Simple opinion cannot be illegal

At the invitation of the interim president of Romania, Mr. Ilie Bolojan, along with Euro-Parliamentary colleagues in the Gold delegation, as well as those from the other political parties represented in the European Parliament, I participated on Monday, April 14, between 10 and 12 hours, in an exchange of ideas with the presidential institution in relation to the current situation of Romania in the European Union.

In general, the discussions were held around the budgetary challenges of the European Union and Romania, in the context of the turbulence caused by the fundamental change in the tariff policy of the new US administration, as well as in the new race in which the European Union has been attracted, everything is grafted on the background image of the fight and the « 

He was also discussed about the cancellation of the elections. Despite the fact that, except for a few Euro-parliamentarians in the ruling and USR parties, the generic conclusion was that the judicial event of December 6, 2024 deeply affected the Romanian rule of law as a member country of the European Union, as well To nothing through other desecretizations (of the « samples » used by the CCR for the cancellation of the elections, NN, Gh.P.) and that everything that can be hoped now is that the poll of 4 – 18 May 2025 be correct and without incident (and without other surprises from the CCR, NN, Gh.P.).

I insisted that the issue of freedom of expression, faith and opinion, freedom that suffer in these moments and unimaginable restrictions 5 years ago be introduced in the debate. Romania is claimed, however, to be a rule of law and democratic, in which human dignity, justice and freedom of beliefs and opinions are fundamental values, guaranteed by both internal legal and legal tools and international treaties to which Romania is a party.

I have shown, in essence, that public institutions and authorities acting Ultra Virres, apart from their ordinary skills, and perverting internal laws, constitutional texts and international legal instruments, have come to practice censorship and bureaucratic persecution, totalitarian, under the pretext of combating misinformation, of the discourse, the discourse, Legal or excessive interpretations of the law that do not give the simple citizen, the politician or the political vehicle a real, prompt and effective right to access justice, in order to eliminate and sanction the abuse.

European legal instruments, such as the Regulation of digital services (DSA), or administrative – bureaucratic, such as the European « democratic » shield, have any components that can generate abuses to human rights and freedoms. For example, the illegal content, which should be only the false illegal information, of a criminal or contraventional nature, can be easily extended to the simple information that is not used by facts, but without illegal character in the absence of the potential to harm the public and, further, to the political, religious opinion or of any other nature. By encouraging citizens to behave like the founders of totalitarian regimes, and even paying large amounts of money to the organizations of founders (anonymous or official), the EU bureaucracy opened a Pandora box, which scored on a slope that could prove fatal. The simple opinion, the value judgment, cannot be illegal (unless it is express and directly forbidden by law). On the contrary, the free opinion must be protected, as it is exactly the substance from which democracy is made. Censorship and prohibition of opinions and opinion crimes are specific to totalitarian states, and not democracy.

Even less internal laws, national jurisprudence and bureaucratic customs cannot expand the terror, censorship and fake news hunt beyond these European limits without putting on the forehead of Romania today the police and repressive state.

From this point of view, the President of Romania, even interim, should be permanently present in the society, as a mediator, and request the elimination or calming of this security, totalitarian and self-constructive that parasitizing and suffocating the society.
It is clear that we are witnessing a huge deficit of democracy, since the law, jurisprudence and bureaucratic customs have been transformed into political weapons with which the war (Lawfare) is carried out against the opponents of the regime, and institutions of the Presidency of Romania or the Parliament (Mr. seeming to tolerate or even enjoy this war.

It is important to say that Mr. Bolojan exemplified the « necessity » of such legal weapons (in fact transformed into political weapons) with its own case. He reminded that he was defamated when he was told in the online environment that he had stolen a TIR from Germany.
Here is the explanation given by me to Mr. Bolojan: a political opinion, or even miserable and with zero credibility, is a value of value, and not an illegal content. If it affects the honor of a person, including a politically involved person, political opinion can be illegal, that is, it can give rise to individual damage processes, but it cannot determine the state authorities to protect the dignity of the offended person. Otherwise we would be in full dictatorship, and not in democracy.
Illegally, therefore, it is not confused with illegal.

The fact that at least 1000 anonymous people decide that that political opinion is illegal content, which must be eliminated and who must determine the sanction of the author of the opinion, only means that we return to the people of the people of the 50s of the last century, where the people of the work (to read the people of the whispers and the delars) made « justice ».

In fact, I made briefly noticed the over 40 -year -old jurisprudence of Strasbourg CTEDO relative to politicians. In the case of a politician, the insulting opinion is allowed, since it is part of the political game and contributes to the circulation of various, divergent, conflicting opinions. In the case of a normal man, the offensive opinion and of a nature of the reputation is within the limits of freedom of expression, guaranteed by art. 10 of the ECHR, if it has a factual base. Of course, if the limits are exceeded, the author’s responsibility can be trained. In any case, they are individual processes, in which both the victim and the author of the harmful opinion have the right to freely access justice. Romania has long repealed the offense of offense to the authority – we cannot return in time, in the form of « fight » against false news and against the discourse of hatred, to the old methods of state intimidation. In a system where the right to free expression is suppressed or limited, the wheel of history can always return, and the oppressor can become a victim.
Romania, a member country of the EU and NATO, is between Ciocan and Nicova, between the new US administration and the EU bureaucracy. Romania is no longer a teenager only entered these sophisticated clubs, today in description. We have matured and we cannot afford to destroy the strategic alliance with the US, nor the endlessness of our position in the EU only because of some pride or whims of the powerful geopolitics of the day.
Because I am a fan of freedom of opinion, I patiently listened to the opinion of the Taliban infantile in the USR, who said, textual: Romania must be stuck to the hard core of the EU (Germany, France, the Netherlands), and not to the Americans. If the hardness is represented by Macron, I say step …

Finally, several participants, especially Euro-parliamentarians, have highlighted the danger of reallocating to war, arming and climatic transition of PNR funds and adhesion funds. Note that PNRR expires on August 31, 2026, and the adhesion funds on December 31, 2027, without the possibility of extension. From the PNRR, Romania has failed to access, so it will lose, 8 billion euros, with grants (non -reimbursable amounts) and 13 billion euros as a loan. From the accession funds, Romania has not even accessed a billion euros, so it will lose 32 billion … Soon, Romania will be transformed, from net beneficiary, into a net contributor to the EU budget, so we will pay for the poor in Germany, France and the Netherlands, as well as for Ukraine …
The discussion was completed cordially, with a promise of resumption at the institutional level, periodically, of this exchange of views, both in Cotroceni and Parliament, and in Brussels.

Facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000119722747&locale=ro_ro