Romania is losing its sovereignty, the Constitution will no longer be observed, and Romanian justice will be carried out in Brussels at the pleasure of the West, according to a false narrative launched in the context of the debates on the justice laws. In reality, amending the law on the status of judges and prosecutors only aligns the Romanian justice system with the European one, observing the principle of the primacy of European Law.
NEWS: “Justice Minister Cătălin Predoiu endorses Romania’s renunciation of its national sovereignty. Judges and prosecutors will no longer be obliged to comply with the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the Romanian Constitution. After removing from the law the sanction for non-compliance by magistrates with the binding decisions of the CCR, Predoiu admits that he wants to impose the primacy of European Law”.
“The Special Committee on Justice Laws, convened this evening, removed from the bill the obligation to comply with the decision of the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR), lawyer Adrian Toni Neacșu has announced.”
“The President of AUR (The Alliance for the Union of Romanians Party) has drawn attention to the fact that, through the amendments voted by the Committee, any punishment for the magistrates who ignore the decisions of the Constitutional Court was eliminated. The reason for convening the press conference was precisely to express AUR's concerns regarding the changes voted within the Special Committee that is blowing up the justice system in Romania.”
“After 20 years, the EU can say that it has fulfilled its plan to take down a country like Romania, populated with naive citizens who believed that integration would bring them prosperity and freedom, led by politicians who exercised their mandates only for external benefits , and concerned strictly with strategies of personal salvation.”
NARRATIVES: 1. The reform of the justice system has led to the undermining of the Constitutional Court and Romania losing its sovereignty. 2. The plan to colonize has succeeded. After resources, manpower and capital, the West managed to get its hands on Romanian justice as well.
LOCAL CONTEXT/ETHOS: As early as August, when the first draft amendments to the justice laws (regarding the Superior Council of Magistracy, the judicial organization and the status of judges and prosecutors) were submitted to public debate, the luju.ro website published an article announcing the disappearance of Romania’s sovereignty and implicitly, of its independence. It’s not the first time that Lumea Justiției is spreading fake news, the site being known even in Brussels for its own, very personal interpretation of any ruling and move of the judiciary, with the aim of serving the interests of the head of the Intact group, the criminal Dan Voiculescu. Over time, this site has concocted articles surely envied even by colleagues from Sputnik or a has disseminated fake news so obvious , that their debunking could be done in record time for such an undertaking.
With the return into public attention of the debates on the justices laws , the sovereignist propaganda was strongly reactivated, and the conclusion of those from luju.ro has been amplified and spread on all the channels available to it. At the initiative of former judge Adrian Toni Neacsu, also a criminal, a petition was started to stop amendments to the justice laws , with a little over 17,000 Romanians adhering to its content. The home sites and shows hosted by characters such as Diana Ivanovici Șoșoacă, Cozmin Gușă, Iosefina Pascal or the leader of AUR Party, George Simion have taken over, distributed and amplified the information, while leaving aside really important aspects of the three laws, which would have really deserved a more serious dialogue.
In recent years, the Constitutional Court of Romania has issued several rulings that have triggered controversy, raising allegations that the Court serves the interests of some corrupt politicians. At the same time, some decisions taken by the Constitutional Court have violated the EU legislation - although the Constitution itself provides for its supremacy - and attracted criticism from the European Court of Justice and the European Commission.
For obvious manipulative purposes, the anti-Western propaganda omits to say that, quite often, the Constitutional Court of Romania has issued some extremely controversial decisions, harshly criticized by the legal community. There have been also voices stating that the CCR has exceeded its powers or that it wants to enhance them. We recall the partial decriminalization of the abuse of office , a decision that led to the classification of more than 800 corruption files in various stages of investigation. Over time, the press has documented several decisions that have brought Romanian justice to its knees in the field of criminal law. The 9 members of the Court, politically appointed by Parliament and the President, were at the center of debates even in the midst of the pandemic when they decided that isolation at home, quarantine and hospitalization cannot be imposed under a ministerial order alone, even if the persons concerned are infected with the new coronavirus. Later, the CCR also intervened in the issue of fines for non-compliance with the restriction imposed in lockdown, a decision extremely cynically taken over by the sovereigntists and presented as a victory of the people against the health dictatorship.
