The European Court of Human Rights decided on Tuesday, unanimously, not to indicate any interim measure in the case opened by Călin Georgescu against Romania.
The case concerns the annulment by the Constitutional Court of the presidential elections in which Georgescu was a candidate.
Georgescu had requested the adoption of interim measures, specifically for the Constitutional Court's decision to be suspended and the electoral process to be restarted. In essence, Georgescu wanted the effects of the Constitutional Court's decision to be suspended until his case was resolved at the ECHR, "to prevent irreparable harm to the democratic rights of the applicant and Romanian citizens."
However, the ECHR rejected the request for interim measures as being outside the scope of Article 39 of the Court's Rules (which refers to interim measures), as reported in a statement by the ECHR sent to SpotMedia.ro.
The decision was adopted unanimously by a Chamber composed of seven judges.
In its decision, the Court recalled that interim measures are applicable only in cases of imminent risk of irreparable harm to a right provided for in the Convention which, given its nature, could not be remedied, and the person invoking such a right could not be restored to their previous situation or adequately compensated.
Moreover, such measures can only be adopted in exceptional circumstances, when necessary in the interest of the parties or for the proper conduct of the proceedings.
"The Court rejected Mr. Georgescu's request as being outside the scope of Article 39 of the Rules. Taking into account the request submitted, together with its grounds and reasons, the Court decided in accordance with its well-established practice that Mr. Georgescu's request does not concern irreparable harm within the meaning of Article 39 of the Court's Rules.
The Court considered that the request is outside the scope of Article 39 of the Court's Rules and decided not to indicate to the Romanian Government any of the interim measures requested," the ECHR statement said.
Ioana Ene Dogioiu explained as early as January 16 why the ECHR could not rule in favor of Călin Georgescu, to suspend the CCR decision and request a rerun of the second round:
"Călin Georgescu requests the suspension of Decision CCR no. 32/2004 and, implicitly, the rerun of the second round, until the substantive judgment.
According to the CEDO procedural specialists we spoke with, the request is inadmissible on its face. Such interim measures have been granted by the ECHR only when the rights protected by Article 2 regarding the right to life and Article 3 regarding the prohibition of torture of the Convention were at issue. For example, a decision to extradite a person to a country where there is suspicion that they will be killed or tortured can be suspended.
Entirely exceptional interim measures have also been granted in cases invoking Article 6 regarding the right to a fair trial and Article 8 regarding the right to private and family life. Obviously, Mr. Georgescu does not invoke any of the 4 articles that would warrant the requested interim measure.
In this case, on the contrary, the suspension could have definitive effects because it would lead to the rerun of the second round, the election of a new president, possibly even Călin Georgescu. And if the ECHR subsequently finds the application to be inadmissible or unfounded, therefore, the rerun of the second round was unnecessary."
Călin Georgescu invokes the right to free elections, violated by the suspension of the second round and the invalidation of votes without conclusive evidence; the lack of a transparent and consultative process that contravenes the right to a fair trial; the absence of a national mechanism to challenge the CCR decision.