After 6 years and at least four decisions of unconstitutionality on laws aimed at reforming special pensions, a majority of CCR judges validate the law assumed by the Romanian Government in front of Parliament, which reduces the amount of magistrates’ pensions to 70% of the average salary income, and raises the retirement age to 65 with a grace period of 15 years.
The Constitutional Court’s decision caused a rare moment in Romanian society where the majority of public opinion applauded the elimination of some elite privileges, but it sparked great dissatisfaction within the current leadership of magistrates, court presidents, the CSM, and the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
No political party in parliament challenged the special magistrates' pension law at the CCR, but it was quickly challenged by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, led by the famous judge Lia Savonea.
In the public opinion, the situation was perceived as an epic confrontation between Lia Savonea, fighting for magistrates' privileges, and citizens accusing corruption in the justice system and the exaggerated incomes of judges and prosecutors upon retirement, as well as the low age at which they could give up work.
The confrontation was to be arbitrated by the Constitutional Court in one of the longest, most tense, and closely watched debates on validating or invalidating a law adopted by the Romanian Parliament.
Simina Tănăsescu, President of the CCR, on the law reducing magistrates' pensions
Perhaps after the law comes into force, new practices or aspects may emerge that will lead to other approaches. Perhaps the law itself will not stand the test of time, given the high frequency of legislative changes.
"The Constitutional Court's position has been expressed once again in a decision regarding a notification," stated Simina Tănăsescu, in a lengthy interview given to spotmedia.ro, which can be read and watched in full on Monday, March 9.
"The Constitutional Court has verified the constitutionality of a law. A law that does not target the overall functioning of justice, nor even all the status elements of the magistrate profession – an extremely remarkable, honorable, and meritorious profession – but a detail, an aspect, a detail…," added the President of the CCR.
In the discussion, Judge Simina Tănăsescu presented secret deliberation as a common method in the process of making constitutional decisions within the CCR, arguing that public opinion's interest has a smaller impact than believed in the Court's internal debates.
"This aspect (i.e., magistrates' pensions) has been addressed by other legal acts, some of which the Court has declared constitutional, others unconstitutional. It is a field of social protection regulation that, not only in Romania but also in other countries, experiences a very high dynamic," stated Simina Tănăsescu, President of the CCR, for spotmedia.ro.
"The Constitutional Court, through this decision, in no way positioned itself against the judiciary power. The judiciary power is one of the three powers in the state. I do not think its extremely important value for the state's functioning can be contested or denied, and that was not the subject of our case," Judge Simina Tănăsescu added, in the upcoming interview to be published.
On Monday, March 9, you can read and watch the full video recording of a long conversation with Judge Simina Tănăsescu, who currently leads the Constitutional Court of Romania.