Christine Anderson, a member of the Europe of Sovereign Nations Group, claimed in a Strasbourg plenary session at the European Parliament, that Romania barring Călin Georgescu from running in the presidential election is unprecedented and undemocratic. This statement is false.
“Romania has now barred Călin Georgescu, as my colleague Mr Piperea just pointed out. This is unprecedented in the EU Member States. Ladies and gentlemen, if democracy were to effect change, that is the sole reason for having a democracy. You can effect change. But what we are seeing now is actually that people can vote for whoever they want and if they don’t like the candidate, they just bar him or put him in jail. As democrats, we cannot stand for this. The European Commission states that in a healthy democracy, citizens can freely choose their leaders,” said Christine Anderson in a plenary session at the European Parliament, on March 10th 2025. Two days later, she also posted a video of her statement on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Background: Romania’s 2024 presidential election
Understanding this claim requires examining the events surrounding Romania’s recent presidential elections. The Romanian Constitutional Court annulled the first round of the 2024 presidential election, held on November 24, citing serious irregularities that compromised the fairness and transparency of the process. In its decision (Ruling no. 32/2024), the Court has ruled that the elections must be rerun in their entirety: “The Court finds that the electoral process for the election of the President of Romania was marred throughout its conduct and at all stages by multiple irregularities and violations of electoral legislation that distorted the free and fair nature of the vote cast by citizens and the equality of opportunity of electoral competitors, affected the transparent and fair nature of the electoral campaign and disregarded the legal regulations on its financing. All these aspects had the converging effect of disregarding the essential principles of democratic elections”.
In the same Ruling, the Court highlighted multiple violations of electoral law, including lack of transparency in terms of digital technologies and artificial intelligence, which were used to create a “clear inequality” between the candidate who benefited from these practices and the other candidates.
Foreign interference and financial irregularities
Further complicating the matter are allegations of foreign interference. Reports from Romanian intelligence agencies, such as The Romanian Foreign Intelligence Service(SIE) and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, pointed to a coordinated effort to influence the election in Georgescu’s favor. Investigations revealed that his campaign received support from Russian-backed networks, which used social media platforms like TikTok and Telegram to amplify messages and sway public perception. According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, these efforts mirrored tactics seen in other Russian disinformation campaigns, aimed at undermining democratic institutions across Europe. Financial irregularities also played a role in the Court’s decision. Georgescu’s campaign reported zero expenditures, a claim contradicted by the scale of his online presence and the findings of Romanian authorities. The Romanian Consitutional Court highlighted the use of undeclared funds.
The barring of Călin Georgescu
These allegations contributed to the Central Electoral Bureau’s (BEC) decision to reject Georgescu’s candidacy for the May 2025 election rerun. Their decision stated that “the candidate, by not complying with the rules of the electoral procedure, violated the very obligation [..] to defend democracy, which is based precisely on fair, honest and impartial suffrages, in accordance with the law, in the absence of which the very foundation of the current constitutional order is altered.”
Georgescu appealed this decision, but on March 11, 2025, the Constitutional Court upheld the ban, effectively preventing him from running in the upcoming election. Contrary to Anderson’s implication that this action was orchestrated by the European Union, the decision came from Romania’s Governmental Institutions. Such claims have constantly gained popularity since the Court’s decision but were, ultimately, debunked.
The Romanian Constitutional Court justified the annulment and subsequent barring of Georgescu as necessary measures to safeguard the democratic process. The court’s decision aimed to ensure transparency and equal opportunities for all candidates, in line with constitutional provisions protecting electoral integrity. Therefore, the notion that this action undermines democracy is false. Rather, the measures were implemented to protect the integrity of the electoral process from external manipulation and ensure a level playing field among candidates.
Anderson’s framing of the situation as undemocratic ignores the broader context of electoral violations and foreign interference that led to these actions. The barring of Georgescu was a consequence of documented breaches of electoral law, not an arbitrary suppression of voters’ rights.
Precedent for excluding candidates
Moreover, Anderson’s claim that barring a candidate is unprecedented is false. Another candidate, Diana Șoșoacă, was also barred from the presidential race due to her pro-Russian, anti-EU, and anti-NATO views, which were deemed incompatible with the presidential oath to uphold the constitution and protect democracy. This decision was influenced by a prior ruling from the Constitutional Court in October 2024, which found that her views opposing Romania’s EU and NATO memberships were incompatible with the presidential oath to uphold the constitution and protect democracy.
The Romanian Constitutional Court’s decision to bar Șoșoacă highlights that candidates whose actions or affiliations threaten democratic principles can be excluded from the electoral process to protect the integrity of democratic institutions.
Conclusion
In short, Christine Anderson’s claim that Romania’s decision to bar Călin Georgescu from the 2025 presidential election is unprecedented and undemocratic is false. The decision to bar Georgescu from running in the 2025 presidential election was not an arbitrary suppression of democratic rights but rather a consequence of documented electoral violations and foreign interference. Romanian authorities acted within their legal framework to safeguard electoral integrity, ensuring that candidates uphold democratic principles.
RESEARCH | ARTICLE © Alexandra Berzovan (Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania)
Leave your comments, thoughts and suggestions in the box below. Take note: your response is moderated.
