Alexandru Vasile, the judge of the Ploiești Court of Appeal, argues that the decision by which the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) annulled the elections of 2024 is “illegal”, invoking several arguments, according to the motivation of the decision.
Motivating the decision of the Ploiești Photo Court of Appeal: Shutterstock
The magistrate emphasizes that the decision by which the CCR annulled the elections of 2024 “is an administrative act of normative character”, Which would justify his judgment by a litigation-administrative section.
“The Constitutional Court does not pronounce generally mandatory decisions, but pronounce decisions”
“In the present case, the Court finds that the contested act is represented by the Decision of the Constitutional Court no. 32 of December 6, 2024 regarding the annulment of the electoral process regarding the election of the President of Romania of 2024, published in the Official Gazette no.1231 of 06.12.2024, this decision being issued by the Constitutional Court in the exercise of the attribution provided by art. 146 letter f) of the Constitution, according to which the Constitutional Court «f) watches to respect the procedure for the election of the President of Romania and confirms the results of the suffrage». In the exercise of this attribution, in accordance with the provisions of the above mentioned Romanian Constitution and of art. 11 para. (1) point B, letter a) of Law no. 47/1992, the Constitutional Court does not pronounce generally compulsory decisions, but pronounce decisions, the act challenged in the present case bearing the name of “decision””, It is mentioned in the motivation.
Regarding the suspension of the execution of the decision by which the CCR annulled the elections of 2024, the judge invokes more “reasons for illegality”.
The Court finds that, by the request for a trial, a first reason for illegality invoked by the applicant, refers to the fact that, to the issuance of the Decision no. 32 of December 6, 2024, “the Constitutional Court committed an excess of power”.
Also, the judge claims that the RCC could not be notified ex officio to cancel the 2024 elections. Another “reason for illegality” invoked by the judge is that the CCR gave the decision to cancel the elections “in violation of the term until this possibility could have been questioned”.
“In the present case, in addition to the fact that there was no request to cancel the elections as stipulated by the mentioned provisions, the annulment of the electoral process was ordered by the Constitutional Court after the voting process for Tour II had begun, without waiting for the closure and with the violation of its previous decision no. 31 of December 2, 2024, which validated the results of the first rugging tour”, According to the cited motivation.
Besides, the judge shows, “Once the 1st tour had been validated, the Constitutional Court could cancel only the second round. “Another” reason for illegality “invoked would be that the CCR decided to cancel the elections with” violation of the conditions (…) necessary”.
The judge also stressed that “The cancellation of the electoral process (…) from 2024 creates a serious possible disturbance of the functioning of the public authority represented by the President of Romania, from the perspective of affecting the representativeness of Romania externally”.
“The Constitutional Court exercised the sovereignty of the Romanian people in their own name”
In the motivation it is also emphasized that by canceling the elections “The principle of security of legal relationships is prejudiced“, But also of sovereignty”as a constitutional principle”.
“The Constitutional Court exercised the sovereignty of the Romanian people in their own name, imposing on the Romanian people an non -law president, appointed by the Constitutional Court, with the serious violation of the provisions of the Romanian Constitution, although, according to art. 142 para. (1), the Constitutional Court should have been the guarantor of the supremacy of the Constitution”, It is shown in the reasoning.
“The motivation of the Constitutional Court of Romania to annul the Tour II is considered” shabby “”
The judge gives as an example in the motivation and the index of democracy for 2024, made by Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU):
“It is also worth mentioning that, in the Index of Democracy for 2024, made by Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), Romania was relegated from “deficient democracy” to “hybrid regime”, the main reason indicated in the report being “controversial cancellation” and “in unclear circumstances” of the presidential elections of the Romanian Court. Considered “shabby”, taken on the basis of “obscure reports of Russia’s interference information services”, in which “the evidence was, at best, questionable””.
The Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) appealed with appeal the decision of the Ploiești Court of Appeal, issued on Thursday, April 24, by which the decision of the Supreme Court was suspended on the annulment of the elections on December 6, 2024.
