IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects Of The Decisions Of The Constitutional Court Of Romania Regarding The Interruption Of The Criminal Liability Limitation Period


  • Cristina Teodora POP

    (Magistrat-asistent la Curtea Constitutionala, Cadru didactic asociat la Universitatea „Titu Maiorescu” din Bucuresti, ROMANIA.)


The interruption of the prescription of criminal liability is regulated by the provisions of art. 155 of the Criminal Code, legal provisions that have recently been the subject of a posteriori constitutionality control, control following which the constitutional court issued Decision no. 358 of May 26, 2022. This extremely controversial decision had, in reality, the aim of clarifying by the Constitutional Court the effects of a previous decision, namely Decision no. 297 of April 26, 2018, having the same object, through which the Court admitted the exception of unconstitutionality and found that the legislative solution that provides for the interruption of the criminal liability limitation period by fulfilling "any procedural act in question", from the provisions of art. 155 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code, is unconstitutional. This latter solution has been qualified differently by the courts and by the doctrine, which have oscillated between considering that the previously mentioned admission solution is pure and simple and the appreciation that it is an interpretive solution

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Teodora POP, 2022. "The Effects Of The Decisions Of The Constitutional Court Of Romania Regarding The Interruption Of The Criminal Liability Limitation Period," Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current, Le Courant Juridique, Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation, vol. 90, pages 90-103, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:90:y:2022:p:90-103

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


    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:pmu:cjurid:v:90:y:2022:p:90-103. 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: Bogdan Voaidas (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.