IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The Restrictive Constitutional Regime Of Government Emergency Ordinances As Reflected In The Recent Case-Law Of The Constitutional Court Of Romania

Listed author(s):
  • Mircea Stefan MINEA

    (Associate professor PhD., “Petru Maior” University of Tîrgu Mureº, Faculty of Economics, Law and Administrative Sciences, ROMANIA.)

  • Anca Mihaela GEOROCEANU

    (Assistant Professor, Phd - Christian University “Dimitrie Cantemir”, ROMANIA.)

Registered author(s):

    Avant la révision de la Constitution datant de 1991, le nombre élevé d’ordonnances d’urgence du Gouvernement (presque 200 par an!) peut s’expliquer par la réglementation lapidaire du domaine de la délégation législative, qui établissait un régime permissif, attractif pour l’Exécutif. Apres la révision de la Constitution (qui a eu lieu en 2003), le nombre élevé (a peu pres le meme qu’avant) d’ordonnances d’urgence adoptées par le Gouvernement est plus difficile a expliquer et – surtout – tres difficile a accepter, compte tenu des nouvelles dispositions constitutionnelles plus strictes en la matiere de la délégation législative. La seule explication de cet abus est le besoin de l’Exécutif de légiférer de maniere tres rapide dans certains domaines a certaines périodes de l’année. Le Projet de loi sur la révision de la Constitution de la Roumanie (projet initié en 2011) ne prévoit pas de nouvelles dispositions normatives – sur la délégation législative – concernant le régime des ordonnances d’urgence ; par conséquent, a notre avis, l’analyse de la jurisprudence de la Cour Constitutionnelle en la matiere pourrait révéler des idées susceptibles de se concrétiser dans des propositions de lege ferenda qui pourraient mener a l’enrichissmenet et a l’amélioration du projet ci-dessus.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation in its journal Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current.

    Volume (Year): 52 (2013)
    Issue (Month): (March)
    Pages: 38-44

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:52:y:2013:p:38-44
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:52:y:2013:p:38-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bogdan Voaidas)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.