Therefore the Court held that from the

Roselin67

Aprovisions of art. paragraph of the Code of Criminal Procedure from a similar perspective rejected the exception of unconstitutionality. On that occasion the Court assessed that a systematic interpretation of the criminal procedural provisions of art. paragraph combined with those of art. para. and of the Criminal Procedure Code. Thus systematically interpreting the criminal procedural provisions shown above the Court found that the regulation in the content of the paragraph subsequent to the one regarding the lapse of time of hours provided for the formulation of the complaint against the.

Prosecutors measure of extending the judicial control from the content Country Email List of art. . of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the obligation of the judge of rights and liberties notified to establish in the council chamber the term for resolving the complaint promoted according to art. paragraph of the Code of Criminal Procedure is equivalent to the imposition of the requirement to establish this term expeditiously. The Court held that the short term in which the complaint is filed requires the judge of the case to fix a similar term for its trial see mutatis mutandis the appeal term of hours from the pronouncement of the decision provided for in art. para. from.



Law no. on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court. whole of the analyzed regulation the obligation of the judge of rights and freedoms to establish in order to analyze the complaint promoted against the prosecutors ordinance extending the measure of judicial control a deadline as short as possible such as to ensure solving it effectively. The Court also noted that any appeal must be effective a constitutional requirement that must also be guaranteed by setting deadlines during the criminal process. That being the case the legislator has the.