Society should think how the constitutional judges can be elected so that they remain separated from politics and are not chosen according to political criteria, ex-CC judge Victor Pușcaș, university professor, stated in a public debate titled “Constitutional Court swaying in the political wind: norm or deviation?”, which was held by IPN News Agency.
The professor said he expects a working group to be set up to work on the legislation concerning the Constitutional Court as some of the norms during the 25 years of its founding became outdated, while others run counter to new doctrines.
According to Victor Pușcaș, the CC should realize that it is indispensable in a state with the rule of law. “The rule of law cannot exist in the absence of an institution that will ensure conditionality control and will keep the subjects or branches of power within the limits of constitutionality,” he stated.
In another development, the ex-CC judges said there are a number of CC judgments that run counter to the Constitution. “The Constitution provides that no law, no legal act has legal effect if it goes against the Constitution. How can a decision that goes against the Constitution be made constitutional? This thing should be specified in the Constitution,” said Victor Pușcaș, noting that the Court by a decision ruled that the CC judgments are part of the Constitution, but this is incorrect as the Constitution provides that Parliament is the only legislative authority in the state.
The professor noted the constitutional judges should fulfill their duties and should be objective and just. “They should not pay attention to what a party says as any political force pursues its own goals and the opposition also has its own goals. The judges should not be blackmailable and should prove their independence and integrity each day or they should leave the post. The CC judgment should be based not on opportunity, but on constitutionality,” he stated.
The debate “Constitutional Court swaying in the political wind: norm or deviation?” was the 131st installment of the series of debates “Developing political culture through public debates” that are supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.