On Friday, the Constitutional Court of Romania decided to invalidate the entire presidential election process. As a result, the election will be conducted anew, with the government tasked with setting a new election date and timetable for the necessary actions.
In its statement, the Constitutional Court referenced Article 146f of the Romanian Constitution, which grants it the authority to ensure compliance with the presidential election procedure and approve the voting results. The judges reached this decision unanimously.
“The Constitutional Court, in order to ensure the fairness and legality of the electoral process, exercised its powers provided for by Article 146 letter f) of the Constitution and, unanimously, decided the following:
1. Under Article 146 letter f) of the Constitution, it annuls the entire electoral process regarding the election of the President of Romania, carried out based on Government Decision no. 756/2024 regarding the establishment of the date of the elections for the President of Romania in 2024 and Government Decision no. 1061/2024 regarding the approval of the Calendar Programme for the implementation of the necessary actions for the election of the President of Romania in 2024.
2. The electoral process for the election of the President of Romania will be resumed in its entirety. The government will establish a new date for the election and a new calendar programme to implement the necessary actions.
3. This decision is final and generally binding. It is published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, and brought to public notice.
The arguments retained in the motivation of the solution pronounced by the Plenum of the Constitutional Court will be presented in the content of the decision, which will be published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I.”
The Court convened urgently following multiple complaints about the conduct of the first round of voting, which took place on November 24. There were also revelations concerning abuses in the campaign of one of the candidates. These complaints referenced documents declassified by the Supreme Council of National Defense (CSAT), indicating that the campaign of the pro-Kremlin far-right candidate Calin Georgescu was allegedly influenced by organised manipulation from outside the country. Georgescu received the most votes in the first round of voting.
Outgoing President Klaus Iohannis’s term ends on December 21.
Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu, leader of the Social Democratic Party (PSD) and candidate in the first round of the presidential election, praised the Court’s decision. Ciolacu, who finished third in the first round and was therefore excluded from the decisive second round, wrote on Facebook that “The Constitutional Court’s decision to invalidate the presidential elections is the only correct solution following the declassification of documents from the Supreme National Defense Council (CSAT) meeting. These documents reveal that the election results in Romania were significantly distorted due to Russian intervention.”
Ciolacu highlighted the need to re-hold the presidential elections and called for an investigation to identify those responsible for the attempt to manipulate the election outcome.
“Romanians deserve clear answers from the authorities, backed by solid evidence, as public trust in state institutions and democratic processes—fundamental to the functioning of our country—depends on this investigation,” Ciolacu said.
Lasconi says the Court’s decision is a violation of democracy
Elena Lasconi, the president of the liberal Union for the Salvation of Romania (USR) party, a Renew Europe member, was set to participate in the second round of the presidential elections in Romania. She said the Constitutional Court’s decision was a violation of democracy.
“This is the moment when the Romanian state has trampled on democracy. God, truth, the Romanian people, and the law will prevail. We should have honoured the vote to respect the will of the Romanian people,” Lasconi stated, as reported by the media.
Lasconi, who believes she would have been elected if the Court had not invalidated the electoral process, underlined that in a democracy, “presidents are not appointed through backroom negotiations.”
“The decision of the Constitutional Court is illegal, immoral, and undermines the essence of democracy, which is voting,” declared Lasconi.
