PRESS INFRINGEMENTS IN

ROMANIAN LAW

Motoc Roxana- Iuliana

TODAY - Erasmus Mobility
 PRESS INFRINGEMENTS IN ROMANIAN LAW

1. General aspects of the offense

According to legislation our criminal, offense is the only basis on which they can give
birth liability prosecution, representing the them unique and exclusive.
By definition of the offense is established rule of law under which any act that will be
incriminated need to meet traits characteristic that differ from other facts (offenses , misconduct )
that can be tackled by other means non-criminal .
A deed is an offense if the following conditions are met:
1. to be provided by the criminal law as an offense
Thus, any crime has to be provided by law criminal as such, but not any deed stipulated
by law criminal it is and offense.
2. the act to present a social danger
The risk capital should be understood any action or inaction by which it brings touch one
of these values: Romania, sovereignty, independence, unity and indivisibility of the state, the
person, rights and freedoms it as well and the entire order of law. In determining the degree of
danger it must be taken into account and the how, the means of committing the crime, the aim
pursued, the circumstances in which it was committed the act , the result produced or that S
would be able to produce such and the individual perpetrator.1
Among the facts that shows per ICOL share the high degree it is crime. It is the most
dangerous antisocial act that punished the most seriously, with imprisonment or fine prosecution.
Antisocial acts are: deviations disciplinary, deviations contraventions, misdemeanors civil etc ,
which have sanctions with sanctions in May least serious.
3. offense to be committed with guilt
When committing a release crime may participate many people in, the author of the
material complained of going on line hierarchy to the editor and chief and even people from
outside editorial (those who gave an interview or that the quality of instigators or accomplices).
The contribution of these people from committing crime may consist in acts of performance
direct and unmediated (author), the needle up of reliefs, the support material and moral
( accomplice or ) or in acts of determination to committing the crime ( instigator).
The offenses release all forms of participation are possible, and the responsibility of
criminal responsibility so all participants . The nature and amount of the penalty is determined by
the court competent in function of the contribution of each participant.
Guilty knew reflects aspect subjective of crime and includes attitude psychic of the
offender to the offense committed and the consequences thereof . Guilt takes two main forms :
intent and guilt .
The intention is defined by art.19, point 1, penal code and represents the psychic attitude
of the perpetrator resulting from the provision of the result of his deed and the pursuit of that
result by committing the deed or only accepting that result . It is known in the legislation in two
forms :
1
Narcis Giurgiu, Legea penala si infractiunea, Ed.Gama, Iasi, 1996
 o direct intention - provided in art.19, point 1, letter a , penal code - the
provision of the result of the deed and the pursuit of that result by committing
the deed ;
o indirect intention - art. 19 pts. 1, letter b, of the Criminal Code - providing the
result of the offender , a result which in May is pursued but accepts
possibility of occurrence of .
The fault is and it known in law in two ways :
o fault with the provision (of imprudence ) - is characterized by that the
offender provides the result of the act of its results that do not follow reste ,
do not accept and consider without even a reason that it can not be produced;
o culpable negligence - is characterized by that the perpetrator did not provide
outcome deed its although had and might to him predict .
In the vast majority of cases, committing the crime automatically entails the criminal
liability of the perpetrator, respectively of the participants. But there are also crimes, such as:
slander, insult, in which the commencement of criminal action is conditioned by the complaint of
the injured person.
Many people can be involved in committing press offenses, from the perpetrator of the
incriminated material and, by going to the hierarchical line, to the editor-in-chief or even people
outside the editorial office (those who have given an interview or who have the status of
instigators, accomplices). The contribution of these persons to the commission of the crime can
consist of:
• acts of direct execution (the author);
• acts of facilitation, of material and moral support (accomplices)
• acts of determination at the commission of the offense (the instigator).
In the press offenses all these forms of participation presented above are possible, and the
criminal responsibility rests with all the participants, the nature and the amount of the sanction
being determined by the competent court according to the contribution of each participant.2
2. Constitutive elements of the offense
For a deed stipulated by law criminal to constitute an offense has to meet the four
elements constituting provided by law prosecution for each offense . Not all facts p reviewed the
law criminal and committed one or May many people meet the elements constituting a crime .
Thus , a minor under 14 years can commit a murder but the deed was , after legislation Romanian
not constitute a crime because he lack is discernment and that side objective ; also not constitute
a crime deed stipulated by law criminal , committed in circumstances of legitimate defense , state
of necessity, error of fact , case fortuitously or is committed in good faith , CAN d act is
punishable only if it is committed with intent , etc. because this removes the guilt and the
criminal liability respectively.
An average not respond Criminal then when, in order to defend the interests legitimately
reveal facts true what could be considered the initial insult and slander.
2.1. Subjects of the offense
2
Codul penal roman
 By the subjects of the crime we mean the persons involved in committing an offense,
either by committing the action itself or by suspending its consequences.
In functional tie of how they are involved in committing the offense. distinguish :
• active subjects
• passive subjects
The subject of the act of a crime is the person who committed the deed directly and
directly (as an author) or participated in committing the crime (as an instigator or
accomplice).
 Only an individual who fulfills the following conditions may be an active subject:
a) to have the age required by law (to have criminal liability) in the time of
committing the crime .
The age at which a person can be criminally charged is 14 years old, until this age it is
assumed that the minor has no discernment, and the minority is a cause that removes the criminal
character of the act.
The minor between the ages of 14 and 16 will be criminally liable only if it is proved that
he had discernment in committing the act . By this time the assumption is relative and allow
evidence contrary
b) To have certain qualifications when the law requires this work, for example
, in the case of the crime of espionage , subject assets need to be citizen
garment n ; civil servant , for the crimes of abuse in the service , negligence
; citizen for the crime of betraying re etc.
Subject passive is that person physical or juridical proprietor of the value of social
protected and who is harmed by the crime committed.
2.2. The object of the crime
Crime is a fact and, like any act, it has an object3. The object of the offense is represented
by a certain value and the social relations around it. The social values are specified in article 1 of
the criminal code as: Romania, sovereignty, independence and unity of the state, property,
person, its rights and freedoms, as well as the entire legal order. These values and the social
relations around them become the object of the crime.
Thus , we can define the subject of crime as being the social and relationships Social
created around this wave times , endangered or injured by the act criminal . It shows in May
many aspects :
• Object of legal generic - is composed of beam, bunch , group of
values social of the same nature , protected by rules of prosecution . Thus,
after the group of protected social relations and to which they are affected by
crime , they are4:
• offenses against the state;
• offenses against the person;
• offenses against heritage, etc

