Simion and Georgescu want the suspension of the president, but without a constitutional basis. Expert: “They are just political statements”
The efforts of Călin Georgescu and the leader of the AUR, George Simion, to initiate a campaign for the suspension of the president Nicuşor Dan are against the very provisions of the Constitution that the two invoke as an argument. They claim that the president does not respect the vote of Romanians, but the Basic Law only provides for the obligation to consult the political parties, not the appointment of a prime minister from a certain political formation.
Călin Georgescu and George Simion and Nicusor Dan PHOTO AFP
“Adevărul” spoke with the constitutionalist Liviu Drăgănescu and the sociologist Barbu Mateescu about the strategy and approach initiated by Călin Georgescu and taken over by George Simion. According to them, the suspension of the president can only be ordered in case of an obvious and particularly serious violation of the Constitution.
“The suspension from office of the President of Romania is regulated by Article 95 of the Romanian Constitution and it is about the extent to which the President of Romania, in case he violates the provisions of the Constitution, can be suspended from office by the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, in joint session.
In this situation, it is not about fulfilling the constitutional conditions, in my opinion, regarding the suspension of the President of Romania, i.e. they are political statements without a concrete constitutional reference to the respective articles, i.e. the suspension from office of the President of Romania. The constitutional conditions are those serious facts that violate the provisions of the Constitution and after that the respective procedure is referred to, which is obviously not the case now. The fact that they did not nominate a prime minister from the parties that did not make a majority does not mean that he violated the Constitution”says Liviu Drăgănescu.
“An attempt is made to capture the emotion from the sovereign space opposite the fall of the drone”
Barbu Mateescu says that AUR's strategy is related to recent events and is thought of as a mechanism for the party to show its own voters the limits it has when it does not hold power in Parliament. At the same time, the message reinforces the call for early elections, also present in George Simion's post.
“There can be many. First of all, let's note that Georgescu started the campaign and, previously, Diana Șoșoăca's party even started the procedures. The goal of the two (separately or in collaboration) is to expose the lack of power of the AUR, since the AUR cannot carry out the suspension without a parliamentary support that does not exist at the moment and that is not foreseeable to appear in the near future. Secondly, they are trying to take over the emotion from the sovereignist space opposite the downing of the drone, the long period without a new government, etc.”
The proposal overlaps with a wave of dissatisfaction already existing in society towards Nicuşor Dan, but the sociologist believes that the president should not respond to these accusations or enter into the logic of such messages.
“Yes. If the sovereignist leaders were absent from the discussion, other vectors could appear to attract their voters. In the current context, where the suspension has limited chances to even be discussed in Parliament, such a communication would signal fragility and nervousness on the part of the president. To communicate with the sovereignist public, a presidential speech in itself is completely insufficient – on TikTok, in the sovereignist space on Facebook and on Realitatea, only edited clips will reach propagandistic, not the information itself”says Barbu Mateescu.
The government during the former Coalition PNL-PSD-USR-UDMR Photo: gov.ro
How PSD tries to control the Tomac Government from the shadows: the great vulnerability that changes the success of the 2015 strategy
Why is the Constitution not provided for a term for the establishment of the Government
Another argument invoked in the public space is that the president would not respect the will of the people, but Liviu Drăgănescu shows that the constitutional provision referred to leaves room for interpretation.
“Regarding the will of the people, it really is a much broader term, much more general. But the president cannot be accused here, because the will of the people means both the party on the 1st place, that is the PSD, the party on the 2nd place and after that we start in that order, obviously. That is, the president cannot be accused here. But there are no grounds for suspending the president, on the Constitution, as it results from the architecture of the fundamental law.
To the extent that, as the Constitution states, there is not a majority of the party that won the elections or, in our country, because there is no party that won the elections, of the parties that can form a coalition, then the president can nominate another prime minister, which happened in our country as well.
I mean, in my opinion, here the president did not violate the Constitution in consultations in any way”says the specialist.
Regarding the fact that the president is not forced by a deadline given by the Constitution to ensure that a full Government is installed, he says that amending the fundamental law in this sense could represent a constraint and there is no need for such deadlines.
Regarding the fact that the president is not obliged by the Constitution to ensure the investiture of a Government with full powers within a certain period, he says that the introduction of such a provision in the Basic Law could represent an unnecessary constraint and that there is no need for such deadlines:
“To the extent that, as the Constitution states, there is not a majority of the party that won the elections or, in our country, because there is no party that won the elections, of the parties that can form a coalition, then the president can nominate another prime minister, which also happened here. I mean, in my opinion, here the president did not violate the Constitution in consultations in any way.
Some precise deadlines could be set here. But I don't know if it would be good, because to the extent that the political class can decay, it cannot agree on these terms”.
An institutional risk: an interim Government during the parliamentary vacation
The constitutionalist draws attention to another term with practical relevance, the approach of the parliamentary vacation. Normally, Parliament empowers a Government with full powers to issue ordinances in the areas provided by law, including for situations that may arise during the summer. If the Bolojan Government would remain interim, this procedure could no longer be applied, which would leave Romania without an executive with full powers to quickly adopt measures in emergency situations.
Nicușor Dan puts pressure on the parties before the vote to invest the Tomac Government: “Romanians care little about our debates”
“The Bolojan government, although dismissed by a parliamentary majority, remains in office. Here is a problem because, regardless of political sympathies or antipathies, to the extent that a government, being dismissed, I repeat, by the Parliament, cannot adopt an ordinance. Let us think that the parliamentary vacation will come.
Here is the big problem and to what extent citizens care about what is happening in the Republic. We always know that the Parliament empowered the Government to issue ordinances during the parliamentary vacation. Why? Because there may be situations that require this. Here is a big problem for us, that we now have an interim government that cannot issue an emergency ordinance. That is, the Parliament can no longer empower him and he can no longer issue an emergency ordinance. Do you understand why this is a very serious problem? That will have to be debated in the public space.
Already today, the ministers who replaced the PSD ministers are no longer in office, they are no longer in office”concludes the specialist.
