The plenary meeting of the Council of the Magistrates (CSM) decided to ask the National Bar Association of Romania to consider discussing the way the lawyers defending Adrian Nastase have complied with the requirement to keep reserved and not seek personal publicity, following their recent statements in the case of their high-profile client, who was sentenced to two years in prison, informs a CSM release.
Also, the CSM plenum decided to notify the Judiciary Inspection for a check into the possible impairment of the independence of the magistrates who built up and tried the case, following the declarations circulated in public media since the handing down of the verdict.
In addition, the CSM members call on representatives of public authorities to stay reserved when making public statements about pending cases.
„The CSM plenary meeting debated on Tuesday aspects related to institutional and media developments in the final decision pronounced by the High Court of Cassation and Justice on June 20 in the ‘Quality Trophy’ file. The analysis of the plenum focused in particular on the interventions of particular public institutions, the public interventions of professional associations and the representatives thereof, politicians, justice professionals and opinion makers that generated an attitude of defiance and ripped the credibility of justice, as state power,” reads the release.
The decisions of the plenum were adopted by majority vote, „after debates on all aspects that have converged into an unprecedented potential impairment of the independence of Justice.”
The CSM plenum also called on the Ombudsman, the Association of Romanian Magistrates and the Association of Romanian Prosecutors, urging for institutional, professional and civic accountability in the acts and actions carried out as institutions and through representatives.
„The CSM plenum considers the conduct of these institutions, of citing from pleas in a pending lawsuit and give to publicity notes addressed to CSM requesting responses in matters only the law court is competent to decide on, is unacceptable and reprehensible,” the release says.