To end of the CCR portrait, we also remember how two of its members granted themselves special pensions .
PURPOSE: To undermine the reform of the justice system. To promote a sovereignist and anti-Western discourse, to undermine trust in the current governing coalition for electoral purposes and to push for early elections (a failed initiative following the resounding failure of the October 2 protests)
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: The entire sovereignist narrative is based on the removal from law 303/2004 (regarding the status of judges and prosecutors) of article 99, letter ș: “Constituting disciplinary violations are: non-compliance with the decisions of the Constitutional Court or the decisions issued by the High Court of Cassation and Justice in resolving appeals in the interest of the law”. So, we see from the very beginning that the article in question refers to decisions of the HCCJ and CCR and not to the Romanian Constitution.
The decisions of the High Court of Cassation and Justice in question in that paragraph are those related to the appeal in the interest of the law. This is a legal procedure by means of which the HCCJ ensures that laws are interpreted and applied uniformly by all courts in the country. More specifically, upon notification by the general prosecutor of the Public Prosecutor's Office attached to the HCCJ, ex officio or at the request of the Minister of Justice, the Governing Board of the HCCJ, the governing boards of the appeal courts or the Ombudsman, when two or more courts give different solutions in relation to the same law, a panel of 25 judges determines which interpretation of the law is the correct one and thus becomes the norm from that on.
This decision has effects only in the future, the judicial decisions examined and the situation of the parties involved in those processes remaining unchanged. The HCCJ decisions in the case of appeals in the interest of the law, just like any other court decision, are based on the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as on the doctrine in the matter and the opinions of the consulted specialists, so the risk for a court decision to contravene one of the HCCJ is extremely low.
In defense of the Constitution trampled on by the world occult, the propagandists invoke article 147 , which, in paragraph 4, says that: “Decisions of the Constitutional Court shall be published in the Official Gazette of Romania. As from their publication, decisions shall be generally binding and effective only for the future”. What the fighters for the country's independence do not say is that article 148, paragraph 2, stipulates the obligation to comply with European norms first: “As a result of the accession, the provisions of the constituent treaties of the European Union, as well as the other mandatory community regulations shall take precedence over the opposite provisions of the national laws, in compliance with the provisions of the accession act.”
Moreover, article 20 of the same holy Constitution says as clearly as possible that: “Where any inconsistencies exist between the covenants and treaties on the fundamental human rights Romania is a party to, and the national laws, the international regulations shall take precedence, unless the Constitution or national laws comprise more favorable provisions. Translated into easy to understand Romanian, this means that only if the domestic legislation is more favorable to the citizen, the Constitution becomes mandatory, not the international legislation to which our country has acceded.
The principle was explained by the Minister of Justice, Cătălin Predoiu, back in August, namely that all sources of mandatory law are and remain binding, and the judge must have full freedom and independence in interpreting and applying them. In conclusion, the national legislation is not in competition with the European one. In the event of a conflict between the norms, the judges will establish which of them applies with priority, without asserting its supremacy in relation to the other. In this way, the supremacy of the Constitution over the rest of the domestic laws is ensured, as well as the hierarchy specific to the order of international legislation. It is equally obvious that, even if from now on the judges will no longer be obliged to comply with the decisions of the CCR, this does not automatically mean that they will only judge according to the laws, treaties and regulations of the European Union. In any case, none of those denouncing the loss of Romanian sovereignty have explained which norms of European law are so bad that their application would seriously and irreparably harm Romania.
As for Romania's status as “colony”, here we are dealing with a thesis intensely promoted by Russian and pro-Russian propaganda and it is a direct continuation of the Cold War theses regarding the usurping and exploitative West. Romania is the one that asked to join the EU and made a commitment that, as a member, it would accept and adopt the common rules for all member states. Although Romania's economic and political strength is not as great as that of most member states (which may translate into less influence at the EU level) it is, legally, a member that has exactly the same rights and obligations as and the others. It can be argued that, with the integration into the EU, all countries have given up a part of their sovereignty, but it should be noted that the main decisions of the EU are made with the consent of the member countries.
GRAIN OF TRUTH: In their current form, already voted and approved by Parliament, the three laws may set dangerous precedents for the independence of the judiciary, the accuracy of criminal investigations or meritocracy in the justice system.