Justice Minister Tudorel Toader stated on Tuesday, in Constanta, that he did not want to enter politics, pointing out that he is not structurally prepared to become a politician, to move from the rigorousness of criminal law to political discourse, stating that during the parliamentary elections of 2016 he was offered a seat on a political party’s list for the Senate, a party that is now in the Opposition. He did not name the said political party.
On Tuesday, at a press conference in Constanta, Tudorel Toader was asked whether he has joined the Social Democratic Party. He recounted that he could have entered Parliament two years ago, had he accepted an offer made by a party that is now in the Opposition.
“I finished my stint as judge in July 2016. In February 2016, I became rector of the University of Iasi. I suspended myself from that office to finish my mandate as judge, [then] I returned to be an active rector until I became minister. Some will be angry, but I assure you it’s true – during the parliamentary elections campaign I received an absolutely insistent offer to be first on the Senate list of a party that is representative in the Opposition today,” the Justice Minister stated.
He said he refused the offer because he is structurally unprepared to be a politician.
“I said no, arguing that I am not structurally prepared to be a politician. To move from the rigorousness of criminal law, the special part that includes the punishment, where you must know even a comma and a letter… it’s very far from a political discourse. I didn’t accept becoming member of the Senate or House, I didn’t join a party, nor am I the member of any party,” Tudorel Toader added.
“Upon revision of Constitution, procedure for tacit adoption must be removed”
On Tuesday, in south-eastern Constanta, Toader also stated that upon the revision of the Constitution, the provision concerning the tacit adoption of a legislative bill in Parliament must be removed.
Toader pointed out that according to the Constitution, a normative act must be adopted through both chambers of Parliament, the principle of bicameralism being respected only if the same regulatory goal of the legislative act is being discussed in each chamber.
He came with arguments through a present case, showing that “if in one chamber talks are being carried out about land registry and in another about topography, the bicameral principle being broken,” the adopted law was declared unconstitutional.
“We have, according to the Constitution, a bicameral system in the legislative process. Sometimes, by the nature or importance of the legislative act, the Chamber of Deputies is the first chamber and the Senate, the decision-making one, sometimes the other way around (…). The Constitution also permits that, if the first chamber does not debate a law within a certain timeframe, the law go to the decision-making chamber. There are many normative acts which pass undiscussed through the first chamber and are debated and adopted in the decision-making chamber. My opinion is that, upon reviewing the Constitution, the procedure concerning the tacit adoption must be removed, otherwise we proclaim the bicameral system to be constitutional, but we adopt the law only in the decision-making chamber,” Minister Toader said.