3
The object of a deed may be material or immaterial
4
They are provided in the special part of the Romanian penal code
 • The specific legal object - is the concrete social value, which is
affected by crime.
offense .
• Material object (direct) - is that social value expressed in a material
entity (object, work, energy) and not all crimes have it 5
Legal object - it is understood the values and social relations of protection, injured or threatened
by committing the offense (for example: in the case of property, the object of the offense
constitutes the rights and obligations that appear in the social relations related to the good,
material object of the property.
2.3. The subjective side of the crime
The subjective side includes all the conditions required by law regarding the attitude of
the offender's knowledge and will towards his deed and his pursuits.
An important, essential element of the subjective side is the subjective element, the guilt.
In addition to the subjective element, one or more conditions are often added - essential
requirements: furniture, purposes, etc.
Guilt, as a subjective element, represents the psychic attitude of the person who
committed a deed, towards the deed and its consequences; the attitude, expressed in guilt,
required by law for the existence of that offense.
In criminal doctrine, a distinction is made between the guilt as an essential feature of the
offense and the guilt as an element of the content of a certain offense.
The guilt, as a feature of the crime, is expressed in the forms and modalities provided by
art.
As an element of the content of the offense the guilt will exist only when the material
element of the offense has been committed with the form of guilt required by law.
The distinction is necessary because guilt as an essential feature does not always imply
the existence of guilt as an element of the content of the offense. There may be guilt as an
essential feature of the offense without guilt as a subjective element of the offense. For example,
in the case of committing an act of guilt, the guilt is realized as an essential feature of the crime.
But it may be missing as a subjective element if the legislator incriminates the deed only if it is
intentionally committed.
It is also possible to have guilt as an element of the content of the offense (the act is
committed with the guilt required by law) without having as an essential feature of the crime, as
is the case of the acts committed in a state of legitimate defense, a state of necessity, a physical
constraint and a moral constraint. .
The guilt as an element of the content of the crime can be presented under one of the
forms provided by art.19 CP and already presented :

 intention
 guilt
 Praeterintentia (intention exceeded)

5
Offenses do not have such object….
 As a constitutive element of the offense the guilt must be provided in the legal content of
each crime. In the criminal code were passed the content of the various offenses and the form of
guilt with which the facts had to be committed to be considered as such, for example: murder by
guilt, destruction by guilt, failure to knowingly perform service duties.
The guilt as a constituent element of the crime can therefore be realized by:
a. fault:
simple - when the author of the act does not provide the
result of danger though could and should to it provide;
with foresight - when the perpetrator foresees the result of his deed but
does not accept it, counting without cause that he will not occur
b. intend:
direct intention - the most serious form of awareness of the criminal conduct and
therefore of the criminal mourning (criminal guilt) which implies, according to
art.19, pt.1, letter a penal code, two components:
• provision of the socially dangerous outcome of the act;
• the pursuit of the socially dangerous outcome
indirect intention - according to article 19, item 1, letter b of the Code Criminal
involves:
• providing for the socially dangerous outcome of his deed;
• accepting the possibility of its production although mainly the perpetrator did
not follow it.
Difference6 between the intention of the direct and the indirect consists in :
the indirect intention lacks the desire to produce socially dangerous consequences the
intention direct the author to undertake in -a behavior actively to affect the outcome
socially per wedge;
in the case of the indirect intention the author has an impassive attitude regardless of
the socially dangerous result ; being unwanted and reflecting -it in consciousness
perpetrator as a mere possibility , the result of crime have to appear in the intention
indirect as a pure case and not a certainty , and in case of intent direct result appears as a sure
and wanted .
the intention of indirectly is a form of guilt May less serious than intention directly , this
difference being requires country to a dosage correct the sentence in relation to the form of
the intention .
The rules according to which the form of guilt necessary to determine a certain offense is
determined are set out in Article 19, paragraph 2 and paragraph 3 of the penal code.
In addition to the subjective element (the guilt) in the content of certain offenses, certain
conditions are also provided, essential requirements that complete the subjective element and
concern the motive or purpose with which the facts are committed.

