The Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) asked the Constitutional Court (CC) to verify legal provisions concerning the term in office of the SCM member and the meetings of the Council. A decision to this effect was adopted in the April 4 meeting of the Council, which is the first held after Parliament appointed three new members from among non-judges, IPN reports.

At the beginning of the meeting, Nina Cernat, who is the only member who remained from the previous composition of the Council, said that after March 21, 2023 only one judge member with an extended term remained in the composition of the SCM and this was appointed acting head. This judge had limited powers and the goal was to ensure the judicial self-governing body and the courts of law operate well.

“The Superior Council of Magistracy as a collegial body fulfills its duties.  The meeting of the Superior Council of Magistracy is deliberative if it involves at least two thirds of the incumbent members (...) These legal provisions and the numerical composition of the Council generated heated discussions and harsh criticism among system judges and in society,” stated Nina Cernat.

According to her, the SCM has to work with an incomplete makeup and with limited powers that include the examination of issues related to the organization of the work of courts and the Council and it will not take decisions referring to the career of judges and the disciplinary punishment of judges.

SM member Alexandru Postica presented the first item from the agenda – the notification of the Constitutional Court. According to him, the law provides that the SCM members are obliged to fulfill their legal duties and to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms of judges, their honor and dignity. “The inclusion of the notification in today’s agenda shows the current SCM members want the High Court to clarify things and explain how these legal duties should be fulfilled,” stated Alexandru Postica.

Council member Ion Guzun said the law on the SCM clearly says that the Council can work if the meeting is attended by two thirds of the members and the decisions are taken by the votes of two thirds of the members.

The decision was taken by three votes in favor. Ion Guzun voted against.