Senate's Popescu-Tariceanu on Venice Commission's position: Political, extremely thin opinion

he Venice Commission's opinion on the three drafts for amending the Romanian justice laws is "extremely thin", in fact "a political opinion" and, being preliminary, it should not have been made public, the Senate's Speaker and ALDE's chairman Calin Popescu-Tariceanu said on Sunday.

"Such a document, called 'preliminary opinion', should not have been made public, because this entails that it is to be altered. I do not know what the procedures are for reaching the preliminary opinion, but the first remark I want to make - this document is a document which, from a legal point of view, seems to me to be extremely thin. It is a political document, it is a political opinion expressed by the Venice Commission. It is not normal, the Venice Commission had to analyze the juridical topics, not political options. (...) The Venice Commission is treating these things with a superficiality that frightens me. It is actually scaring me. With regard to our political choices in the field of criminal policy, in the field of judicial organization, I think the filters we had and that worked, including at the Constitutional Court, were enough," Popescu-Tariceanu said in a telephone interview with the private broadcaster Romania TV.

The Venice Commission (the Council of Europe's consultative body, made up of independent experts in the area of constitutional law) published on Friday its preliminary opinion on the three draft amendments to the Romanian justice laws, the law on judicial organization, the law on the Superior Council of Magistracy and the law on the status of judges and prosecutors, on which both the President of Romania, Klaus Iohannis, and the Monitoring Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe demanded the opinion of the Commission.

Among other things, the Venice Commission has recommended that Romania reconsider the system of appointing and dismissing senior prosecutors, including by revising the respective provisions in the Constitution, in order to create the 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 Magistracy, capable of balancing the influence of the minister of justice. AGERPRES