It is a great chance for Romania that everything that gives real chills to the rest of Europe, all the authentic dangers threatening the evolution of other countries, end up as a parody here sooner or later.
It’s the same with Romanian sovereigntism, fortunately, I would say, falling into the hands of some clowns, limited and without a sense of ridicule.
In short, after they started to grow politically, George Simion and Diana Șoșoacă quarreled over the position of absolute leader. Mrs. Șoșoacă created her own pocket party, which she raised to unexpected percentages in polls, most of them taken from AUR.
So, when he had the chance, George Simion struggled to clip his wings. And the opportunity was the marital scandal that led Silvestru Șoșoacă to run on his own, certainly without a chance to win the mandate, but with the potential to decrease the score of his former consort, Simion's rival.
For this to happen, Silvestru Șoșoacă needed to present the 130 thousand signatures. It's not easy, especially in a short time, so George Simion would have ordered that Silvestru Șoșoacă be pushed towards candidacy through the shortcut of forgeries.
Because Mr. Simion doesn't even consider signature forgery a problem, as already seen in the interview conducted by Valeriu Nicolae, where he calmly said that no one collects them correctly and it's a pretense.
So, all in all, it was a dirty trick for a settling of scores between two political clowns already losing speed, turned into a criminal case for signature forgery. Silvestru Șoșoacă is a suspect under judicial control, Simion is to be questioned.
However, Romania's misfortune is that mediocrity, to put it elegantly, is specific to the country's key institutions.
First of all, I wonder how it is possible for the BEC, the institution meant to oversee the correctness of the candidacy procedures, to have swallowed some signatures reeking of forgery from a mile away.
If we were to listen to Mrs. Șoșoacă, which is certainly difficult, there would be some complicity behind the acceptance of these lists, leading even to areas of pseudo-press.
Secondly, the way the General Prosecutor's Office acted is debatable. Far be it from me to think that a possible forgery of signatures should be excused as a minor offense. On the contrary, a decisive initial action that also serves as an example for amateurs is welcome.
Whether the signatures are many or few, whether the time for collection is long or short, can be discussed. What is certain is that the response to possible legislative exaggerations is not committing a crime.
But what is the reason for a strong action just a few days before the elections, on such a sensitive electoral ground?
For days on end, a huge propaganda machine has been carrying out a broad action not to investigate the facts imputed by the DNA to certain individuals, which would be absolutely legitimate, but to authentically demonize the Romanian Justice as a whole, projected as 100% the result of the action of occult forces.
In these conditions, how tempted can many people be to believe in the victimization howls of George Simion and engage in a mobilization that AUR seemed to have lost? We shall see. And if AUR is good at something, it is good at victimization.
If George Simion ends up at PICCJ for questioning, he will surely do so with fanfare and pomp, a few days before the elections, in a spotlight that was missing throughout the campaign.
And even if some of his supporters would be willing to admit that the signatures are false, as George Simion himself told Valeriu Nicolae in the interview, one might wonder if only AUR and Silvestru Șoșoacă are guilty and not perhaps the rest are protected by, you guessed it, the parallel state.
Without even mentioning the fact that there is a clear political beneficiary of the whole story, Diana Șoșoacă, whose signatures seem to have interested no one.
The legal truth cannot be established until Sunday. So, the match of these days will be one of perception with a direct effect on the elections. Something a Prosecutor's Office should not take on.
Of course, the Justice calendar is independent of the political one and a political reason can always be found for why an action by the Prosecutor's Office would be politically inopportune.
But there are events of maximum importance and visibility, such as elections, around which the Prosecutor's Office should be cautious if, of course, there is no flagrancy or violence. Otherwise, it risks influencing the outcome.