I. In the hearing of 14 December 2022, the Constitutional Court, in the context of the a priori constitutionality review, regarding the objections of unconstitutionality formulated by the People’s Advocate and deputies belonging to the Save Romania Union Parliamentary Group and certain non-affiliated deputies, decided
1. Unanimously dismissed, as unfounded, the objection of unconstitutionality of the Law approving Government Ordinance no. 16/2022 amending and supplementing Law no. 227/2015 on the Fiscal Code, the repeal of some normative acts and other financial-fiscal measures, as well as the provisions of Article I (68) [with reference to the introduction of para. (5) ind. 6 – para. (5) ind. 9 in Article 146 of Law no. 227/2015 on the Fiscal Code] from Government Ordinance no. 16/2022.
2. By majority of votes, dismissed, as unfounded, the objection of unconstitutionality of the provisions of Article I (107) [with reference to Article 457 of Law no. 227/2015 on the Fiscal Code] of Government Ordinance no. 16/2022.
*
The decision is final and generally binding.
The arguments set out in the grounds for the decision of the Constitutional Court will be set out in the decision, which will be published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I.
II. In the same hearing, the Constitutional Court, postponed until 31 January 2023, the following cases:
– Objection of unconstitutionality of the Law amending and supplementing the Emergency Government Ordinance no. 155/2001 regarding the approval of the stray dog management program, objection formulated by the President of Romania;
– The objection of unconstitutionality regarding the provisions of Article 15 (1) and (3) with reference to the phrase “general assembly” and Article 33 (3) and (4) of the Youth Law, objection formulated by the People’s Advocate;
– Objection of unconstitutionality of the Law on the approval of the Emergency Government Ordinance no. 115/2022 supplementing Article I of the Emergency Government Ordinance no. 130/2021 regarding some fiscal-budgetary measures, the extension of some deadlines, as well as amending and supplementing certain normative acts, objection formulated by 44 deputies belonging to the Save Romania Union Parliamentary Group and 7 non-affiliated deputies;
– The objection of unconstitutionality of the Law amending and supplementing the Law on cadaster and real estate advertising no. 7/1996, objection formulated by deputies belonging to the Parliamentary Group of the Save Romania Union and by unaffiliated deputies;
– The objection of unconstitutionality of the Aquaculture Law, objection formulated by the President of Romania.
The External Relations, Press and Protocol Department of the Constitutional Court of Romania