EditRomania’s president challenges the judicial higher authority amid claims of abuse
Nicușor Dan’s plan for a referendum among magistrates has opened a new institutional conflict over judicial independencey and the limits of presidential authority
Romanian President Nicușor Dan has moved to confront what he describes as systemic integrity problems within the country’s justice system, after receiving extensive testimony from judges and prosecutors alleging fear, pressure and undue influence exercised by the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM).
The initiative, which includes a proposed referendum among magistrates, has triggered a sharp response from the judiciary’s governing bodies and raised questions about constitutional boundaries and institutional trust.
Speaking after a meeting with members of the judiciary, Dan said he had been presented with hundreds of pages of material detailing alleged abuses within the system. According to the president, magistrates described a climate in which senior figures – particularly chief court judges – do not act in the public interest, but to the profit of a closed group within the judiciary.
“The situation we are in is serious, in that there is this suspicion about the integrity of the judicial system,” Dan said, pledging that the allegations would be investigated. He added that the conclusion emerging from the submissions was that certain leaders within the system exert influence that undermines public trust.
The president’s intervention follows an open call he made for magistrates to submit complaints. He said he had received around 2,000 pages of documentation highlighting integrity concerns warranting further action. While the Romanian president has the authority to appoint senior judges and prosecutors and may attend meetings of the CSM, he does not have the legal power to dismiss its members.
Against this backdrop, Dan announced that in January he intends to initiate a referendum within the magistrates’ community, asking a single question: whether the Superior Council of Magistracy acts in the public interest or in the interest of a specific group within the judicial system. If magistrates confirm confidence in the council, Dan said legislative discussions would continue. If not, he argued that the CSM should “urgently leave”.
The proposal has exposed the depth of tension within the judiciary. Dan claimed that fear is the main reason many magistrates are reluctant to engage publicly. Despite more than 1,000 magistrates signing an open letter expressing solidarity with colleagues featured in a recent investigative documentary by Recorder, only around 20 magistrates agreed to attend consultations at the presidential palace in a personal capacity, with a similar number participating as representatives of professional associations.
Romania’s “Captured justice”: documentary sparks nationwide protests and demands for judicial reform
According to Dan, some magistrates sought elaborate measures to avoid being seen entering the Cotroceni Palace (the office of the President), including arriving separately, waiting in nearby locations, or even being collected discreetly from petrol stations. He also said that unusual meetings were convened in certain institutions and that messages of intimidation had circulated in the days leading up to the consultations.
The justice minister, Radu Marinescu, reacted cautiously, noting that the president has yet to present a clear legal framework for organising such a referendum. Only once the proposed procedure is clarified, he said, can its legality be assessed. Marinescu also stated that he had not been invited to the discussions with magistrates.
The strongest institutional pushback came from within the Superior Council of Magistracy itself. The prosecutors’ section of the CSM described the referendum proposal as a direct interference in judicial independence. In a statement, prosecutors emphasised that the council’s constitutional role is to guarantee the independence of justice, not to protect national or “guild” interests.
They also recalled that since May, the CSM has repeatedly invited the president to attend its plenary sessions, arguing that dialogue could have resolved many of the ambiguities now raised publicly. While acknowledging that good intentions may underpin the idea of a referendum, prosecutors warned that alleged violations of the law cannot be remedied by circumventing constitutional and legal frameworks. Current legislation, they stressed, provides clear mechanisms for dismissing council members – a referendum is not among them.
The judges’ section of the CSM echoed these concerns, stating that it would not tolerate any form of direct or indirect interference in the activity of the judicial authority.
Dan has framed his actions as a response to what he sees as a crisis of confidence within the justice system, arguing that silence driven by fear cannot be reconciled with democratic accountability. The judiciary, for its part, has insisted that independence must be protected from political encroachment, even when criticism is voiced in the name of reform.
Sources: BGNES, digi24, Reuters
Caption: Romania’s President Nicusor Dan speaks to the press at the EU Council in Brussels, Belgium, 18 December 2025. EPA/OLIVIER MATTHYS
Updated: December 23, 2025 - 07:15