6
Valerica Dabu, Dreptul comunicarii sociale, Bucuresti, 2000
 The handset is that feeling ( desire , tendency , passion ) that has led to the birth in the
mind of the perpetrator , the idea of committing to a certain facts . Lack of a mobile has a
motivation is an indication of abnormal mental to the perpetrator that requires research
responsibility thereof . Mobile committing crimes it is an element
necessary for knowing act of conduct and the dangerousness of the offender with consequences
on the plan to adapt the sanctions criminal against it , even if the existence of the offense does
not require a particular cell .
The purpose or goal pursued by committing the deed , the subjective element of the crime and
supposes the clear representation of the result of the deed by the perpetrator .
2.4. The objective side of the crime
The objective side of the crime designates all the conditions required by the norm of
incrimination regarding the act of conduct for the existence of the crime .
Research side targets of crime to do by examining elements of its components, recognized
the doctrine of prosecution as being:
the material element immediate
follow-up the causal link between the
material element and the immediate
consequence.
The material element of the objective side designates the act of conduct prohibited by the norm
of incrimination.
The material element is designated by a word, an expression that shows the prohibited action or
inaction
The action designates an attitude of the offender by making something that law criminal
orders to not do. It is can be achieved by the acts materials ( making , destruction , killing , etc.),
the words ( insult defamation , propaganda for war etc. ) or in writing ( denunciation
calumnious , altering the writing , etc. ).
Inaction designates the attitude of the perpetrator who does not do something that the
criminal law orders him to do. By inaction , offenses are committed such as : non- denunciation
(art.170 CP), non- denunciation of offenses (art.265 CP), leaving without help , for the omission
of notification (art. 316 CP).
Immediate follow-up
By committing the action or inaction against the object of the crime, there is an injury, a
danger of it. The harm to the social value protected by the forbidden deed is precisely the socially
dangerous consequence.
The injurious follow-up must be immediate, that is, the immediate result of the action or
inaction and not a distant mediated result.
It is achieved by:
- damage direct, damaging a value protected by law criminal (life, dignity, prestige of
the person, etc.)
- putting in danger of some relationships for ensuring certain values social ; this
means that the injury can be material or moral (eg , at insult, slander did not occur
but is imminent)
 From the point of view of the harmful consequences, the crimes are divided into:
- crimes of injury, the result - they have the content references to the result produced ;
- crimes of danger, the attitude - when the content of the offense are not references
with regard to the result.
Contact the causality between the action or omission of the perpetrator and the result destination
is another important element of side objectives.
The link of causation is the binder in by the element material (cause) and following the
immediate (effect) requested by the law for the existence of a crime. Report of causality can be
due only or with multiple causes.
In the judicial practice, there are often cases in which the dangerous pursuit is due to the
action or inaction of several persons, to whom interposed certain circumstances that have
influenced the result produced.
Establishing the causal link is difficult because it concerns phenomena that have taken
place in the past, and their characteristics are deduced from the result produced..
3. Offenses specific to the law of social communication
In Chapter IV of the Code of Criminal Romania (1998-2006) entitled "Crimes against
dignity " are established two offenses respectively, insult and slander, offenses that can be
committed by any person physics including the agent media. In the new Criminal Code of
Romania published in the Official Gazette no.575 of June 29 , 2004 in chapter VIII entitled "
Crimes against dignities i ", only the crime of slander is incriminated .
Law no. 278/2006 amends and completes the penal code and the offenses of insult and
slander are decriminalized, but subsequently the Constitutional Court on January 18 , 2007
admits the exception of unconstitutionality of art. 56 of Law no. 278/2006.
Article 56 is referred to repeal May several articles of the old Penal Code, respectively
205 - insult, 206 - libel, 207 - sample veracity and 236 indicate 1 - defamation t country or the
nation . By the decision of the constitutional court , all these articles will now be reintroduced in
the Penal Code . The decisions of the Constitutional Court are obligatory .
3.1. Insult
3 .1.1. General considerations

According to art.205 of the Criminal Code, which incriminates insult, by the term of
insult was meant "the attainment of the honor or reputation of a person by words, gestures or by
any other means, or by exposure to mockery and punishable by imprisonment from a month to
two years or fine. The same punishment also applies in case a person is assigned a defect, disease
or infirmity which, even if it were real, should not be revealed. The criminal action is set in
motion at the prior complaint of the injured person. Reconciliation of the parties removes the
criminal liability ”.
The demarcation between freedom and abuse of freedom is difficult to do especially in a
society like ours, which is constantly changing, where corruption and crime are on the rise,
where the moral law, as a guarantee of freedom, has not been established. firmly, and an ethics
of social coexistence cannot yet be founded on its own autonomy. In such a society, the legal
norm, with all its shortcomings, tends not to substitute the moral law but to promote and ensure a
certain social harmony, an indispensable requirement for the exercise of freedom.
The existence of the legal norm by which the insult was incriminated was first of all a
guarantee of the right to one's own image, a fundamental right provided by the Constitution, as
well as of the normal, civilized evolution of social relations in all aspects.

