Пак те питам. Румънският закон еднакъв ли е с българския? Защото от закон до закон- има разлика, голяма разлика.Чел ли си го?

Тъпо Говедо

Тогава да ни назначат управници от техните. Защото нашите не стават. Протекторатът се превръща в обществен фарс.

Actions having a significant positive impact upon confiscation tools (eg Actions 5 on
extended confiscation, 6 on non-conviction based confiscation or 7 on third party
confiscation) are also those having the biggest impact on fundamental rights. A limitation
of the right to property and right to a fair trial of the defendant must be justified, respect
proportionality and be accompanied by adequate safeguards. The European Court on Human
Rights (ECtHR) has rendered many decisions, consistently upholding their application of nonconviction based confiscation regimes in particular cases. However, it has avoided ruling on the principled question of their compatibility with the European Convention on Human
Rights. Reversals of the burden of proof concerning the legitimacy of assets have so far
survived the scrutiny of the ECtHR, so long as they were applied fairly in the particular case,
with adequate safeguards in place to allow the affected person to challenge these rebuttable
presumptions. While the ECtHR has consistently upheld extended confiscation regimes in
specific cases, their compatibility with the Convention is assessed on a case by case basis.
Again, the degree of procedural safeguards afforded to the defendant plays a determinant role
in assessing the proportionality of the measure. A strong argument in favour of justifying third
party confiscation is the case where assets are claimed both by the third party and by a victim.
(това в Бг въобще разгледжа ли се като сценарии или само "бачи боку сега ще им земе къщита на мошенбниците и ще има за народа)
If the perpetrator of a crime has insufficient assets to meet a claim (as is often the case),
measures in favour of the third party would weaken the position of the victim. Temporary
measures such as freezing orders may, due to their provisional character, justify further
limitations of certain rights and principles of due process, provided that sufficient safeguards
or remedies are available and those limitations respect the essence of those rights and
principles.

With a view to addressing barriers to prosecution, this option would include the introduction
of non-conviction based confiscation in limited circumstances (policy action 6). This
would make confiscation possible in circumstances where a conviction cannot be obtained
because the suspect has died, fled prosecution or sentencing or is unable to stand trial due to
mental illness.
Criminals often transfer their assets to knowing third parties as soon as they are under
investigation in order to avoid confiscation. This option would also include third party
confiscation (policy action 7) for assets received for less than market value and which a
reasonable person in the position of the third party would suspect to be derived from crime. In
relation to the freezing/seizure of criminal assets, this option foresees the introduction of
harmonised minimum standards (policy action 8)