During the Supreme Magistracy Council’s (CSM) plenary meeting on Thursday, High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) President Cristina Tarcea announced that she will notify the Supreme Defence Council (CSAT) and the Judicial Inspection (IJ) after an association accused her of allegedly “repeatedly frequenting” the Romanian Intelligence Service’s (SRI) protocol villas. She said that that is “a horrible, general manipulation” meant to jeopardise the act of justice and “to overshadow the judges who must issue solutions in delicate cases during this period.”
The ‘Coalition of Romanians in the U.S.’ has sent the CSM an address in which it asks the Council to ask the Supreme Court President for “explanations regarding the repeated visits she allegedly paid to SRI villas.”
Cristina Tarcea said during the CSM’s plenary meeting that she has the notification in her possession and that it is “a horrible, general manipulation” meant to jeopardise the act of justice.
Tarcea complained that pressure is put on magistrates and such accusations only serve to overshadow the judicial system and the act of justice, announcing she will notify the CSAT and IJ.
“But, precisely because we are not living in a normal society, precisely because we are witnessing a horrible, general manipulation, whose only purpose is to jeopardise, eventually, the act of justice, I want to inform you that I will personally notify, later today, the Supreme Defence Council and I will likewise notify the Judicial Inspection. I believe it’s time we put an end to these defamatory statements that lack any legal grounds, and those making them should bear the consequences,” Cristina Tarcea said.
She said we are living in a society “characterised by general paranoia, in which any weakness, real or unreal, is speculated in order to overshadow the act of justice and the judges who must issue solutions in delicate cases during this period.”
“I could care less about my image, but this image impacts the image of the High Court and the image of the judges who must issues some delicate and difficult solutions during this period,” Cristina Tarcea stated.
Regarding the accusations levelled against her, Cristina Tarcea said that the ICCJ’s relations with other institutions were within the institutional framework: “I’m telling you I wasn’t in the protocol houses, and all of the High Court’s relations with any kind of institutions were purely inter-institutional and purely within the limit of legal stipulations.”
Justice Minister Tudorel Toader also took part in the Supreme Magistracy Council’s meeting.
Supreme Court President on the amending of the Criminal Codes: There are many debatable issues
High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) President Cristina Tarcea announced on Thursday that she has followed the legislative process regarding the amending of the Criminal Codes and there are “many debatable issues,” pointing out that the final form of the bill must be seen.
“According to the legal provisions currently in force too, when one of the members of the panel is unable to attend, the chairperson of the panel or the chairperson of the court will sign, as the case may be. I too have seen, have followed the legislative process. There are many debatable issues, but we must start off from the premise that this is a first form, the legislation procedure will continue. When we felt that certain legal dispositions were not in line with the constitutional dispositions or were not corroborated with other laws, we made written observations,” Cristina Tarcea stated.
The Supreme Court President said that one must wait and see the final form of the bill.
“I too have understood that a new reason for revision is being introduced, but I want to remind you that last year there was a similar modification to the Civil Procedure Code, the intent being to revise all decisions taken before the legislative proposals came into force. That bill was challenged, by the High Court, at the Constitutional Court, and the Constitutional Court declared these legal dispositions to be unconstitutional. Consequently, we have a precedent,” Cristina Tarcea added.
Asked whether there is the risk of a negative impact, the ICCJ President answered affirmatively.
“There is the risk of a negative impact, because if the idea that all decisions pronounced before the coming into force of a new law can be revised were to be accepted, you realise what that would mean for the volume of activity. Everyone will exercise their right to revision and all decisions pronounced since the coming into force of the Constitution will be attacked, which, I believe, is a disaster from all standpoints, not to mention the fact that the idea of stability of juridical decisions is undermined,” Tarcea added.