3.1.2. The object of the insult offense

Object law specifically it is the relationships social that concerns the honor and
reputation of being human , values social important for this . The honor is understand the degree
of integrity, morality , integrity , fairness , demnitatesi honor recoverable Nosc of society .
Reputation you all own image, concept by which understands esteem , consideration and respect
that they enjoy the person of the fellow his , so what , attitude psychic that has community about
an individual , ie honor as compared objectively .
So the insult to achieve the honor , the reputation of the person , the dignity of it and that
the right to own image. For example , the statement that X is a man of morals light and that has
had relationships sexual with all b arbatii from her village is touch brought the reputation of the
party injured and that the offense of insult .
According to the Romanian Constitution the person has among the fundamental rights
and the right to one's own image. The right to life intimate family to and privately he allows a
person to censor what you can to and affect self-image that and he made it, and he represented
her and and he kept her. Along the right to their own image, the right to life intimate can be
invoked when you and it affects the self-image.
3.1.3. Subjects of insult offense
The active subject of the crime can be any responsible person, as perpetrator, accomplice,
instigator. Usually the insult is committed by a single person, respectively an author, who
appears to be the only subject and it is not excluded that when the deed is committed other than
orally it is committed by two or more persons (co-authors) who, intentionally, it contributes
directly to the realization of the activity that constitutes the material element of the crime.
The passive subject of the offense can be any natural person. If the passive subject had
the quality of a civil servant who fulfills a function that implies the exercise of the state authority,
then his insult is a more dangerous offense, sanctioning with a greater punishment: imprisonment
from 3 months to 4 years (outrage).
If the author insults several people there are more passive subjects, so all the same
insulting offenses.
Regarding the passive subject we observe that the feeling of honor implies a minimum of
moral personality, and reputation - a minimum of life, of relation to the social environment. A
small child, a disabled child, an individual in a state of congenital idiocy as well as any other
person who is in a state of psycho-physical abnormality that excludes subjectively and
objectively the aggression against the honor, cannot have this quality.
3.1.4. The objective side of the insult offense
The objective side involves three components: the material element, the socially
dangerous consequence and the causal relationship between them. The material element
 consists either by an action or inaction of the attainment of the honor or reputation of a person,
or by an act of attributing to a person a defect, illness or infirmity which, however real they
may be, need not be related.
According to art. 205 para. 1 penal code, the material element of the objective side has three
forms :
 reaching the honor
 achieving reputation
 exposure to mockery

