Romanian NGOs condemn Constitutional Court ruling as threat to democracy

Twenty non-governmental organizations, including ActiveWatch, APADOR-CH, and Expert Forum, have issued a public letter protesting the “arbitrary” disqualification of an opposition candidate from the electoral race, reports Agerpres.

The decision by Romania’s Constitutional Court (CCR) “questions the very essence of the democratic system” in the country, according to a statement from the Center for Resources for Public Participation (CeRe).

“We firmly protest the decision of the Constitutional Court, which questions the very essence of the democratic system in Romania. In no established democracy do we encounter situations where a candidate, even one with fascist-inspired views, is removed from competition through such rulings,” the statement reads.

The NGOs remind the public that, on October 5, 2024, the Constitutional Court invalidated the candidacy of Diana Șoșoacă, a decision made by a slim majority, with five votes in favor and two against, while two CCR judges were absent from the session.

“In its rationale, the CCR provides an extended philosophical argument to conclude that ‘the elements contained within the oath of allegiance represent eligibility and substantive conditions for candidacy for the President of Romania, which the candidate must meet at the time of submitting their candidacy,’ and that ‘the examination of these conditions can only be conducted by the Constitutional Court.’ The Court names these new, self-imposed criteria as ‘constitutional suitability for candidacy.’ To assess these new criteria, the Court has decided to scrutinize the candidate’s ‘conduct’ and public statements,” the document further states.

The signatories note that the Constitutional Court’s decision is an unprecedented and “deeply concerning” development in Romania. In a democratic country, the opposition should be defeated at the ballot box, “not excluded from competition through procedural measures.” According to the same source, Diana Șoșoacă is not the only candidate who has publicly expressed, at least once, “anti-democratic and anti-European political views.”

“The CCR is evaluating ‘the public statements, stances, or participation in certain events’ of the candidate and considers these as ‘sufficient grounds to suggest that Ms. Diana Iovanovici-Șoșoacă, as a candidate for the presidency of Romania, questions and disregards the obligation to respect the Constitution through her public discourse regarding the removal of certain essential guarantees of fundamental state values and choices, namely Romania’s status as an EU and NATO member.’ In simpler terms, five judges of the Constitutional Court argue, over ten pages, that they, and only they, have the right to analyze individuals’ behavior and decide who deserves to be president, independently of the popular vote,” the open letter states.

The NGOs consider this decision a “serious deviation towards illiberalism.” They note that the CCR’s role is to ensure that candidates meet eligibility requirements and serve as an electoral review body, which “should not make moral judgments” based on a candidate’s public statements, as long as they meet the formal and substantive conditions.

“We do not support the political views of candidate Diana Șoșoacă. On the contrary, we firmly condemn the fascist-inspired statements she has made and the conspiracy theories she promotes in the public sphere. There are organizations and courts that can sanction such statements and actions, in accordance with existing legislation, which must be applied while respecting the principles of the rule of law and fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression. We strongly believe that any citizen can propose even constitutional changes if such a proposal complies with the limits set by articles 150-152 of the fundamental law. Such a proposal can be debated and subjected to parliamentary and popular vote,” the source notes.

The document is signed by: ActiveWatch, APADOR-CH, the Văcărești Natural Park Association, the Association for Community Relations, the Association for Technology and the Internet, Respiro Human Rights Research Centre, the Civica Association, Átlatszo Erdély/Transparent Transylvania, the Legal Resources Centre, the FILIA Centre, the Centre for Public Innovation, the Centre for Independent Journalism, the Centre for Sustainable Policies Ecopolis, the Romanian Centre for European Policies, CeRe: the Center for Public Participation Resources, Expert Forum, FDSC – the Foundation for Civil Society Development, Forum Apulum, Funky Citizens, and Spiritual Militia.