Article 44 (1) of the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to property. To be entitled to forthright holds, use and transfer your property is one of the bases of economic freedom and such freedom is highly correlated with economic growth. Clear property rights are vital and for human prosperity; These rights allow people to use the resources under their control to achieve personal goals.
Only when people are confident their right of ownership have strong incentives to preserve and maintain the property. Secure rights to use and benefit from the underlying property business and commercial activities. Equally important, secure property rights, power descentralizeaza asezand a set of things in their hands under the control of officials and public servants. For these reasons, among others, Article 44, para. (1) establishes a crucial legal principle.
And yet, as things stand now, the article contains a dangerous ambiguity which may undermine the benefits of constitutional guarantees of the right of ownership. Article 44 paragraph 1. (5) stating:
"For projects of general interest, the public authorities are entitled to use the basement of any property with the obligation to pay compensation for damage is reported to the owner of the land, building or plantation, as well as for other damages imputable to these authorities."
Article 44 paragraph 1. (5) allows public officials to use the basement of any private real estate properties as long as the use is convincingly argues for "projects of general interest". However, the meaning of "general interest" can be interpreted very subjective, facilitating public officials claiming their use. Should we wonder how Red flags to the general interest. It is legal only if a user is in the interest of all citizens? This seems a reasonable interpretation. Or use will be legal if the only benefit of a particular group? How small should be a group to be in the public interest? It will decide on the operation of the bureaucratic apparatus? In other words, the standards that will apply to Romanian courts to determine the purpose of general interest are of utmost importance. This suggests that citizens with the right to use and benefit from their property would be much safer and therefore more valuable if article 44 paragraph 1. (5) would be formulated more clearly.
Art. 44 (5) should be read Together with article 5. 136 (3) which States that: "public mineral resources … are exclusively public property. " We might ask what mineral resources would be of interest? A realistic reading of the provision would be that any valuable mineral resource (or potentially valuable) is "public interest" and therefore a public property, but how will know an owner that his property has such resources and, therefore, is or will become matters of public concern? If the equation "potentially valuable resources = public property" is correct, then Art. 136 para. (3) nationalized resources. Such public property economic freedom diminishes and can lead to lower levels of economic growth over the long term.
Public property means that the national Government and has a legal right to all waves of unearned revenue from resources of the subsoil. The Government is not obliged by law to share any part of the income generated by the resource owner who owns rights to the surface. Rather, the Government should pay compensation only if its actions affect soil or soil surface structures.
While this requirement may constraint least Government actions, lest property rights Division under which the public ownership, footer = sol = private property will increase the possibility of utilization of deficient by the Government? It will increase income and resource abuse if additional measures are not taken by empowerment.
When the Government will retain control of the proceeds of the subsoil resources he will be in a position to allocate "annuity" rentierilor, who may resort to bribery or other actions corupatoare to get drawn. Corruption can diminish growth in the long run, all costs imponing Romanian citizens. In other words the Constitution can create a variety of "natural resource curse" nationalizand subsoil resources.
That would be the solutions? Moving us along a continuum from the highest degree of economic freedom at the lowest: A) the Government could transmit rights to subsoil towards owners. This would give the owners a valuable advantage in severe deconditioning of property rights. Individual owners would be Empowered to explore, to develop their property or otherwise as they think fit, or to cede towards others rights to exploration and development. Of course, the owners would have the obligation to grant compensation to those who would harm during exploration or development. Extending property rights this way would extend economic freedom in Romania. B) Property could be owned jointly by the Government and the owner of a surface. in such a case, if both parties agree, the joint owners would establish a contractual arrangement to Share both the costs and revenues. The deal would limit income opportunities arendasi search and would provide financial resources for the surface owner shares entrepreneurial or otherwise. Splitting income could lead to increased investments in human capital and could serve as an alternative or complement to the financing of small and medium enterprises. C) Government could retain ownership rights to subsoil resources, but would create a trust fund to manage the independent audited income and offer every Romanian citizen a dividend annually in the years in which profit is generated through the use of footnotes. Dividends would be based on the criteria established in consultation with a wide range of Romanian citizens and might include features such as age, length of service, citizenship status or criminal offender etc.
As it is currently worded, article. 44 para. (5) of the Romanian Constitution but ambiguous language uses to describe when the national Government can use the basement of private properties. but ambiguous language. 136 it is enough to leave the impression that all the valuable resources of the subsoil are public property nationalizata. Such nationalization but limited economic freedom and provides new opportunities for corruption and rent so much that with economic freedom in Romania and is affected and the rate of economic growth over the long term.
