Romanian Constitutional Court rules politicians' wealth statements should no longer be public

The Romanian Constitutional Court (CCR) announced on May 29 that it declared unconstitutional several provisions of Law 176/2010 that compel politicians and dignitaries to disclose their assets and interests on an annual basis, including the provision requiring the publication of the statements. CCR argues that the specific provision violates the right to private life.

The National Integrity Agency (ANI), which publishes and screens the politicians' wealth statements, said in a press release that the CCR's decision may violate all the commitments undertaken by Romania at the international level over the last 20 years in the fight against corruption and may affect the process of accession to the OECD.

The agency emphasizes that the publication of asset declarations and declarations of interests does not violate the right to private life, according to several decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

The Constitutional Court emphasized that the solution pronounced should not have the effect of eliminating the obligation to fill in the asset statements but only that these declarations should no longer be published on specific websites as currently required. Instead, the statements should be submitted to the National Agency for Integrity, which should manage them according to the powers provided by law.

The visible weakening of the transparency was criticised by president Nicusor Dan, who asked, without knowing in advance the reasoning behind CCR's ruling, that the lawmakers should amend the Law 176/2010 such as to meet the constitutional requirements but also keep the politicians' wealth statements public.

"The surprising decision of the Constitutional Court announced today is in contradiction with an essential principle of democracy - transparency in the exercise of public functions. Citizens' access to information regarding the asset declarations of dignitaries is a guarantee of integrity and responsibility in the public space, and this principle must be firmly defended. If the reasoning of the decision identifies technical deficiencies in the current legislative framework, it is the responsibility of Parliament to promptly correct them," said Dan.

(Photo source: Inquam Photos/Octav Ganea)