‹ Back
Ortodoxinfo (Romanian) · Aug 16 View source View full article on hyper.nooz.ai

Președinții a 50 de tribunale din România cer clarificări despre întâlnirea dintre șefa CCR, Simina Tănăsescu și Ilie Bolojan

🌐 Quote shown in the original Romanian — English translation below

… Elena-Simina Tănăsescu, pe atunci consilier prezidențial, și-a dat demisia în urma controverselor generate de întâlnirea cu un judecător al CCR. Ei reamintesc poziția exprimată atunci de Administrația Prezidențială, potrivit căreia era „inadmisibil” ca în spațiul public să planeze suspiciunea unei posibile imixtiuni în activitatea Curții, și susțin că același standard trebuie să rămână valabil și astăzi.

Aceste exigențe sunt aplicabile în egală măsură justiției constituționale. În cauza Sieć

Obywatelska Watchdog Polska c. Poloniei, hotărârea din 21 martie 2024, Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului a subliniat interesul public al informațiilor privind agendele întâlnirilor unor judecători ai Curții Constituționale, într-un context în care existau suspiciuni privind contacte cu un om politic interesat de o cauză aflată în examinarea Curții”, se precizează în comunicat.

Ce explicații cer concret președinții curților de apel

Judecătorii vor să fie clarificat, în primul rând, dacă întâlnirea dintre Elena-Simina Tănăsescu și Ilie Bolojan a avut loc. Dacă răspunsul este da, ei cer să se spună în ce condiții s-a desfășurat, de ce a avut loc în biroul președintelui Senatului, care a fost motivul întâlnirii și despre ce s-a discutat. Potrivit …

🇬🇧 English translation

Presidents of 50 Romanian courts demand clarifications regarding the meeting between CCR head Simina Tănăsescu and Ilie Bolojan

Presidents of 50 courts in Romania are requesting public clarifications regarding the meeting between the President of the Constitutional Court, Elena-Simina Tănăsescu, and the dismissed Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan, which public information suggests took place in the office of the President of the Senate. The magistrates warn that a lack of transparency could affect the appearance of impartiality of the Court and public trust in its decisions.

In a joint statement, the court presidents invoke the standards of independence and impartiality applicable to the judiciary and maintain that these must be respected "with the same rigor" in the case of constitutional jurisdiction.

Magistrates demand clarification on the framework of the Bolojan – Tănăsescu meeting

"The independence and impartiality of justice imply not only the absence of any external influence, but also the removal of any appearance that could generate legitimate doubts. Transparency represents, from this perspective, an essential guarantee of public trust in the act of justice," the statement reads.

They are requesting clarification on the existence and framework of the meeting, the reason why it allegedly took place in the office of the President of the Senate, as well as the purpose and topics of the discussion. This move comes ahead of an important CCR session scheduled for Monday, August 17, in which the Court is set to debate, among other things, complaints regarding the Integrity Law.

Court presidents invoke European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence

The court presidents also invoke the 2018 precedent, when Elena-Simina Tănăsescu, then a presidential advisor, resigned following controversies generated by a meeting with a CCR judge. They recall the position expressed at that time by the Presidential Administration, according to which it was "inadmissible" for suspicion of possible interference in the Court's activities to hover in the public sphere, and they maintain that the same standard must remain valid today.

"These requirements are equally applicable to constitutional justice. In the case of Sieć Obywatelska Watchdog Polska v. Poland, the judgment of March 21, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights emphasized the public interest of information regarding the meeting agendas of Constitutional Court judges, in a context where there were suspicions regarding contacts with a political figure interested in a case under examination by the Court," the statement specifies.

What specific explanations are the appellate court presidents requesting?

The judges want it clarified, first and foremost, whether the meeting between Elena-Simina Tănăsescu and Ilie Bolojan actually took place. If the answer is yes, they demand to know under what conditions it occurred, why it took place in the office of the President of the Senate, what the reason for the meeting was, and what was discussed. According to the press release, these explanations are necessary to stop speculation and to protect public trust in the CCR.

"To eliminate any speculation and to protect public trust in the constitutional jurisdiction, we consider it necessary to clarify the information that has appeared publicly regarding the existence and the framework in which the meeting took place, the reason for its occurrence in the office of the President of the Senate, as well as the purpose and the topics discussed," declared the judges of the Courts of Appeal in Romania.

Judges say the same rules must be respected at every level of justice

The final message from the presidents of the courts of appeal is that independence, impartiality, and transparency should not only be demanded of judges in ordinary courts. According to the press release, the same rules must be respected with the same strictness by the institutions that administer constitutional justice.

In conclusion, the heads of the courts of appeal state that respecting these rules strengthens institutions rather than weakening them. According to the statement released by the judges, transparency and respect for the independence of justice are necessary so that people can have trust in the state institutions.

‹ Back