Venice Commission concludes Romania's annulment of presidential elections was problematic

The Venice Commission, in the plenary session from March 13 to 15, has formally adopted its final report on the annulment of Romania's presidential elections, concluding that such a decision should only be taken in "extraordinary situations" in compliance with several principles and should preserve the electorate's right to free elections.

The report was prompted by the Romanian Constitutional Court's decision in December 2024 to annul the results of the first round of the presidential elections held in November.

Although not commenting on the merits of the Romanian Constitutional Court's decision to annul the presidential elections on December 6, the Venice Commission outlined a series of principles in line with international standards, most of which were breached by the Constitutional Court's ruling.

Romania's Constitutional Court ruled that the elections should be rerun in May 2025 after declassified documents from the Superior Council for National Defense (CSAT) revealed that the results had been influenced in favor of Călin Georgescu through covert online campaigns, foreign interference, and illegal campaign financing.

A preliminary Urgent Report was published by the Venice Commission in January.

Both the urgent and the final reports highlight the necessity of a transparent and well-justified ruling in such cases and issue recommendations for best practices on such extraordinary decisions of canceling elections.

As a starting point, the Venice Commission underlines that elections are aimed to produce an electoral result that will "ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people" – which will be achieved through the rerun of the elections in May 2025.

This being said, Venice Commission's experts stress that the annulment of elections should be considered only under "exceptional circumstances" and must be based on objective and well-founded arguments. The Commission emphasizes that, ideally, the highest election monitoring body, such as Romania's Permanent Electoral Authority, should handle such decisions, with constitutional courts intervening only in cases of appeal. The key criterion for annulment, according to the report, is whether the integrity of the elections has been "irremediably affected."

The report further warns that the annulment of an election should only be pursued if it results in less harm than accepting a flawed outcome. It also calls for more explicit regulations on the conditions under which elections can be invalidated, particularly in the context of online political campaigns and their financing.