The Senate adopted on Monday, as the decision-making chamber, the amendments to the three Laws on Justice –Law No. 303/2004 on the statute of judges and prosecutors, Law No. 304/2004 regarding the judicial organisation and Law No.317/2004 regarding the functioning and organisation of the Superior Council of Magistrates, following the Constitutional Court decisions.
The amendments to the Law No.303 /2004 were adopted by 83 votes “in favour,” and 36 “against”; the amendments to the Law No.304/2004 were adopted by 83 votes “in favour,” 35 “against” and no abstention. For the Law No.317/2004 there were recorded 82 votes “in favour,” 36 votes “against” and one abstention.
Senators belonging to the National Liberal Party (PNL), the Save Romania Union (USR) and People’s Movement Party (PMP) were against these laws. None of the amendments rejected by the Committee and supported in the plenary meeting received the necessary number of votes for adoption.
PNL to challenge judicial laws at the Constitutional Court once again
The National Liberal Party (PNL) announced on Monday, after the final report issued by the special committee that modified the judicial laws, that they will attack them once again at the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR), accusing that the committee’s meeting took place “under the empire of haste and superficiality.”
“The special committee’s meeting today was, likewise, under the empire of haste and superficiality, just like a good part of the proceedings of this committee took place. We were convened sometime around yesterday afternoon; until 10 a.m. this morning we weren’t given any of the amendments set to be debated,” Ioan Cupsa stated.
He says that the PNL will challenge the laws at the CCR, because there are “sufficient reasons for the texts that will be adopted as a result of the re-examination to be declared, to a significant extent, unconstitutional.”
“The PNL will attack [the judicial laws] once again at the Constitutional Court. Sufficient reasons have been created for the texts that will be adopted as a result of the re-examination to be declared, to a significant extent, unconstitutional. We will do it because texts that were not declared unconstitutional by the CCR were modified in this re-examination procedure. Likewise, they didn’t apply with correctness the CCR decision in the case of those texts that were declared unconstitutional. They added new texts to the texts that were previously adopted. We’ll see each other at the CCR and we’ll see each other afterward, again, in this re-examination procedure,” he added.