to elect the 2 members for the Superior Council of the Magistracy, according to the law.
Jurisdictional functions
In a larger sense, the High Court of Cassation and Justice, according provisions of the Constitution and of its own organic law has in view the correct and unitary application of laws by all the other courts: courts of first instance, Tribunals and Courts of Appeal.
On jurisdictional level, the role of the Court is carried out: through the decisions pronounced by the Court in settlement of the recourse in the interest of law - concerning legal matters differently solved by the courts; through the decisions pronounced in settlement of the recourse actions for cancellation - declared against final judgments (preponderantly criminal) affected by severe errors as well as through the decisions settling common recourses declared by the parties in the most complex cases tried by Tribunals in first instance and in appeal by the Courts of Appeal.
In many of the cases brought to its jurisdiction, the High Court of Cassation and Justice has delivered sentences in favor of observance of human rights established in the international treaties and conventions, having correspondent in all legal domains: civil one (right of property, labor right, trade-union rights, family rights and others); commercial one (real rights and other rights deriving from the right of association and judicial relations having commercial character); in contentious administrative matter (the fundamental rights infringed by acts pertaining to administrative bodies) and in criminal law matter (right to life, to liberty, to person's security, to honor and to inviolability of correspondence etc.).
All the courts making up the judiciary are bound to assure observance of the mentioned rights at each of the jurisdiction levels (trial in first instance, in appeal and recourse).
The High Court of Cassation and Justice holds, yet, a special role, from at least two points of view: firstly, it is the last forum beyond which an injustice can't be any more repaired; under the system of powers separation in State, the decisions of the Court constitutes the last word in a process, a fact implying a high responsibility; secondly, the Court is the supreme jurisdictional authority which has to assure an unitary application of the laws by all the other judicial courts, a function meant, among others, to remove any discriminating treatment, thus being the only way to assure, on judicial levels, the equality of all persons.
In criminal cases, for instance, attention is focused on defense of the accused rights and, at the same time, on assurance of moral or material redresses owed to the injured person.
Mostly, by successive legislative measures, the internal provisions of criminal - material and procedural - law have been adjusted with the stipulations of the international treaties and conventions; the provisions constituting limitations in the exercise of certain rights have been abrogated; facts with no real social danger have been taken out of discrimination; sentences for some very severe offenses have become heavier, and amendments have been brought to the legislation especially in the domain concerning defense of the accused; thus, at present, measures of criminal charge, especially those referring to liberty, taken during criminal prosecution, are under the control of judicial court with the assurance of an effective defense throughout whole prosecution and trial process.
Concerning the role of the High Court of Cassation and Justice in the correct and unitary application of the law by all the other courts, an important place is held by the jurisprudence of the Court; for being acquainted with this jurisprudence, the decisions of the Court - in brief or "in extenso" - are periodically submitted to all the Courts and public prosecution's departments as well as to the magazines of specialty, and yearly a widespread bulletin is published comprising judgments concerning the most recent and important legal solutions.
Among the most important judgments we exemplify the Decision no. 1 dated September, 28, 1998 of the Joint Sections, which, by reconsidering a previous jurisprudence, has ascertained that the judicial courts are competent to try, under the law conditions, the disputes concerning infringement, by the former totalitarian State of the right of property and of the other real rights, within 1944-1989.
