Av. gen. Mazák si concluziile pt. cauza C-33/07. Ministerul Administraţiei şi Internelor – Direcţia Generală de Paşapoarte Bucureşti/Jipa… sau despre posibilitatea amendarii regimului juridic national (i.e. romanesc)

Da, urmand concluziile avocatului general, se poate ca in viitor, ulterior pronuntarii hotararii CJCE (iar aceasta urmeaza in cele mai multe situatii aprecierile avocatilor), Romania sa amendeze legea sa… Dispozitivul redactat de avocatul general era urmatoarea formulare:

(1)      Article 18(1) EC and Article 4 of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC preclude, in circumstances such as those in the case before the referring court, national legislation such as that at issue in the present proceedings which provides for restrictions to be placed on the right of Union citizens to leave their Member State of origin in order to travel to another Member State.

(2)      In the absence of a specific finding by a Member State in relation to one of its own nationals, adopted in compliance with the principle of proportionality and based exclusively on the personal conduct of the individual concerned, that the exercise by him of his right pursuant to Article 18(1) EC and Article 4 of Directive 2004/38 to leave his own Member State to travel to another Member State may pose a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to the requirements of public policy affecting one of the fundamental interests of society, the Member State of origin may not impose, on grounds of ‘public policy’ or ‘public security’ as provided by Article 27 of that directive, restrictions on the freedom of movement of that person.

(3)      Failure by a Member State to examine the personal conduct of a person when restricting, on grounds of public policy or public security, his right to move and reside freely in the territory of the Member States invalidates any justification of the restriction in question.

Textul concluziilor aici (*).