High Council

High Council of Magistrates. CSM was fundamentally re-designed through Constitution’s update. Half measures practice, all the confusions concerning the definition of some real judge power characterized by the current constitutional design of the CSM. The logic inconsistency emerges from the fact that CSM includes both judges and state attorneys. This institution is not able to be a part of the legal power, as a state constituted power, for the simple reason that it does not create, nor fulfill justice. It only warrants justice’s independent functioning.
CSM should be the interface between citizens-magistrates-public authorities. SoJust evaluations concerning CSM’s activity take us to the conclusion that CSM is still incapable of fulfilling its constitutional role and purpose where justice independency is concerned.
Although CSM is an organism assigning judges and state attorneys in management positions, not a single one of its members has ever sustained a test to occupy this kind of positions; generally, they did not graduate management or human resources courses, even if 10 of them are occupying high range functions in the legal system. Moreover, all suspicions that surround CSM members are nourished by the lack of interest towards this aspect: choosing a new board was performed under non legal conditions, CSM members can not be recognized through site inscriptions, there are some conflicts of public interest, often decisions are taken without vote regulation compliance, meetings take too long (12 hours) etc.
Sojust considers that CSM can deploy its activity under optimal conditions only if all its members will have a permanent activity. This aspect was underlined in European Commission’s Reports, was invoked by the president of Romania, as well as by magistrate’s associations and by the civil society.
CSM was established as an organism destined to administrate magistrates careers – judges and state attorneys. Born out of the fight between magistrates and ex justice ministers, CSM received by Law some non constitutional abilities.
Concerning CSM rulings, a detailed study revealed the existence of illegal decisions, arbitrary decisions, non consequent decisions, “strange”, unmotivated, motivated with great delay, non published or inefficient. Thus, over 100 CSM decisions are contested before Courts, by magistrates or by the civil society.