CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 mars 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 11 April 2022   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 62047/19 Gabriel-Adrian NĂSUI against Romania lodged on 13 November 2019 communicated on 25 March 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicant’s conviction for corruption offences upheld by the High Court of Cassation and Justice on 27 March 2019 (communicated to the applicant on 17 May 2019). During the criminal trial against the applicant, the provisions of Article 155 of the Criminal Code, governing the interruption of the course of the statute of limitations of the criminal responsibility, had been declared unconstitutional by decision no.   297/2018 of the Constitutional Court . The applicant alleges that, as a result of the above-mentioned Constitutional Court decision, the criminal proceedings against him should have been discontinued on account of having been time-barred. He complains that his conviction breached his rights under Article 7 of the Convention due to the lack of foreseeability and certainty of the law that was applied in his case and led to his conviction, namely Article 155 of the Criminal Code.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Having regard to the Constitutional Court decision no. 297/2018, was the text of Article 155 of the Criminal Code clear and foreseeable to the applicant? In particular, has the applicant been convicted for acts which were no longer punishable owing to the lapse of the statute of limitations in respect of the relevant offences in his case? If so, did the applicant’s conviction amount to a violation of Article   7   §   1 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Antia and Khupenia v.   Georgia , no.   7523/10, §§ 39-43, 18 June 2020)?