The Constitutional Court explained why the head of state might dismiss only once the recommendation to appoint a certain person a minister, invoking the principle applied on law revision. The President may send laws back to the Parliament for revision only once and then he is to promulgate them. In a 10-page text released yesterday, the Constitutional Court jurists argue the PM is to propose someone else than Norica Nicolai should be appointed a minister of justice.
There is argued that the constitutional norms settling that "the President revokes and appoints ministers at the prime minister's proposal" is to be interpreted that the President decides himself whom to appoint, at the PM's suggestion. The motivation adds: " Decision making is by itself an act of will. The President is therefore free to take the prime minister's proposal or demand him for a different one." Still the court admits this norm may lead to institutional deadlock, in case public authorities fail to reach consensus several times.
It is to be reminded that by a previous decision the Constitutional Court decided the President of Romania might ask the PM to make another proposal, mentioning the head of state had no veto right and thus dimissing an unmotived refusal. But the court claims that, in order to decide how many times is the President allowed to ask the PM for a different recommendation, the principle of law revision is to be used. According to the Constitution, the President may demand the Parliament only once to revise a law before promulgating it. In the document there is mentioned: "The Court assumes this solution acts like a constitutional principle for settling juridical conflicts between two or more public authorities entitled to pass a measure settled in the Fundamental Law and this principle is to be generally applied in similar cases." (...) (A.H.)