil human rights in Russia. Modern problems of theory and practice, Transaction Publisher, 2007, p104. 39 V. Dongoroz, S. Kahane, I. Oancea, N. Iliescu, C. Bulai, R. Stnoiu, V. Rosca, Theoretical explanations of the Romanian Criminal Code, Volume III, Academy Publishing House, Bucharest, 1971, p.403 . More recently, M. Basarab, V. Pascal Ghe Matei Tiberiu Medeanu, C. Butiuc, M. Bdil, R. Bode P.Dungan, V. Mirisan, R. Manca C. Mihe, The commented Criminal Code, vol II, The special, Hamangiu, 2008, p.342.

10

21). To all those involved, in any quality, in the legal proceedings, the magistrates can not show prejudice about race, sex, religion, nationality, the socio-economic and the cultural background. The magistrates have a duty to protect the citizens equality before the law, to respect and to protect the dignity, physical and moral integrity of those involved in legal proceedings in any quality they participate in these proceedings (Article 2). Finally, we stated that under Article 276 of the new Criminal Code, entitled "Pressure on Justice", shall be punished with imprisonment from three months to one year or with a fine, the action of a person who, during the course of judicial proceedings, make unreal statements on commission by the judge or the prosecution of a crime, of a serious misconduct relating to the taking of evidence in order to influence or intimidate. 4. The dignity of the human person and the evidences. Obtaining evidence must be made according to fair procedures that are in harmony with the moral values on which society is attached, among them being the dignity of the human person. On a general level, on this issue, the new Code of Criminal Procedure, article 101, entitled "Loyalty principle of evidence" provides: 1. It is forbidden to use violence, threats or other means of coercion and inducements in order to obtain evidence. 2. No methods or listening techniques affecting the person's ability to recall and report conscious and voluntary the actions which are the subject of proof, can not be used, not even if the person consents.In addition, the evidences obtained through torture and other illegal means can not be used in criminal proceedings (article 102). On the other hand, the new Penal Code provides that the crime of insider research (article 280) is the use of promises, threats or violence against a person prosecuted or tried in a criminal case by a prosecutor or a judge, for it determine to give or not to give statements, to give false statements or withdraw its statements, and in production, forgery or false evidence ticluirea by a criminal investigation body, a prosecutor or a judge. In the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, an important case that has attracted attention is the Jalloh v. Germany 40. The facts were as follows: four policemens saw the applicant, at least, in two separate occasions, pulling a plastic bag out of his mouth and giving it to another person for a fee. Suspecting that it was drugs, police caught him while he swallowed the last. In order to cause evacuation bag, they administered an emetic, forcibly, in hospital with a gastric probe, suspect regurgitating two capsules who were retained as evidence. German courts have concluded no incompatibility in principle of the process with respect for human dignity. The applicant adressed to the European Court of Human Rights, alleging breach of Article 3 of the conventional text. In addition, he estimated that the use of evidences obtained in violation of human dignity, brought the right to a fair trial. In addition, he estimated that the use of the evidence obtained in violation of human dignity, brought the right to a fair trial. Court has observed that "in a criminal use of evidence obtained in violation of art. 3 raises serious questions regarding fairness of the proceedings" before concluding that this use "as evidence of strong drugs by administering an emetic to force to the applicant determined the inequity of the whole process".
40

Cauza Jalloh contra Germaniei, decizia Marii Camere din 11 iulie 2006, cerere nr. 54810/00.

