Five people got together in a criminal group and they committed horrible murder. They stabbed someone one to death in cold blood. There were five stabs and it isn't known which was the killing one. The first person is a deputy, the second is a senator, the third is both a minister and a MP, the fourth is a minister, but not a MP and the last person is not a state official. The police started the first investigations under a prosecutor's co-ordination. But given the Constitution and more special laws, only one of the assassins may be interrogated and arrested. As for the remaining four, the head of state agreed criminal investigations should open, after the Prosecutor's Office asked for his consent. But the Ministry of Justice announced the Prosecutor's Office only about the minister who was not a MP. As far as the minister who is also a MP is concerned, the Ministry of Justice sent a solicitation to the Juridical Committee in the chamber of Deputies. Both the latter and the Senate learned about the Prosecutor's solicitations on the two MPs who were not ministers.
In the meantime, the inquiry has been making no progress. How long will this continue? Until Romanian deputies and senators decide if the three MPs, two of them also ministers, must be deprived of immunity in order to be investigated or not. But what if one Chamber or both think, on grounds of the Juridical Committee's analysis, that there are not enough proves to deprive them of immunity? But what if the President is doing too much? What if he addresses the minister of justice, making a complaint against the MPs too? Could this lead to a severe conflict between two important state institutions? Between the President, part of the government, but relying on the legitimacy of citizens' ballots, and the Romanian Parliament, the main power in state, also enjoying substantial legitimacy, also due to citizens' ballots. What if the Constitutional Court reaches an ambiguous decision and speaks double language? The prosecutor in charge of the case will fail. And the assassins will move freely. Investigations against an ordinary citizen may continue with the respective person arrested. But it can't possibly lead to any results, since it is about a murder committed by several murderers.
How come such an absurd situation? How come five alleged murderers aren't equal to the law? How come different measurements are used, ending up with an unpunished assassin? Apart from paying the price for an unpunished murder because of failing to provide citizens with security, society is troubled because of a top-level conflict between the fundamental state institutions.
If we can admit that, if all the above-mentioned protagonists, except for the murderers, of course, are well-meaning (which can't actually be), then the evil is in the very law, in the Constitution, in the article on the deprivation of immunity.
I will be developing upon this tomorrow in order to explain in full detail what is the killing trick, settled in the very fundamental law, that is the Constitution, and also present in more juridical documents. It is actually an ambiguous point politicians make full use of in order to pursue their interests, attack each other and protect their comrades. When I say politicians, I mean the head of state too, of course.
P.S. Mind you that my example on the group of assassins is purely theoretical. In fact, things are much more serious, if we think about high level corruption.