The chairman of the Legal Committee with the Deputies' Chamber, Social Democratic Party (PSD) deputy Eugen Nicolicea stated on Friday that the preliminary opinion of the Venice Commission regarding the amendment of the Justice laws is a draft and contradicts a previous report of this body concerning the European standards on the independence of the judicial system.
He considers that this preliminary opinion is "a slap in the face" of those in the Opposition and the president who said that the Justice laws don't need to be amended.
"The Venice Commission is giving a slap in the face to those in the Opposition and Romania's president, because they have requested many times that nothing be amended, that things be delayed and have made all sorts of notifications to the Court [Constitutional Court of Romania, e.n.] so that they don't enter into force, be delayed, be blocked. The Venice Commission, you will notice, requests that certain amendments be made, and those who said nothing should be done are contradicted by it," Nicolicea told AGERPRES.
The Social-Democrat showed that as regards the substance, the Venice Commission contradicts itself.
"Presently, the report regarding the European standards on the independence of the justice system, adopted by the Venice Commission is in force, the official document, not a draft, which is what you have now. The document they are presenting now is a draft that cannot overrule what they voted last time, unless they will change that report. With regard to to respecting the independence of judges and prosecutors, in the proposed law and in the adopted law, you know there is a difference between what was proposed and what was adopted, it closely respects these European standards. Those who do not respect are those from the Venice Commission given that in the respective report adopted by them they talk about a multitude of models, no one model can be recommended, they say, and in most cases the high-ranking prosecutors are appointed either by the gov't or Parliament. No mention of the word 'president' in the adopted report. And I will tell you why. In many countries in Europe, there is no president. If they make now a recommendation in that sense, they need to modify their own report," Nicolicea affirmed.
He added that the law was not amended with respect to the nomination of high ranking prosecutors, it has stayed as before, and the president has a role in this regard.
"Moreover, if this where the problem stems from, you should note the following matter - the removal from office of the DNA [National Anticorruption Directorate, e.n.] head was carried out based on the old law, not the legislative proposal. (...) Discontent is therefore addressed at the old law," he mentioned.
Asked what would be the explanation that the two reports of the Venice Commission are different, Nicolicea replied: "We should draw up an official letter, ask them which report is the valid one."
"I wouldn't want to suspect any one of manipulation and bad faith, but not to read your own adopted documents seems rather farfetched, not to say they make fools of themselves," he added.
The Venice Commission recommended Romania on Friday to reconsider the nomination and removal from office of high ranking prosecutors, including by reviewing the respective provisions in the Constitution, in view of creating conditions for a neutral and objective nomination and dismissal process by maintaining the role of the institutions, such as the president and the Superior council of Magistrates (CSM), capable of balancing the influence of the Justice Minister.
The recommendation is part of the preliminary opinion, published on Friday, of the Venice Commission (consultative body of the European Union, made up of independent experts in constitutional law) regarding the amendment projects to the three amendment projects of the Justice laws in Romania.
Comentează