11

A famous French author said: "The search appears to be particularly bombers, not only for freedom, but also and especially with regard to the dignity of the person concerned. No doubt that the infringement is minimal and will not be felt as vexatious if it concerns only luggage, briefcases or purses; it becomes intrusive when the form of a quick palpation clothing. Harming human independence, dignity, modesty becomes unbearable when that authority requires a stripping agent, partially or wholly, of the person concerned and reaching its climax when brought to the inquiry body is pushed too far and resembles a medical exploration41. A novelty that brings new Code of Criminal Procedure is that article 156 (2) provides that the search is carried out with respect for human dignity, without constituting a disproportionate interference with private life. On the same line, article 166 ("Making the body search ') shows that the judicial authority is obliged to ensure that the search is carried out with respect for human dignity. The operation should not put the person in a position vexatious and should always be practiced by a person of the same sex with the searched. In this sense, the search report shall contain, inter alia, the name and position of the person conducting the search, the date and time of commencement and termination, specifying any interruption occurred, place and circumstances in which the suspect or defendant was found. A progress is to regulate physical examination (article 190 of the new Code), in detail. Due to severe intrusive measure, internal physical examination of the body of a person, the legislature has provided that must be carried out with respect for privacy and human dignity, and only by a doctor, a nurse or a person with specialized medical training. 5. Human dignity, the media and the criminal process. The peculiarity of the criminal process lies in the fact that it is possible a humiliation and a stigmatization of the parties in the eyes of public opinion. As noted Tsatsos K. "moral stigma, accompanied by dark murmurs that one is immoral, can damage deeper than any judicial decision given by the rules of law. Where tradition is maintained beyond the penalties imposed by the state, there are also penalties for society. Some doors remain closed to certain individuals. Remembering remain regarding old mistakes that criminal law has prescribed, but not the moral law" 42. Currently, it is expressly and clearly provided for in Decision no. 220/2011 on the regulation of audiovisual content code 43 that prohibited the dissemination of images or recordings with people in a state of detention, arrest or serving a sentence of imprisonment, without their consent (article 42 paragraph (1)). Article 44 provides: "(1) May not be broadcast recordings and made available to providers of audiovisual media services by police or judicial authorities, irrespective of the medium used computer without the people who are victims of these crimes, without the agreement of their family or, where applicable, of their legal representatives. (2) Can not be disclosed in any way the persons who are victims of offenses relating to sexual life; it exempts situations where victims have given
41

A. Vitu, Dignit de la personne et procs penal, n P. Pedrot, Ethique, droit et dignit de la personne, Ed. Economica, 1999, p.388.
42 43

G. Theotokas, Penses et positions, II, p.1326 i urm., apud. K.E. Beys, p.312. Decision. 220 of 24 February 2011 on the regulation of audiovisual content code, updated text under the amending normative acts published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, by 28 July 2011, in force since 28 July 2011.

12

their written consent, provided to respect the limits of identification established by the agreement. Regarding minor aged 14 years, a victim of sexual abuse, if accused of a crime or a witness is broadcast any clues that might lead to its identification (article 4 paragraph (1)). If the minor is the victim of other crimes or has been subjected to physical or mental abuse, dissemination of statements is possible only with the consent of the minor, and with the written consent of parents, legal representatives or, where appropriate, the person who take care of the minor (article 4 paragraph (2)). Also, the minor aged between 14 and 16, who is charged with an offense or is a victim of a crime, can be presented in news, in debate programs or broadcasts, only if the conditions are met: there is its written consent; the prior existence of a written consent of the parents or legal representative; is accompined during transmission or recording by a parent or the legal representative, or by the attorney for criminal investigation or arrest (Article 6 paragraph (1)). Finally, in accordance with article 6 paragraph (2), if the minor, aged between 16 and 18 years if charged with a crime, are necessary its explicit consent and assistance by a lawyer, if is prosecuted, detained or arrested, while, if is victim or witness to a crime, his explicit consent is required and eliminate any elements that may lead to the his identification of the minor's request, parents or legal guardian. The new regulations introduced in the new Criminal Procedure Code will be very helpful in improving the protection of human dignity in criminal proceedings. On hearing advertising, article 352 paragraph (3) provides that the court may declare them closed for the whole course or any part of the trial, at the prosecutor's request, at the parties request or ex officio, if the trial court could undermine state interests, morals, dignity or private life of a person, or minors interests or the interests of the justice. As a novelty, according to article 352 paragraph (4), the court may declare a closed hearing at the request of a witness if the hearing in public, could prejudice the safety or the dignity or his private life or his family. The legislator considered useful to provide in article 352 paragraph (9), that during the trial, the court can prohibit the publication and dissemination by means of written or visual, of the texts, drawings, photos or images from disclosing the identity of the injured party, the civil party, the civilly responsible, as provided by paragraphs (3) and (4). 6. Human dignity and the punishment. The juridical literature is common ground that one of the functions of punishment is exemplary. It considers, properly, that firmness, promptness, uncompromising that the offender is punished exert a positive influence on others as members of society who are determined not to commit crimes. The only element that I want to emphasize, however, is that human dignity prohibit transforming of punishment in public spectacle. Violates the dignity of the person all the treatments in which the individual is reduced to a mere object in the hands of public power. So, extremely harsh sentencing of an individual determined can not be justified on account of the idea to intimidate all others to commit such an act. Or, if the article 52 of the Criminal Code provides that "The purpose of punishment is to prevent the commission of the offense", we referr, by way of example, to article 25 of the Spanish Constitution which states
13

