The Bucharest Court of Appeal (CAB) on Wednesday evening published the reasoning behind the decision by which the legal action opened by former presidential candidate Calin Georgescu regarding the annulment of the presidential election was rejected on December 31.
In essence, Judge Cristina Ardeleanu from the Bucharest Court of Appeal claims that the Central Electoral Bureau (BEC) implemented the Constitutional Court's (CCR) decision of December 6 to annul the election, and the decisions of the CCR are final and binding, therefore they cannot be analyzed in court.The judge also says that, by annulling the presidential election, the BEC did not violate the civil and fundamental rights of citizens provided for in the Constitution (the right to vote, to be elected).
"Regarding the violation, through the exercise of an abuse of power, by the Central Electoral Bureau, by adopting decisions no. 230D/06.12.2024 and no. 231D/07.12.2024, of the following civil rights: the right to vote; the right to be elected; the right of the Romanian people to exercise national sovereignty through its representative bodies, constituted through free, periodic and fair elections according to art. 2 paragraph. (l) of the Constitution with respect for the constitutional values provided for in art. 1 paragraph (3), respectively of the principle of legality provided for in art. l paragraph (5) of the Constitution, respectively to elect the President of Romania, given that the mandate of the current President expires on December 21, 2024; the right of Romanian citizens to live in a democratic and rule of law state in which the principle of legal certainty is being observed, the Court holds that these claims of the appellants and the accessory intervener are unfounded and will reject them. In order to reach this conclusion, the Court took into account the circumstance that through the contested decisions the BEC ensured the effectiveness of the mandatory provisions of the CCR ordered by Decision no. 32/06.12.2024. However, the BEC's ordering of technical measures regarding the organization of the electoral process, based on the powers recognized by Law no. 370/2004, in order to ensure the implementation of Decision no. 32/06.12.2024 of the CCR, is not likely to infringe the fundamental rights recognized by the Constitution," the CAB also says.Calin Georgescu and the Coalition for the Defence of the Rule of Law sued the Central Electoral Bureau and several institutions, requesting the annulment of two decisions of the BEC by which the entire electoral process was annulled and the presidential elections were ordered to be restarted from scratch, based on the decision of the Constitutional Court.
Regarding the issuance of BEC Decision no. 230D/06.12.2024 before the publication of CCR Decision no. 31/06.12.2024 in the Official Journal, the Court notes that the issuance of this decision was carried out by the Central Electoral Bureau based on the communique published by the Constitutional Court in which the solution pronounced in the meeting of December 6, 2024 was made public, a solution that is final and binding according to art. 147 of the Constitution.Also, regarding the Central Electoral Bureau's lack of competence to issue the two decisions annulling the elections, the CAB emphasises that the decisions pronounced by the Constitutional Court are generally binding, and ensuring the effectiveness of the Court's provisions may require concrete actions by the authorities with powers in the field in which the constitutional court ruled.
"In order to reach this conclusion, the Court took into account the circumstance that, given that the Constitutional Court of Romania ordered the annulment of the entire electoral process regarding the election of the President of Romania, carried out on the basis of GD no. 756/2024 regarding the establishment of the date of the elections for the President of Romania in 2024 and GD no. 1061/2024 regarding the approval of the calendar program for the implementation of the necessary actions for the election of the President of Romania in 2024, the respondent Romanian Government had no legal basis to proceed with the issuance of a government decision establishing the calendar of the second round of voting. Therefore, the Court finds that the existence of an unjustified refusal within the meaning of art. 2 para. (1) letter i) of Law no. 554/2004 cannot be held against the respondent Romanian Government regarding the establishment of the calendar applicable to the second round of voting," the CAB specifies.