a) a) By attaining the honor is understood to be committing acts by which one strikes in the
appreciation that a person has about himself (that is, self-respect regarded as a purely
subjective feeling, which is considered to be an innate attribute presumed to exist in each
human7). There will be insult even when speaking offensive words to someone, which
corresponds with what everyone thinks about the offended person (for example: if someone is
said to be a "channel", a qualification that everyone would believe is wrong, is considered
insulting). So only he decides to change his attitude and no one in society should prevent him
by insulting him to come out of certain negative states.
b) By touching the reputation of a person it is understood to do something that would upset,
diminish or obscure the good reputation that someone actually earned and among his peers.
This time it is not about protecting the honor as an abstract good, but about a moral heritage
really agonized by a person, that is, the esteem, the consideration, the respect and the
appreciation that a person has endeavored to acquire and which he actually enjoys in his eyes.
to his peers. Thus any appreciation, even when by nature it would not be insulting, but which
it was
c) Exposure to mockery means doing something of a nature to depict a person in a ridiculous,
angry, humiliating or dishonest situation. Of nature to provoke humiliating hilarity, ridicule,
derision or contempt of others. Exposure to mockery can result from ridicule of faculties,
feelings, physical appearance, port, way of life, occupations, relationships, etc. to a person.
Everything regarding the person, the things and the facts in relation to which this life unfolds
can therefore form the object of the mocking action. The offensive activity can be
accomplished by any means: oral, written or through pictures or facts.
d) By the act of attributing a defect, illness or infirmity which, although real, that should not be
revealed, it is understood that the imputation or reproach of abnormal physical or mental
states which, in most cases cannot be removed by it, the dignity of the victim being affected
by the humility to which he is subjected or by the ridicule created around his person. By
"defect" is meant an abnormal physical or mental state, native or acquired (eg bullying,
strabismus, various tics, undeveloped intelligence) that does not depend on the will of the one
who manifests it. By "disease" is meant an organic or functional modification of the normal
balance of the body. The word is synonymous with illness, affection, betasug. By "infirmity"
7
Any person deprived of liberty will be treated unanimously and with the respect of the dignity inherent to
the human person - has article 10 point 1 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights, a pact ratified by
Romania by Decree no.212 of 1974
is also understood an abnormal state, physical or mental, which consists in the lack or
deformation of an organ (for example: invalid by one or both legs or hands, blind of one or
both eyes) degradation of the psychic (for example. : mentally weak). It does not matter if the
defect, disease or infirmity is real or not. If they are real, they must be from those that should
not be revealed, that is, those that create a state of inferiority, disability, humility, compassion
(blind, deaf, dumb, etc.)
Modes of committing the insult are different . Thus , the insult can be :
• directly, that is, when it refers to the one to whom it is communicated
directly (eg it is betiv, bankrupt, hot etc);
• indirect, that is, when the deed, the statement refers to another person, but
in such a way that it harms the one to whom it is transmitted (eg your wife is a
woman of slight morals or a lady of consumption, etc.)
The insult can be made by an explicit fact when using words or images that express
clearly what the insulter wants to say about the insult (eg he is a man of nothing, lacking
in honor and dignity) or by implicit fact when from what is said or expressed by the
insulter he deduces what he says about the insulted person (eg, someone gives him a
nickname or an insulting name: "Catavencu", "Harpagon").
The default insult can be :
• symbolic, consisting of a gesture (for example, at the address of someone,
the gesture of theft by significant rotation of the fingers), drawing (caricature
of someone in costume, putting horns, etc.), image or song from implicitly
deducing what the offender wanted to say;
• oblique, consisting of an assertion of the perpetrator about himself, but by
which he implicitly expresses the offensive appreciation towards the
interlocutor or, in front of which he makes the affirmation (for example I am
not hot, corrupt etc., thus expressing implicitly what he believes about the
offended);
• masked, when the perpetrator gives to his offensive action the
simultaneous appearance of a joking or compassionate attitude (simulates a
joke or a mildly seemingly harmless irony, but which expresses mockery,
disdain, disrespect towards the one we are addressed to).
3.1.5. The subjective side of the insult offense
The subjective side of the insult offense is the intention, under its two forms: the direct
intention and the direct intention.
In the case of direct intention, it is necessary that the active subject be desired and
pursued so that, by the facts committed, it may affect the honor and reputation of the passive
subject.
 Guilt can exist when the deed is committed with an indirect intention, that is, it provides
that it will attain the honor and reputation of the passive subject and, although it does not pursue
it, accepts the possibility of socially dangerous consequences.
The intention results even from committing the deed, it is not necessary to prove that the words,
the acts of the perpetrator are absolutely and univocally insulting. But when the means to which
the perpetrator has resorted do not have an offensive content by their nature, that is, they do not
have in themselves the intrinsic ability to achieve honor or reputation or to expose a person to
mockery, but can lead to this result through the image and the circumstances in which they were
used, it is necessary to establish the intention to offend which, in these situations, is no longer
presumed but must be proven.
Although the motive and the purpose do not represent components of the subjective side,
not being included by the legislator in the legal content of the insult offense, they have legal
interest and are to be considered as exclusively subjective factors that act on the criminal
resolution, when individualizing the punishment can be retained. either as aggravating legal
circumstances (for example: within the meaning of Article 73, paragraph (1), letter d) Criminal
code for committing the offense for insane reasons, such as hatred, envy, jealousy, etc.) or as
mitigating judicial circumstances related to the objective conditions in which such resentments,
desires or passions could have arisen as well as in connection with these factors with different
circumstances of the perpetrator's personal life or his previous relationships with the injured
person.
3.2. Slander
3.2.1. General considerations . Definition
Art.206 which criminalizes the slander provided in paragraph 1: "the assertion or
imputation in public of a certain fact regarding a person, who, if they were true, would expose
that person to a criminal, administrative or disciplinary sanction, or to the public contempt
punishes with imprisonment from 3 months to 3 years or with a fine.
Al.2: "The criminal action is put in motion at the preliminary complaint of the injured
person"
Al.3: "the reconciliation of the parties removes the criminal responsibility"
Calumny is therefore a rude birth; however, it may also consist of a true statement or
imputation which, unless justified by the defense of a legitimate interest, is also malicious. It
therefore consists in attributing to a person a certain fact that the perpetrator knows to be false
or which the truth is true, it asserts or imputes it with the intention of causing harm, that is to
strike the dignity of that person, presenting it as an incorrect person, dishonest or immoral, in a
word he does not deny the public moral persuasion that he enjoys among his peers.
 The affirmation or imputation in public of a fact determined in such a way that the person
to whom it is attributed would be exposed to a legal sanction or the public contempt always has
the ability to undermine the dignity of the person. Thus the act committed violates one of the
fundamental rights of the person: the right he has to enjoy the esteem, consideration and respect
among his peers.
Although in the case of offenses against dignity the object of criminal protection is the
same - the dignity of the man regarded as social value - the slander appears in relation to the
insulting offense as a crime with a higher degree of social danger.
Like any crime, slander involves a double danger - a social danger through the disorder that it
produces to the society and an individual private danger through which it gets hit in the passive
subject of the crime.
As a comparative look between the slander and insult offense we observe the
following:

a) the element of the objective side in the slander is limited only to affirmation or
imputation, while to the insult it is committed by any touch brought to honor or
reputation;
b) at the offense of slander the act imputed or affirmed must be rigorously determined
whereas at the insult the act can be any act even with a certain degree of generality
(stupid, betive, etc.);
c) in the offense of slander the act imputed or determined must be more dangerous
than in the case of insult, that is of such nature that, if it is true, to attract a criminal,
administrative, disciplinary or public disdain, in the case of insulting offense by this
deed it is sufficient to affect the honor or reputation of the person or exposure to
mockery.
d) Another differentiation derives from the requirement of advertising which, unlike
insult, is essential for the existence of the slander offense itself, so the affirmation or
imputation "in public of a reprehensible fact facilitates the possibility of knowing it by
an indeterminate number of persons, from where and resonance. its special in the
sphere of public opinion.
e) The punishment for the crime of slander has higher legal limits than for the offense
of insult due to the higher degree of social danger.
3.2.2. The object of the slander offense
The object of the slander offense is the social relations that ensure the dignity of the
person against certain serious facts. The dignity of the person is given by the degree of moral
authority recognized by the company, and the public dignity is given by the degree of authority
of a high public function provided in the law.
The generic legal object of the slander offense is the same as the insult offense, but in the
case of the slander the gravity of the facts is higher than in the case of the insult offense. And
insult and slander are lacking in material object.
The slander, besides affecting the dignity of the person expended on it and to some
violations of the liberty from the public authorities, which in case the act imputed or affirmed is a
crime that is investigated ex officio, are obliged to verify, to perform preliminary acts on it ,
police calls, innocent justification, the proposal of witnesses or the administration of other
evidence, etc. These activities give a high note of social danger when the victim is charged with
committing a crime that is investigated "ex officio".
3.2.3. Subjects of slander offense
The active subject of the slander offense can be any person with criminal responsibility
(ie over 14 years, with discernment and without being declared irresponsible).
The offense can be committed with participation in the form of instigation or complicity
in all cases, and in the form of the co-author only if it is committed in another way than the oral
one.
The passive subject of the offense can be any person. In case the passive subject is a
civil servant who performs a function that involves the exercise of the state authority in the
exercise of the function or for acts performed in the exercise of the function, the act will receive
another qualification, namely the offense of insult provided by art.239 al.1 penal Code.
3.2.4. Side objective of the crime of libel
As with any crime , side objective of the crime of libel has three elements :
• antisocial activity, namely the assertion or imputation in public;
• the socially dangerous pursuit, namely the serious damage to the dignity of the person
by imputing or asserting a certain fact which, if true, would expose it to a criminal,
administrative or disciplinary sanction or public contempt;
• the causal relationship between antisocial activity and socially dangerous
consequences.

In order to commit the offense under this aspect it is required first of all an affirmative
action or an imputation sanction. To say something means "to tell", "to tell", to "communicate"
something, and to impute something means to "reproach" something, to "make an accusation" or
to put something in the charge of a person. These two actions are stipulated by the alternative
law, which means that the material element of the offense is accomplished by committing any of
them.
 The affirmative action or the imputation action can be performed in any way and by any
means: by words, orally or in writing, by the press, by gestures, images. The words can be
spoken directly by the perpetrator or can be transmitted or reproduced by mechanical means.
In order to commit the offense under the aspect of the objective side, it is required,
secondly, that the action of affirmation or imputation should look at a certain person. The
determination of the person is made by indicating the known name or nickname, the exclusive or
well-determined quality of the respective person (Prime Minister, Minister of Interior, Patriarch
of the Metropolitan Church of Moldova, etc.) or of some persons (members of the government,
the full court, etc.). the determination must be implicit, that is, the imputation is addressed
directly and personally. It does not have to be necessary that the one on which the affirmation or
imputation is present is present at the moment when it is produced.
The assertion or imputation may also refer to several persons. In this case, the condition
regarding the determination of the person is fulfilled if it is indicated the group of which it is part
(for example the components of a certain sports batch) or a certain circumstance of nature to
make known those persons (eg the circumstance that all participated in the contest organized for
occupying the same position).
Third, in order to commit the offense under the aspect of the objective side, it is required
that the assertion or imputation regarding a person have as object a certain deed. By "deed" is
meant any concrete external manifestation (acts, attitudes that actually occurred in the form of
action or inaction). The simple wishes, intentions, projects expressed by someone do not
constitute legal facts. For example, there is no act if the slanderer claims about a person that he is
thinking of taking revenge against another person by committing an offense.
A fact is considered determined when he is individualized by showing his circumstances:
place, time, manner, personal things and any other data of nature to reveal the fact in his
loneliness. A fact is not equally determined when it is shown in its genus or species (eg we have
an indeterminate fact when it is stated that X had committed an offense or that Y had committed
an offense, a theft, etc. without showing how, when, against whom, etc.).
Of course it is not necessary that the description of the fact be made in detail, it will
always be sufficient to have given a minimum of details to allow others to identify the fact. For
example, when X is alleged to have used a fake diploma, when a doctor is alleged to have issued
a fake medical certificate to a person, when Y is alleged to have had sex with Z, etc. We have an
indeterminate fact in the situations in which it is stated e.g. that X gets used to fake acts or Y's
wife has lovers.
So, when the assertion or imputation does not concern a particular, individualized fact,
that is a concrete reality that can be identified and verified, there is no crime of slander but insult.
In this sense, in the judicial practice, it was considered that the material element of the insult
offense and not of the slander offense is realized (for example, the assertion that the injured
person is walking naked at night with men or that the claimed person is a crook, hot, that the
victim is a woman of light manners, etc.).
For the existence of the slander offense under the aspect of the objective side, fourth, it is
required that the act affirmed or imputed to be a fact which, if true, would expose the person to a
criminal, administrative or disciplinary sanction or public contempt.
 Therefore, for the assertion or imputation to constitute an offense, it is necessary that the
act of the perpetrator should have as an object a certain gravity, so that the reputation of the
slanderer is actually infringed. This act can be an offense regardless of the degree of social
danger it would present, an administrative convention, a disciplinary offense or an immoral act.
It is not required that the act affirmed or imputed to have attracted to the person the effective
application of a penal sanction, administrative, disciplinary or to the public scorn; it is sufficient
that by its nature the act asserted or imputed constitutes in itself an offense, an administrative
contravention or a disciplinary offense or an immoral act. Thus, there is no slander if the
defendant asserted that the applicant had killed her husband through spells - an assertion that no
one can believe.
The act asserted or imputed, liable to expose to a criminal, administrative, disciplinary or
public contempt, must be untrue or, if true, the assertion or imputation was not made to defend a
legitimate interest. If a legitimate interest is defended and it is proven that the act to which it
refers is true, the slander offense is removed according to art.207 Criminal Code.

