Autor: Rodica PANAINTE

Editura:  Cugetarea

Cod ISSN: 1221-4876, pp. 152-158

Abstract:

The incrimination of the defamation offence commited in mass media is one of the most controversial themes for the public debates in Romania.

The study started from a conviction decision against Romanian state pronounced by the European Court of the Human Rights (Constantinescu vs. Romania). The European Court has established that the Romanian state has broken the European Convention of the Human Rights by convicting a person for having commited a defamation offence by mass media.

We have analyzed the conviction sentences pronounced by the Romanian instances in this complex case. The analysis points out that these sentences, either conviction or discharge sentences, are the result of the misinterpretation or even of the ignorance of the legal dispositions that regulate the defamation offence, especially those concerning the required conditions of the subjective elements in the legal content of the defamation offence.

The study also deals with the modifications brought by the new Romanian Penal Code, that is to be applied beginning with July 2005. These modifications are able to make easier the proof in the trials of defamation.

Considering the study through the light of these elements, it is obvious that it represents an indirect pleading for the maintaining of this incrimination, by demonstrating that the risk of any illegal or indefeasible sentence in this matter is removed by a good knowledge of the elements of penal theory and of the legal dispositions that regulate the defamation offence.