BUCHAREST (Reuters) – Romania’s top court said a hardline nationalist candidate’s pro-Russian, anti-European Union and anti-NATO opinions made her ineligible to run for president in an upcoming election.
The Constitutional Court decided late on Saturday to remove Diana Sosoaca, leader of small ultra-nationalist eurosceptic opposition party SOS Romania from the list of candidates, but only published an explanation of its ruling late on Monday.
The weekend ruling had prompted politicians from across the political spectrum to voice concerns that the court was overstepping its powers.
It has also escalated tensions in the ruling coalition of leftist Social Democrats and centre-right Liberals, whose leaders are both running in the election, raising doubts about the two parties continuing in an alliance after polls.
European Union and NATO member Romania is due to hold a two-round presidential election on Nov. 24 and Dec. 8, with parliamentary polls in between.
Under the Constitution, any Romanian citizen over the age of 35 without a criminal record has the right to stand for president.
But the Court argued that Sosoaca’s public opinions made her unable to uphold the presidential vow to respect the Constitution and protect democracy should she be elected.
The nine-member court voted five in favour of removing Sosoaca to two against, with two absent.
The majority, including four judges proposed and backed by the ruling Social Democrats, said her statements “are sufficient grounds to indicate Diana Sosoaca as a presidential candidate questions and disregards the obligation to respect the Constitution through public speech calling for the removal of fundamental state values and choices, namely EU and NATO membership.”
Sosoaca, a European Parliament member, is known for anti-Semitic and pro-Russian views. But some politicians said removing her right to stand for election undermined the rule of law and set a dangerous precedent for eliminating candidates.
“No constitutional or legal provision enables the Constitutional Court to interpret its own remit and extend its area of rule by two new criteria for candidacies which are of a subjective nature and are not stated … in the law,” top court judge Laura Iuliana Scantei said in a dissenting opinion.
(Reporting by Luiza Ilie; editing by Alex Richardson)
Comments