IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Controversies Regarding The Compulsoriness Of Precautionary Measures In Cases Regarding Tax Evasion


  • Ramona Mihaela COMAN

    (Associate professor PhD., University of Medicine, Pharmacy, Sciences and Technologies George Emil Palade, Tg. Mures, ROMANIA.)


The law to combat tax evasion provides a compulsoriness of establishing the precautionary measures. Therefore, Article 11 of Law no. 241/2005 for the prevention and combating of tax evasion, sets down that, in the event that a crime provided for by this law has been committed, taking precautionary measures is mandatory. As a principle, the provisions of a special law are supplemented by the provisions of the general law, tot the extent that they do not conflict. Therefore, it is obvious that in relation to the competence to dispose of them, the act by which it is disposed of, the remedy, the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure are applicable. From the analysis of art. 11 of Law 241 of 2005, however, it would result that the precautionary measures are taken in all cases, without any exception, without the courts being able to make an evidence-based analysis of the necessity and proportionality of these measures. The article analyzes to what extent this interpretation does not contradict the constitutional requirements regarding free access to justice, the right to defense, the protection of private property equally

Suggested Citation

  • Ramona Mihaela COMAN, 2023. "Controversies Regarding The Compulsoriness Of Precautionary Measures In Cases Regarding Tax Evasion," Curentul Juridic, The Juridical Current, Le Courant Juridique, Petru Maior University, Faculty of Economics Law and Administrative Sciences and Pro Iure Foundation, vol. 92, pages 110-116, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:pmu:cjurid:v:92:y:2023:p:110-116

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item


    attachement order; tax evasion; unconstitutionality; the right to defence; free acces to justice.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law


    Access and download statistics


    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:92:y:2023:p:110-116. 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.