Appellate court presidents denounce anti-judiciary 'hate' campaign: abject terms, manipulation and lies

Romanian appellate court presidents are calling out a "hate" campaign waged against magistrates under the pretext of the reform of length of service pensions, arguing that under the guise of this "reform", the political class actually intends to limit access to justice for millions of people affected by the austerity measures announced by the government.

The judges also denounce the systematic attack on the judiciary carried out "in utterly abject terms" by politicians, in a campaign based on "manipulation, lies and on turning the population hostile" against this category of professionals.

"The presidents of the courts of appeal condemn the repeated, unfounded, insulting and destructive attacks carried out in a sustained manner against judges, with the clear aim of weakening the strength of the judiciary in its relations with the other two powers, especially the executive, under the pretext of the 'reform' of length of service pensions, with the effect of discrediting the judiciary, and with direct consequences on the citizens' right to impartial justice," reads the statement signed by 16 presidents of courts of appeal, including the head of the Bucharest Military Court of Appeal.

Recent debates - they say - have been marked by aggressive rhetoric, unfair generalizations and labeling intended to fuel a hostile attitude towards the judicial system, in full disregard of the fact that the status of the judge is based on international, not national standards, which arise from the specific nature of the function, responsibility, legal incompatibilities and professional prohibitions, as well as from the need to ensure their independence in relation to the other powers of the state. "The real purpose of this campaign (...) is to intimidate judges and destroy the citizens' trust in the justice system, precisely at a time when the austerity measures planned by the government will affect millions of citizens," the statement notes.

The heads of the appellate courts draw attention that, absolutely predictably for periods of economic crisis and austerity, the number of disputes between citizens and the state will skyrocket, and the active judges will have this wave of litigations on their hands, but for this they need to enjoy true independence and the necessary resources for handing down correct rulings, within a reasonable time. "A weakened judiciary, with insufficient and disheartened human resources that are systematically under attack, often in utterly abject terms" in a campaign based on manipulation, lies and on turning the population hostile, does not benefit the citizen, who in turn becomes weak in their relations with the state. The tendency of the political class to hinder, in various ways, the citizens' access to justice is obvious and it is our duty, as judges, to expose it as such," declare the presidents of the courts of appeal.

They also bring to mind two Constitutional Court rulings requiring the legislator to amend the law so as to allow the citizens to have access to justice, a fact the lawmakers completely ignored.

"The citizens' access to justice to defend their salary rights was severely limited by the adoption of OUG No. 62/2024, whose effect was that of blocking the course of trials before first instance courts and stifling the High Court of Cassation and Justice through hundreds of requests to issue preliminary rulings in such cases," the signatory magistrates also said.

They also denounce the double standard in the government's communication about the pension reform: in the case of magistrates - "hate campaign", in the case of the military personnel - including the Gendarmerie and intelligence services - "any amendment must be made only after extensive consultation".

"Last but not least, we note that the prompt institutional reactions of the Supreme Council of Magistrates, dismantling false information circulated in public, are either ignored or presented in a truncated manner, which once again proves that the purpose of this campaign is not that of a loyal consultation between the powers of the state, but to weaken and subdue the judiciary," the cited source states.

The 16 appellate court presidents conclude their statement by asking "all actors involved to cease the campaign intended to undermine the independence of the judiciary and to vilify the judges, who remain loyal to the law and the Constitution despite being often overworked, having insufficient resources and being subjected to constant pressure."