The judicial overhaul

The amendment of the justice laws has sparked heated debates on the Romanian political scene.

Roxana Vasile, 21.12.2017, 13:51

Three justice laws have been amended and are to come into force urgently, as intended by the Social Democratic Party, the senior partner in the ruling coalition in Bucharest: the status of magistrates, the judicial organisation, and the activity of the Superior Council of Magistracy. The adoption of these laws has been rushed for a number of reasons, the government says, citing the fact that they haven’t been revised for the last 13 years, have given rise to anomalies related to the career of magistrates and have allowed for abuses by some prosecutors and judges, who, protected by impunity, have given verdicts that have later been overturned by the European Court of Human Rights, with the Romanian state forced to pay huge damages.

The right-wing opposition and some of the professionals working in the judiciary agree that the three laws need to be amended, but criticise the haste with which they have been passed, the lack of transparency in the drafting of the laws and the lack of comprehensive debates, given the importance of this legislation. Sections of civil society are also discontent and people have again taken to the streets to voice their outrage at the decisions taken by the ruling coalition.

Let’s hear from one of the people who protested on Wednesday evening near the Parliament building: “They are counting on the fact that people don’t understand what the independence of magistrates really means. The truth is that people understand exactly what it means. What they are doing through these hypocritical and perverse amendments is to put indirect and psychological pressure on magistrates.”

Fiercely criticised, one important amendment to the law on the status of judges and prosecutors is that Romania’s president is allowed to refuse only once the appointment of a proposed prosecutor general and the heads of the main prosecutor general offices. Secondly, judges and prosecutors are to be held accountable for any possible errors if they acted in bad faith and with negligence. As far the law on judicial organisation is concerned, its most controversial provision is that on the creation of a department that can investigate all crimes committed by magistrates.

The Social Democrat senator Adrian Tutuianu explains why the law on the organisation and functioning of the Superior Council of Magistrates had to be amended: “In these 13 years, the Superior Council of Magistracy has failed to fulfil its role, that of guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary and self-regulating the judicial system. Secondly, Law no. 303 from 2004 stipulates the separation of the decision-making competencies related to the career of magistrates, judges and prosecutors and this also requires the amendment of Law no. 317 from 2004. We also had to put into application several rulings of the Constitutional Court, some of which were issued 3 or 4 years ago.”

The amendments to the justice laws have come to the attention of the Council of Europe, that has called on Romania to offer clarifications on the controversial draft laws, after the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) has for the first time activated a procedure for exceptional circumstances.

President Klaus Iohannis, who is yet to sign these three laws, has warned the political class on the consequences of these changes with respect to Romania’s relationship with the European Union. He said calling a referendum on the subject of the overhaul of the judicial system is not the only ace up his sleeve.