
Patriots are punished by the justice system, which is a puppet in the hands of external forces, says a Romanian citizen known for his extremist actions and speeches against the Hungarian minority.
NEWS: Fined for having a Romanian conscience. The High Court of Cassation and Justice, represented by presiding judge Gheza Attila Farmathy (imagine my “luck”!) is forcing me to pay 3,000 lei in fine to the National Council for Combating Discrimination for publishing an article on Facebook titled “The Romanian Constitution – Outlawed under government decree”, see the link in the commentaries, as well as a snapshot of the High Court’s ruling.
NARRATIVE: Defending the Constitution is punishable in a judiciary controlled by external forces.
BACKGROUND: In the early years after the collapse of communism in Central and Eastern Europe, nationalists from Romania and Hungary have rekindled the dispute regarding the official status of Transylvania, generating an overtly extremist ideology, which is gaining increasing support at present. Tensions have escalated into violence, peaking with the tragic events of March 1990 in Târgu-Mureș, or with the recent conflict sparked by the scandal revolving around the Heroes Cemetery in Valea Uzului, where one of the Romanian leaders who incited violence against the Hungarian community was a dentist from Brașov, Mihai Sorin Tîrnoveanu.
A known ultranationalist with an anti-Hungarian speech, Tîrnoveanu is also the founder of the “Calea Neamului” (Way of the People) publication and association, which equally employs a discourse with extremist overtones. At the same time, the healthcare professional from Brașov is also the leader of the National Movement, a political party whose ideology is grounded on “classical” ideas (the defense of the nation state and regaining national sovereignty, the defense of the faith and the Romanian Orthodox Church, etc.) as well as newer theses, such as the elimination of excessive digitization in education, eliminating “Health Education” as a subject from school curricula and introducing the “History of Romanians” in curricula, because “our schools no longer teach the true history, which most of us have studied, but rather want our children to learn a completely different history, which has nothing to do with the Romanian People”. In terms of “foreign policy”, the agenda of the National Movement supports “diplomatic, cultural and historic efforts to combat propaganda actions specific to revisionist elites in Hungary…”
Following several discriminatory and violence-inciting posts, Tîrnoveanu claims his Facebook profile was permanently disabled, which determined him to create his own website. However, right now, Tîrnoveanu continues to publish on this social network from four separate pages (according to the High Court press release), which have tens of thousands of followers. In 2020, Mihai Tîrnoveanu was fined by the National Council for Combating Discrimination (CNCD) for discriminatory actions, a decision he challenged in court. While the Brașov Court of Appeal ruled in his favor, the appeal filed by the High Court of Cassation and Justice overturned the original ruling, and Tîrnoveanu was forced to pay 3,000 lei in fine in addition to covering legal fees.
In a broader context, Mihai Tîrnoveanu’s comments fall in line with the idea that the Romanian judiciary is controlled by external forces, which led to Romania losing its sovereignty.
PURPOSE: To undermine societal trust in the judiciary and the authorities, to stir and amplify social unrest.
WHY THE NARRATIVE IS FALSE: The post whereby Mihai Tîrnoveanu announced the “unfair” ruling of the Romanian justice system is in fact a call for financial help, disguised as an effort to combat globalized censorship and political correctness.
The subject of Tîrnoveanu’s post, for which he was fined, is a false narrative, something which the High Court explains in the motivation. The provisions of the Administrative Code and the decree of the Education Ministry on the methodology for admission to higher education units have nothing in common with the introduction of a second official language of Romania. In fact, the decree Tîrnoveanu criticizes simply alligns the said methodology to the legislation on combating discrimination, in the sense that it prevents universities from forcing candidates who graduated a high-school in Romania with teaching in a language other than Romanian to sit an exam testing their Romanian-language skills. Under the said decree, proof of graduates’ language skills is provided by the Romanian Baccalaureate exam, where Romanian is a mandatory test subject. In fact, Article 5 of the Law on undergraduate education stipulates that “learning Romanian as a school subject is mandatory to all primary beneficiaries of education”.
Therefore, the conclusion that someone should be punished for defending the Constitution is also false, as the fine was applied to Mihai Tîrnoveanu for discrimination, offensive language and the use of threats. Moreover, Tîrnoveanu was forced to delete all comentaries containing explicit threats such as “we’re better off killing all the thieves in the government, before moving to ethnic cleansing”. Following his refusal to comply, he was fined by CNCD. Invoking the freedom of expression granted under Article 11 in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has no legal basis as long as the goal of the expression was to insult or level threats. As a matter of fact, judges write in their motivation that the physician from Brașov “was repeatedly sanctioned by CNCD and is the target of other investigations pending at the Council and the Tribunal in Brașov”. Besides, Tîrnoveanu’s claim about the High Court’s ruling being issued by a Hungarian-born judge who presided the three-judge panel is misleading, since under the law, decisions require majority ruling, which means at least one of the other two Romanian-born judges had to concur to the ruling.
Check sources: