The Romanian Constitution, referred repeatedly to the national interest that the Romanian authorities are held to represent in some way or another. Lack of clarity or polyvalent concepts, as well as the fact that they belong to a particular vocabulary of political doctrines make necessary a interrogative on the edge of the text. He will say in the end that should have senses that deserve investigation efforts on revising the Constitution.
Interest of national acts as a limiting factor of certain rights and freedoms. Article 44 paragraph 3 allows expropriation for a cause "public utility". How exactly that happens we learn from paragraph 5: "for works of general interest, the public authority may use the basement of any immovable property".
National interest prevails over private and according to article 135 (Economy), paragraph 2, point (b), which provides that the State must "ensure the protection of national interests in economic, financial and currency". It takes place in conditions which, in accordance with paragraph 1 of the same article, "Romanian economy is a market economy based on free initiative and competition". In translation, the interests of Romania's currency cannot be undermined, for instance, a group of speculators to act according to law and, by chance, devalorizeaza currency. If the National Bank of Romania needs a ratio between lion and euro to maintain some macroeconomic equilibriums, the State may limit or cancel the payout ultimate speculators.
Also, even if in article 135, paragraph 1 is invoked the principle of competition, and the first letter of the paragraph following the Constitution's authors embrace fair competition, in subparagraph (c), the text speaks explicitly about investments in scientific and technological research in the public interest. Thus, the State must ensure "stimulating scientific and technological research of national". The fact that not only implies the existence of a national technology as long as the document is valid, but the State is also obliged to support preferentially.
In subparagraph (d) of article 135, we can find that natural resources should be operated "in accordance with the national interest". Private property is inalienabila, but when it comes to the "common good", it falls on a second, less important. The chapter on natural resources is framed and article 136 (Property), in paragraph 3, where, in support of the national interest, is declared public character of natural resources.
In the name of national interest, the State can use the basement of any immovable property, exploit any natural resource, to intervene in the economy, in the financial system, on the money market and may dispose of or limit "the exploitation of the subsoil, water, air space with potential energy, of plajelelor, territorial sea, natural resources of economic zones and the continental shelf, as well as other organic law established".
In the name of "national security", that is all in the public interest, may be circumvented as well as rights to inviolability of domicile (art. 31) or the right to information (article 27).
The problem is not that the freedoms and rights are limited. And in classical liberalism they are inviolable only until the point where it would violate rights and freedoms, on the same floor, other individuals.
The problem is not obvious, nor as general interest or all, take along, weighs heavier than the private interests of each individual. But it is the manner in which doctrinal bias "public interest" is operationalizat and advocated in the Constitution. A neutral Constitution, opinionated, aware neorientata, nor any individualistic, may suggest a formula for determining the general interest, but cannot determine ex ante a certain organization (State) law is of general interest. For instance, why should stipulam that the State should have in natural resources, property and not as they should be owned by the person who brings the greatest benefits the community?
The text of the Constitution reveals a economic and social philosophy, one that does not understand the mechanism of freedom. Countless economists have shown that, in terms of liberty and private property, a person who follows the goals will serve the interest of the general public, or all. If an entrepreneur wants to earn money, he needs to offer buyers products that please them. Without clients, entrepreneur would not achieve its goals. Subject to this principle and exploitation of natural resources, and the expropriation of a property, and the latter regardless of compensation at market price. Because private interests do not necessarily manifest in the existing market price; Maybe the owner wants more money on the golf course that he knows that it will pass a highway. Once again, the general good or the national interest is not necessarily the one you claim and defend the official authorities.
About national interests do not know many things, but that in the name of the State authority may violate rights and freedoms. Since, under the Constitution, the authorities shall establish national interest "at the right time, they are" invited "to decide constitutional in their own interest. Of course, they will be able to do, for example, by a parliamentary majority. Instead of simply hoping that their interest will be ours and in the general interest, we can now formulate constitutional guarantees for this.
