How to explain the BEC decision against the registration of the United Right Alliance

How to explain the BEC decision against the registration of the United Right Alliance

Beyond the political victimization, the reasons why the United Right Alliance (ADU), USR-PMP-Forța Dreptei, is in a legal impasse are real. The Central Electoral Bureau (BEC) could not have made any other decision than rejecting the registration of ADU for the June 9 elections and, a day before, rejecting the PMP representative in BEC.

Why is PMP blocked?

Simply put, legally speaking at this moment, the president of PMP registered in the Party Registry, a kind of political Land Registry, is Cristian Diaconescu, not Eugen Tomac. So, the only one who can sign on behalf of PMP at this moment is Cristian Diaconescu.

To make it clearer, it's as if the landowner in the land registry is Ionescu, but the one who wants to sign the contract at the notary is his brother, arguing that the rest of the family wishes so. Surely the notary, in our case BEC, cannot validate such a thing.


The legal saga of PMP started in 2022 when Mr. Tomac convened a congress that installed him as the party president and attempted to make the modification in the Party Registry.

At first instance, he succeeded, after which the Bucharest Court of Appeal decided that the case should be retried by the TMB. Which is ongoing, with the next hearing on April 3.

In 2023, Mr. Tomac organized another congress and tried once again to register. Cristian Diaconescu challenges this at TMB, the decision was pronounced on February 2, 2024 and PMP, then Mr. Drulă considers it enforceable. It is not, the minute does not specify such.


The court sends the non-final and non-enforceable decision to the Parties Department for resolution when the decision becomes final, due to the absence or rejection of the appeal. The appeal was filed by Cristian Diaconescu and has the first hearing on April 3.


The problem was explained by the Bucharest Court of Appeal in the lawsuit brought by Eugen Tomac after AEP blocked PMP's subsidy, more precisely placed it in an escrow account until the signatures were clarified.


That is


So, at this moment, Mr. Tomac cannot sign on behalf of PMP because he is not registered as a representative of PMP in the Party Registry, and there is no final or even enforceable decision based on which the modification could be made.

What BEC noted in the decision rejecting the registration (here in full) is exactly the same. The one who signed the sales contract is not the owner in the Land Registry.


2019 Precedent

In 2019, BEC rejected the registration of the "2020 USR PLUS Alliance" for the European Parliament elections precisely because the founding protocol was signed by Dan Barna and Dacian Cioloș, while in the documents, the presidents of the two parties were Nicușor Dan and Daneș Raluca. The situation was the consequence of the challenge to the USR congress in 2017 lost by Nicușor Dan.


Even though he had resigned from the party in the meantime, Nicușor Dan re-enrolled in 2019 just to ratify the protocol: "There was this problem, the risk that an alliance that some people want to vote for may not be able to run. I don't know if it's too late, but the only alternative was for me to co-sign. To co-sign, I had to be a party member, because otherwise it would have been a forgery. The solution was to submit an enrollment request, which was approved last night by the Sector 6 branch. I signed as a member and as a president registered in the Registry of Political Parties. Once these enrollment formalities are completed, I will return to my initial position, as an independent."

Yes, the High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the alliance's appeal at that time, but in conditions where Nicușor Dan did not challenge Dan Barna's representation rights, and even collaborated, and the leadership structures were perfectly valid. The issue was then, indeed, a formal one, now it is truly a scandal about representation, and the entire party leadership, with all its structures, is uncertain.

What's Next

Whether the High Court of Cassation and Justice will overturn the BEC decision regarding ADU on Monday is difficult to anticipate. Legally speaking, it's hard to say. It remains to be seen if the appeal will be judged on the merits as long as it is filed by Eugen Tomac, who does not have the capacity as a representative of PMP.

It would be interesting for the High Court of Cassation and Justice to judge whether Mr. Tomac has this capacity, thus entering the substance of the dispute that is the subject of the two proceedings, the substance at TMB and the appeal at CAB, and transform a non-contentious procedure into a contentious one.

It also depends on whether the High Court of Cassation and Justice will consider that the non-registration of the president in the Registry is merely a strictly formal matter, as in 2019, or if it is just an element of an internal chaos, with all leadership bodies in disarray, therefore unable to make major decisions on behalf of the party until a definitive solution to the dispute.

If that's the case, ADU could consider that the High Court of Cassation and Justice has done them a huge legal favor and would encourage political pressure as a means to prevail.

The scandal, victimization, hysteria, threats, demonization of justice do not change some legal realities. I have heard the argument that law cannot override democracy. Wrong! Democracy without the rule of law does not exist.

Every day we write for you. If you feel well-informed and satisfied, please give us a like. 👇