ZAGREB, Nov 27 (Hina) - The chairman of the Croatian Parliament's Committee on the Constitution, Rule Book and the Political System, Mato Arlovic, said on Thursday the decision of the Constitutional Court to abolish the Law on
Amendments to the Penal Code "smacks of an attempt by the Constitutional Court to prove loyalty to the new government" and that it did not befit a court.
ZAGREB, Nov 27 (Hina) - The chairman of the Croatian Parliament's
Committee on the Constitution, Rule Book and the Political System,
Mato Arlovic, said on Thursday the decision of the Constitutional
Court to abolish the Law on Amendments to the Penal Code "smacks of
an attempt by the Constitutional Court to prove loyalty to the new
government" and that it did not befit a court. #L#
At the time of adoption of changes to the Penal Code in July, Arlovic
claimed that their adoption required the simple majority of 56
votes, rather than the majority of at least 76 votes, as was decided
today by the Constitutional Court, which abolished the changes.
Arlovic believes that the court's decision has political
connotations, the more so as it was adopted after recent
elections.
"The decision smacks of an attempt to prove loyalty to the new
government, whose representative initiated the procedure to assess
the constitutionality (of the changes)", Arlovic told Hina.
The law was abolished at the proposal of the Croatian Helsinki
Committee and Vladimir Seks of the Croatian Democratic Union, which
won Sunday's polls.
Arlovic said that the Law on Criminal Proceedings was an organic law
which defined basic human rights and freedoms as guaranteed by the
Constitution and that its adoption required the qualified
majority, which was not so in the case of the Penal Code.
"The Penal Code, and its amendments, do not define basic rights and
freedoms but regulate the protection of social values in a state,
which is why its adoption does not require the qualified majority,"
he said.
Arlovic also claims that it is evident from the parliament's work so
far that neither the Penal Code nor its amendments were considered
an organic law, nor did their adoption require the majority of
votes.
He believes that the decision of the Constitutional Court is far-
reaching, binding and sets a precedent, because of its legislative
character.
It is also binding for the parliament, which from now on will have to
adopt penal codes with the qualified majority, he said.
(hina) rml sb