Romania lives in these days a moral revelation: we discover, with a shamanic-collective emotion, that the judges have great pensions, the criticism of extermination of the magistrates being made in the spirit of herd, sociological at Gustave Le Bon.
Photo webp
The government plays the role of the knight of social justice, the magistrates respond with constitutional arguments, and the Romanians assist fascinatingly, with the same pleasure with which they look at the island of love or a scandal from Măruță. I don't understand almost anything but they want blood.
Everyone talks about principles.
Judges must be paid well. Not because it would be gods, but because the temptations are many and the resistance is a limited resource. A salary and a decent pension do not guarantee justice but a small income is sure.
The problem is that we came to confuse the income with virtue – as if integrity had an hour rate, as at the brothel.
The real problem is not as long as I get now, but how I got here.
When the Romanian state invited the magistrates in the system, no one was scandalized by salaries, pensions or bonuses. It was, to be honest, a decent offer in a period when too few wanted their robe. There was no public revolt then, no criticism of “privileges”. The offer was on the table and everyone seemed to agree.
Aaaaa and not forget! Law 303/2004 on the status of judges and prosecutors was adopted during the Nastase Government, promulgated by President Ion Iliescu and published in the Official Gazette no. 576 of June 29, 2004. Obviously, after years, the magistrates, in privacy, to the vote, were always with the Swedish plaque …
But let's go back, for many years later, we are surprised that the offer exists.
Yes, maybe the state was generous, but the state made the promise! It is, as it would be said, stupid to change your mind after fifteen years and say, “We looked on the bill, it's a lot.”
I understand the frustration of magistrates. Partly I accept it.
But let's be honest to the end: the offer has improved alone, over time, by creating ex Nihilo privileges, and more simply, through judicial decisions that pushed the guilds over what the state had assumed.
And then, yes, I understand the dissatisfaction of other social categories. It is difficult to explain to a teacher, seller or doctor that a system that writes its own benefits also talks about “fairness”.
But let's go back to “divinity”
Let's be serious: in many courtrooms, the atmosphere is less about “equality of weapons” and more about “tuna hierarchy”.
On the podium, the senior with robe. Some judges concern the lawyers from above. In the room, lawyers, sometimes, are for judges only some petitioners with studies. It is a theater of small gestures, where everyone defends their pride as a constitutional right.
And somewhere between arrogance and fatigue, professional respect dies slowly.
The government suddenly discovered the privileges of justice to save the PNRR and decided to cut the “special” pensions of the magistrates.
The purpose? Not only a reform, but also a good photo for a communication campaign entitled “The power of the example”. The politicians felt that the magistrates had entered some public opposition.
And here comes the part that many magistrates do not understand or stubborn to accept: you will not win the public debate as you behave now, arrogant.
No matter how the battle ends on money and pensions, the arrogance label will remain.
Each time any magistrate will joke, one by one, an isolated case, the public reaction will be tough for the whole guild.
This is how the perception works: one mistakes, everyone pays.
And, unfortunately, in the war with public opinion, it does not win the one with justice in the law, but the one with the larger mouth.
Our justice resembles an orchestra in which everyone plays what he wants, but everyone believes are conductors. Politicians are more heard, magistrates believe the score, and the citizens … are just there to pay.
The dignity mixed with pride and diluted in procedures.
Independence turned into a magic word that opens doors, but closes ears.
Independence does not defend itself through communications. Defends itself in the silence of a well -written decision.
And respect is not required in serious tone, it is won by constant behavior.
Dear judges, pensions are not your original sin, but neither salvation.
If you want respect, you will not get it in communications and protests, but every minute of the courtroom, where a man comes and hopes that justice exists.
Maybe, one day, justice will be less about pensions and more about consciousness.
Until then, let us no longer argue who is more holy. That in this story, if we look closely, we all carry a small sin at the rever ….
