The President's continuous refusal to promulgate normative documents is fetching much strain to the political life and it can even lead to constitutional crises like the one bursting out now, with the Court of Accounts as apple of discord. It is not my intention to decide who is right in this case. Because Mr. Traian Basescu didn't promulgate the law, the Parliament broke the Constitution, claiming they had no choice. What is going on with this important state institution called the Court of Accounts? What does the constitutional crisis consist in? How far can the President go by dismissing one law after another? The Court of Accounts in Romania is vital to the functioning of the rule of law. If it functions well, this institution can have a decisive contribution to the eradication of political and administrative corruption. Such an institution must exist in any democracy. It is guaranteed by the very Constitution of Romania, which also settles the duration of the mandates entrusted to the institution's officials, that is the president and the councilors. As for the way it functions, this is grounded on special laws, debated and approved of by the Parliament of Romania. The latter country is right now faced with two difficulties concerning the Court of Accounts. The first is the fact that the mandates of its officials were up last February and no other officials have been appointed so far. Therefore the institution has got no heads for the time being and Romania is a state with no Court of Accounts. This is the fault of the parliamentary parties, who have kept on opposing each other and failed to agree on new people to be appointed. Given such a strange situation, the Parliament broke the Constitution twice by prolonging the mandates of the president and councilors of the Court of Accounts, which the Constitution forbids. The Constitutional Court could not be addressed against the two parliamentary acts simply because the Constitutional has it that such decisions may not be complained against. This is a vicious circle indeed. The second difficulty comes from the political groups' decision on the need to make changes on the law concerning the Court of Accounts. This is a correct option. Much time has passed since the promulgation of this law still in force. Romania went through difficult transition times, it joined the European Union and it has now got to harmonize some juridical norms with the EU legislation. After intense debates and talks, after a delay of several months, the Parliament provided the head of state with a new law to promulgate. But the law about the Court of Accounts found Traian Basescu in full presidential strike, isolated on the political stage and involved in an overt conflict not only against the government, but also against all the parliamentary parties, except for the Liberal-Democrat one. The head of state is making full use of the constitutional means he is entitled to in order to keep his adversaries tense. He is doing this by refusing to promulgate some normative documents, which is giving a hard time to the Parliament. So MPs have to revise their laws, anyway flawed. And there is also the fact that there is no clear majority in the Parliament. But this time the President has caught the Parliament in offside. By not promulgating the Court of Accounts law, he has forced the Parliament into breaking the Constitution one more time to prolong the mandates of this institution's heads for a third time. Even if the Constitution Court may not be addressed in the present circumstances, a crisis has emerged simply because the Constitution was broken, therefore the Constitutional Court may do away with any denial coming from the Court of Accounts. So the fact is that politicians' stupidity and the stubbornness of Traian Basescu, right now on a presidential strike, has given us a Court of Accounts that doesn't exist, still it is chased by them all.

Sorin ROSCA STANESCU