The fundamental purpose of a Constitution is to limit the power and to prevent abuse. However, the Romanian Constitution, through the mechanism of legislative coordination, expressly provided for in article 115, consecrate just abuse of power of any Government installed at the helm of the country. Give me a good opportunity to repeat the words of Chi: "when the rule of law into domination, power, legislators are basically the most subtle form of repression: the oppression in the name of «law».
Sindbad rule of law issue, still loose in Romania, is the Court of administrative control, meaning the possibility of questioning in an ordinary court, in front of a full trial, any administrative act and to demonstrate on the merits, with evidence, injury or an abuse of law under which to require revocation or amendment.
Part of the problem are contradictory. On the one hand, the mechanism provided for by the legislative coordination article 115 of the Constitution of Romania Government give two ways to issue ordinances: simple-empowering law-urgently-and subsequently subjected to Parliament for approval; simple ordinances could be subject to the approval of Parliament, "If the enabling law so requires" (article. 115, para. 3). On the other hand, article 61 of the Romanian Constitution has clear that Parliament is the sole legislative authority of the country. Also, in accordance with paragraph 1. 5 of article 115 of the Constitution, find the Government is allowed in areas are protected by organic laws, through emergency Ordinances, though the provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2. 6 look like emergency Ordinances shall not affect the status of fundamental institutions of the State. However, the fundamental institutions of the State are the devices of the Constitution expressly by the organic law, in article 73, paragraphs 2 and 3. 3.
In terms of control of the Court, article 126, paragraph 2. 6 of the Romanian Constitution guarantees the verbatim court control of administrative acts of public authorities on the path of administrative courts. To do this, but, compared to the original model-system constitutional. The Constitution of France, and it provides under article 38 can delegate the legislative, Parliament can vote on a law empowering the Government is empowered, by means of which to issue Ordinances during limited. Both Constitution enabling law is enacted in accordance with the procedures of the ordinary laws.
While the Romanian Constitution recognizes the Ordinances of Government quality administrative provisions (article. 126, para. 6), that of France is not transanta in this respect, but, according to the jurisprudence, they are administrative. For these reasons, in France, Ordinances may be appealed directly to the courts for abuse of power by the people whose interests were affected by those provisions. When it is invoked with an action relating to a contested Ordinance for abuse of power, the administrative judge may cancel this Ordinance after that, for example, it does not comply with the limits laid down in the law of competencies or that it is contrary to the constitutional principles and values or contrary to a general principle of law. Unless the Ordinance is ratified, it is no longer considered an administrative act and can no longer be disputed in court.
Unlike France, the Constitution of Romania provides for two kinds of Ordinances, and urgent, but it may not be appealed directly to the administrative courts unless, in advance, were declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. This gives them the default attributes of a law, and not of an administrative action, against the citizens, who cannot defend against the abuse of power, as well as in France, with evidence proving injury in an ordinary court.
It is true that there are material conditions for issuing ordinances by the Government, but they are ineffective. In general, in Romania, administrative, from emergency ordinances until the Government's decisions and orders of the Ministers, also within the courts, judges being held to apply their provisions spetelor subject to judgment. And above all, the field of taxation is the most severely affected by the excess of unpredictable and unstable.
Legal limits of power administration are "narrow hole"-in the words of Friedrich Hayek-that may disappear in time, freedom and property of persons. The fact that judges are obliged to respect and apply the rules of government ordinances, laws issued by the Parliament too, in cases we have resolved as a result of taxation policy has a Government and courts, which is today the most significant abuse in the relations with the citizens. Mises warn much as devolution is the main instrument of dictatorship.
We cannot avoid excess abusive legislation if you don't give up on legislative delegation. Otherwise, we get to deny democracy and the value of liberty before being grabbed to enjoy their benefits. Force for instability is one of the phenomena that disparages it democracy and stifle freedom of action, and the impossibility of sanctiona abuse of power in an ordinary court makes in article 126, paragraph 2. 6 of the Romanian Constitution, according to which the court control of administrative acts is guaranteed to remain a ridiculous forms devoid of substance.