In the fifth row , for the realization of the crime of libel under the appearance of side
objectives to require that affirmation or imputation to be committed in public .
According to art.152 criminal code the deed is considered committed in public when it
was committed:
a) in a place that, by its nature or destination, is always accessible to the public, even if
no person is present;
b) in any other place accessible to the public, if two or more persons are present;
c) in a place not accessible to the public, with the intention, however, that the deed
should be heard or seen and if this result occurred against two or more persons;
d) in a meeting or meeting of several persons, except for meetings that can be
considered by the family due to the relations between participants;
e) by means of which the perpetrator realized that the deed could reach the public's
knowledge.
When the imputation or affirmation has been made discreetly, in privacy, in a private
setting, only towards a person, there is no publicity. Also, there is no publicity when the
imputation or affirmation was made by a letter addressed personally to the accused. There is
advertising, for example, when the open letter, although addressed to the accused, was sent to the
headquarters of the company where it is associated, to its service, so that other people can
become aware of its content.
3.2.5. The subjective side of the slander offense

For the existence of the slander offense it is not necessary, from the aspect of the
subjective side, that the act of the perpetrator be committed with intent, both direct and indirect.
So the act of slander committed by guilt is not considered a crime of slander.
The conditions of the subjective side of the slander offense are not met when:
 a) the author did not have the will to make the assertion or imputation in public,
but he came to the public's knowledge contrary to his will. For example, X makes
an intimate communication with Y and others, without X's news, listen to the door
etc;
b) in the case of admitting and conducting the proof of the truth according to art.
207 penal code;
c) the deed is committed in good faith when it is a legitimate interest or the author
was in error in fact caused by someone else who presented him false documents,
false witnesses, etc. For example, X made public statements about a person Y who
was convicted by the court of first instance on the basis of acts that subsequently
turned out to be false, and Y was acquitted as innocent. In judicial practice, the
intention - directly or indirectly to slander in the case of an accused who published
in the press under his signature an article that refers entirely to a person other than
the injured party and in which the name of the injured party appears only by
chance, was excluded to circumscribe asserted facts about that person.

3 .4. Other crimes that can be committed through the press

The constitutional provisions, by art.30 al.6 and 7, establish the limits of freedom of
expression. Thus, the freedom of expression cannot harm the dignity, honor, private life of the
person nor the right to one's own image. The defamation of the country, of the nation, the
exhortation to war of aggression, to national hatred, racial or religious hatred, incitement to
discrimination, territorial separatism or public violence, as well as obscene manifestations,
contrary to good morals, are prohibited by law.
In the field of social communication, as in other fields, these values can be violated, and
some of them constitute offenses provided by the penal code and which we will list and define as
they were provided by the legislator.
In addition to crimes against dignity (slander and insult) in the field of communication
law, the following offenses may also be committed:

