I wouldn’t normally have any intention to comment on Mrs. Lasconi’s performance in the interviews given as a candidate. Everyone sees, hears, judges for themselves, and acts accordingly. But the latest displays of incompetence by Mrs. Lasconi have generated some extremely dangerous theses, which only serve to increase confusion among the electorate, already rather misled regarding the duties and powers of the President of Romania.
Mrs. Lasconi is extremely ill-prepared regarding the functioning of the state and international institutions directly related to her duties. I won’t list them, but practically every time she is taken out of slogans and spectacle, on my show on Europa FM, on Europa liberă, on Antena 3, most recently on G4, Mrs. Lasconi goes from one blunder to another.
I will choose just one example. Not from the foreign policy recital at Antena 3, nor from the one on defense and NATO at Europa Liberă, nor from the one on intelligence services at Europa FM, but from the one on justice at G4media.
It is not acceptable to keep insisting that the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) should investigate drug trafficking together with the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT).
"I know it's not their competence, but what stops them from working on it? Do you think that given the situation in Romania and the fact that it has become a phenomenon, politicians should not be involved in this matter?"
What do you mean work on it if it's not their competence? What stops them from working on drugs? The criminal law and the absolute nullity of sanctions. That's what it means not to know what the material competence of the prosecution offices, whose heads you appoint, entails. And regarding politicians, it seems like Mrs. Lasconi somehow lives with the impression that the DNA has exclusive competence over them regardless of the offense, be it corruption or drug trafficking.
Mrs. Lasconi is dissatisfied with the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM), but does not consider it necessary for it to no longer have exclusive power over the appointment of the leadership of the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ). Probably she does not know that the president no longer has any power in these appointments.She wants reform, but without changing the law. What do you mean?
Presidential Advisors
In her defense, even respectable voices are included, saying that it is not a problem for the president not to know, that's why he has advisors and a Minister of Foreign Affairs, it's important to be honest, with time he will learn. And she defends herself with brilliant advisors, whose names we do not yet know.
This solution is extremely dangerous.
Of course, no one knows everything, but when you want to hold a position as important as that of the president of the country, you should be at least literate in the fields and institutions related to its exercise. It's one thing to develop a foundation that already exists, to perfect yourself, to refine yourself, and another thing to start learning on the job.
Then, the individually elected president by millions of people is the holder of public trust, of the mandate, he carries the responsibility, he must make the decision and it must be a competent one. Yes, he has advisors, works with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, but they should not take the president's place, only complement the elements of vision.
When the president knows nothing, they practically become the president, and he has no way to discern, to understand if he is not being manipulated, if he is not being misled (some names around her at this moment increase my suspicions regarding a lack of political discernment).
At Europa FM, Mrs. Lasconi told me that she will appoint the head of the Romanian Intelligence Service (SRI) based on competence criteria that she herself cannot evaluate because she does not know how the services work, so the evaluation will be done by the advisors. So, will they choose the head of the SRI?
If those who will decide during Mrs. Lasconi's mandate will be the advisors and she will be there with "love," then they should also be voted together with her. Moreover, what will a president so incompetent do in bilateral discussions, where generally you don't go with the whole flock of advisors.
The immense disappointment caused by President Iohannis was also a consequence of his ignorance and convenient delegation of decision-making to all kinds of advisors, of course except for matters of direct personal interest.
A Story about Iohannis' Mandate
And for illustration, I will share a previously undisclosed episode from May 2015. For the first time, I partially break the rule of not revealing private discussions, but the very long time that has passed since then, the fact that the president's term has come to an end, and the relevance of the episode, I consider it a substantial justification.
In May 2015, I received an invitation to a discussion at the Cotroceni Palace from the then chief of the President Iohannis' chancellery, Dan Mihalache.
As it was a holiday at the beginning of the month, the Palace was deserted, but my entry there surely still exists in the SPP archive. Mr. Mihalache welcomed me in his office and after a brief preliminary discussion, very interesting indeed, Mr. Mihalache proposed to me the position of spokesperson for the presidential administration, replacing Mrs. Tatiana Niculescu, who had just resigned.
I replied that any journalist would be honored by such a proposal, but before responding, I should have a discussion with the one I would represent, with the President of Romania. There must be compatibility with him, even a dose of chemistry I would say, without which representation cannot be correct or efficient.
I will never forget the reply I received from Mr. Mihalache, looking me straight in the eye: "Why would you need to talk to the president? I think you haven't understood who is in charge here. It's me!"
I insisted, however, that without a discussion with the president, there could be no question of a response. He told me he would talk to Mr. Iohannis.
I firmly believe that he did not do it, and I do not think he searched for a spokesperson for him, in fact. The next spokesperson for the president, Mădălina Dobrovolschi, took office a few months after Mr. Mihalache left Cotroceni, becoming the ambassador of Romania to London.
This is what an abandoned presidential mandate looks like when left to advisors because the president did not know what to do with it or did not want to bother too much. And this should never happen again.