that "The custodial sentences and the security measures aimed at rehabilitation and reintegration into society and may not include measures of forced labor, the sentenced to imprisonment rejoicing, during the execution of the fundamental rights defined in this chapter except those that are expressly limited by the judgment of conviction, the nature of punishment and the penal law ". The major change of optical, begun by adopting the penal and the criminal procedure code is continued by the draft law on execution of punishments and measures ordered by the court during the trial, one of the innovations being important to the setting with regime for penalty of a socialization program, adapted to the convicted person by conduct, personality, age, health status and possibilities for social reintegration of the convicted, called "individuation administrative enforcement regime of deprivation of liberty". In an opinion, it is considered that the individuation of the sentence may constitute an infringement of human dignity, because vague that surround it. It is estimated that lack "of judges realease explanation of the reasons for their choice", would affect the dignity of prisoners as, "individualization can be perceived as arbitrary, as long as they run parameters are less visible." The new Criminal Code clarifies important aspects in this respect, covering more rigorous general criteria for deciding on the sentence. According to article 74, determining the amount of the penalty is commensurate with the gravity of the offense committed and the offender's dangerousness, which is assessed on the following criteria: a) the circumstances and manner of committing the crime and the means used; b) the state created danger for protected value; c) the nature and severity of the outcome product or other consequences of the offense; d) the reason and purpose of the crime; e) the nature and the frequency of offenses that constitute criminal history of the offender, f) conduct after committing the crime and during the criminal trial; g) education level, age, health, family and social situation. The death penalty is or is not compatible with human dignity? Examination of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights emphasizes that the European Court ruled only on the conditions of ordering or implementing the capital punishment, leaving uncut the compatibility of the penalty itself with dignity. This idea that the death penalty is infringing human dignity has often been stressed in the juridical literature, but they expressed views to the contrary. However, the Constitutional Court of South Africa said in an unequivocal manner that "the death penalty involves, by its very nature, a denial of the executed person's humanity" that is "degraded because the convicted person entirely lacking dignity and treat it as an object to be removed from the state". In our doctrine, this issue was not analized, the death penalty was abolished by decree no. 6/1990 and replaced with life imprisonment. 7. Conclusion. The human dignity is becoming more and more present in the legislation of the states and in the jurisprudence. Its main drawback is the use by legislators and judges as a "double-edged sword. The analysis of comparative law perspective emphasizes this aspect: the use of dignity argument may lead to opposite solutions. The problems arise in the definition of dignity, which are the acts that are inconsistent with the dignity and the implications for the role of the state. It was expressed the view that should be adopted including a law that contains
14

provisions that are specifically geared toward creating a general way to respect the dignity, the fundamental principles of state regarding the policy on the protection of the dignity, the obligations of the state in creating a respectful manner generally protecting the dignity of citizens, the duties of citizens to the state and regulating the liability for violations to the dignity. Unable to make a single point of view. The views expressed ranged from full support to a total rejection of the project by putting into question the need to adopt such a law, and especially could not reach a consensus regarding what should cover.

15