 Offenses against the authorities

o Offense brought to a mark.
It constitutes an offense of offense brought to certain signs, according to art.236
al.1 Penal code - "any manifestation by which he expresses disdain for the
insignia of Romania". Paragraph 2 provides that the act represents a lower social
danger if the manifestation of contempt refers to the emblems or signs used by the
authorities and is sanctioned with a lesser punishment.
o Defamation of the country or nation
Art.236 penal code stipulates that "public manifestations committed with the
intention of defaming the country or the Romanian nation" are incriminated.
o Outrage
 It constitutes an outrage according to art.239 CP "Insult or slander committed
directly or by means of direct communication against a public official who
performs a function that involves the exercise of the state authority in the exercise
of the function or for the acts performed in the exercise of the function".
 Offenses against state security

o Propaganda in favor of the totalitarian state

Art.166 CP provides that "propaganda for the establishment of a state
totalitarian committed by any means in public, is an offense ”
o Communication of false information
Art.1681 CP provides: "communication or dissemination by
any means of news, data or false information, or by phased documents, if
the deed is likely to undermine the national security of the state or the
international relations of Romania"
 Offenses that affect relations regarding social coexistence
o Soviet nationalist propaganda
This crime provides for "the attainment of racial or national hatred, if the deed
does not constitute the offense provided for in art.166 CP (propaganda in favor of
the totalitarian state)"
o Public incitement and apology for the offenses (art.324 CP)
o The spread of obscene materials (art.325 CP)
It constitutes an offense according to art.325 of the penal code "the act of selling
or spreading, as well as of making or holding for the purpose of spreading, of
objects, drawings, writings or other materials of obscene character"
Offenses against the execution of justice
Not denouncing offenses
According to art.262 CP „the omission to immediately denounce the committing
of any of the offenses provided in art.174, 175, 176, 211, 215, 217 al.2-4, art.218
al.1 and art.275 al.3 from the penal code ”constitutes an offense.
The omission of the notification of the judicial organs
Under the name "omission of notification of judicial bodies" the criminal code
incriminates in art263 "the act of the civil servant who, knowing of committing an
offense in relation to the service in which he performs his duties, omits the
prompt notification of the prosecutor or the criminal prosecution body according
to the law of criminal procedure ”.
Favoring the offender
The offense in favor of the offender consists, according to art. 264 of the Criminal
Code, in "the help given to an offender without an agreement established before
or during the commission of the offense to make it difficult or difficult to
 prosecute, prosecute or execute the punishment or to ensure the offender's use or
product. crime ".
Failure to notify organs Judicial organs
Art.265 of the Criminal Code provides that the offense of ignorance of the
judicial bodies is "the act of not informing the judicial bodies of circumstances
which, if known, would lead to establishing the innocence of a person sent to trial
or wrongfully convicted or released to a person held in preventive detention
unfairly ”.
Offenses against the person's freedom
Violation of the secret of the correspondence
Art.195 CP stipulates that "the opening of a correspondence addressed to another, or
the interception of a call or communication made by telephone, telegraph or other
means of distance transmission, without law" constitutes an offense.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Dr. DUMITRU TITUS POPA - The right of communication .
Norma Publishing House , Bucharest , 1999
• VALERICA DABU - The right of social communication .
Bucharest , 2001
• LUCIAN VASILE SZABO - Freedom of communication in the press world .
Amarcard Publishing House , Timisoara, 1999
• VALERICA DABU - The legal responsibility of the civil servant.
Global Lex Publishing House , Bucharest , 2000
• LEONARD MEHEDINTI - Deontology and the law of the press .
• CORNELIU TURIANU - Insult and slander through the press. All Beck
Publishing
House , Bucharest , 2000
• Sicorna Publishing House , 1999
• VASILE DONGORAS - Theoretical and practical explanations of the Romanian
Criminal
Code .
• NARCIS GIURGIU - Criminal law and crime .
Bama Publishing House , Iasi, 1996
• TUDOR DRAGANU - Constitutional law and public institutions .
Lex Publishing House , Bucharest , 1998
• TUDOR DRAGANU - Constitutional protection of freedom of opinion .
Lex Publishing House , Bucharest , 1999
• IOAN MURARU - Constitutional protection of freedom of opinion .
Lumina Lex Publishing House , Bucharest , 1999
• DAN CLAUDIU DANISOR - Constitutional law and political institutions .
Scientific
Publishing House , Bucharest , 1997
• Constantin BULAI - As a criminal novel. General Part , Vol . I Sansa Publishing
House , Bucharest , 1992

[1] Narcis Giurgiu, Criminal Law and Crime , Gama Ed . , Iasi, 1996
[2] Romanian penal code
[3] The object of an act may be material or immaterial
[4] They are provided in the special part of the Romanian penal code [5] There was thus the object of offenses ....
[6] See Valerica Dabu , Social Communication Law , Bucharest , 2000
[7] Any person deprived of liberty shall be treated with unanimity and with respectful dignity inherent in the
individual human - has
Article 10 paragraph 1 of the Covenant International on the rights of civil and political pact ratified by Romania by
Decree No .212
1974
[8] There may constitute the crime of libel claims made in public that relate to facts attributable or incredible for
that also acts unreal are not likely to trigger criminal prosecution , disciplinary or administrative is often the
subject person injured contempt public. For example. there are no slander when the defendant has said about the
person injured that and he killed her husband by magic .