Romanian EPDE member Expert Forum (EFOR) published a report on the modification of the composition of the electoral commissions.
The way electoral commissions are setup has changed constantly in recent years. But not always through laws discussed in Parliament long before the election date, but through emergency ordinances or articles crammed into a long list of amendments. This is despite the fact that one of the basic principles of legislative stability, defined by the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice on Electoral Matters, is that the fundamental elements of electoral law, including the composition of electoral commissions, should not be modified less than a year after the elections.
Main conclusions
- For the 2024 local and European elections, the manner in which commissions were setup has been modified for the merger of elections, through GEO 21/2024. The Venice Commission confirmed in an opinion on the merger of elections, published on 18 March and quoting EFOR/the Vot Corect coalition, that the use of the GEOs “undermines legislative quality, legal certainty, and democratic principles, including the principle of the separation of powers.”, and “Contrary to international standards, the adoption of GEO 21/2024 was neither consensual nor the result of adequate public consultation.
- Ahead of the 2020 local and parliamentary elections, the manner in which electoral commissions are formed has changed, just a few months before election day. For example, changes were introduced for local elections regarding the manner in which representatives of parliamentary parties fill in the commissions, favoring parties that had representation in both chambers.
- For this year’s elections, the rule was amended by art. 3 (4) of GEO 1/2025, an ordinance approved without any public consultation. The GEO amends the method of filling out county/sector/foreign commissions and those for polling stations with representatives of political parties.
- Law 370/2004 refers in its original form to political parties participating in the elections or having proposed candidates; the original law is not necessarily clearer either, using various formulations. According to the new regulations, in the first phase, the commissions at the intermediate level and those at the polling station level are filled with one representative of each parliamentary political party, regardless of whether it has registered candidates or not. In the second phase, the commissions are filled, by drawing lots, with representatives of political parties that are not represented in Parliament and have proposed a candidate.
- This procedure of filling in the commissions with representatives of political parties gives an unjustified advantage to parliamentary political parties, especially since two of them, POT and SOS Romania, do not have candidates. It is not clear why some parties who are not associated and did not support with any registered candidate have representatives in the electoral commissions. On the other hand, non-parliamentary parties that propose candidates have very little chance of getting seats in the commissions. At the county level or at the polling station level, the commission is filled with 7 representatives, exactly as many parliamentary parties there are. It is worth mentioning that parties that do not have representatives can nominate delegates – but these are similar to observers and to not participate in the decision making process.
- Another problem is that independents cannot appoint representatives to electoral offices or delegates.
- The ODIHR report for the 2019 presidential elections recommended that “Political parties and independent candidates should have equal opportunity for representation on election bodies. Preferential rules that put parliamentary parties at an advantage should be reconsidered.” The current rules further limit fair representation.
- Although this change is not explained by the initiators, we can deduce that it will create imbalances of representation in the electoral commissions. Even if according to the law and the regulation on the organization and functioning of electoral commissions, members exercise a state function and must be neutral in their activity and decision-making, we know that in practice the situation is more complex, and objectivity is not always at the level we would expect. In practice, most likely three parties will have a closer interest in the candidate Crin Antonescu (PSD, PNL, UDMR), and another three in the candidate George Simion (AUR, POT and SOS Romania). Such majorities can distort the balance in the decision-making process.
- In conclusion, this amendment may affect several principles regarding the formation of electoral bureaus, as well as the transparency of the process, as follows:
– It was approved non-transparently, without any consultation.
– It was approved by GEO, without justifying the urgency, just a few months before the elections.
– The draft GEO has not been approved by law up to this point.
– It only applies to these elections – again, it is not clear where the need for fixed amendments to this regulation came from. EFOR has also criticized in the past the use of GEOs that modify significant aspects related to the organization of elections and that are applied punctually for one election, without a solid justification.
– The way electoral bureaus are formed favors certain candidates.
– It continues to limit the representation of independents.
More information and the report is available here (Romanian only).
