The spectator: Democracy dies in Romania

« If the vote in the first round goes where you should not, then you can cancel the second round. If the « wrong » candidate still has the first chance to win the repeated choices, then you arrest him before registering and forbiding his participation. Then you organize the elections again, this time with a stronger « independent » candidate, who, with all the media support, can defeat the ally of the « wrong » candidate but much more popular that you have just forbidden”, Writes Neil Clark, for The spectator.

Democratic? Well, if this had happened in an « officially enemy » country, be sure that the center politicians would have done everything to denounce such elections. But when in a country the EU and NATO member is happening, Leslie Nielsen’s words are valid: « Nothing to see here! ».

Hypocrisy exceeds any limits. The man who should be the President of Romania now, if the authentic democracy was allowed to follow his course, is Călin Georgescu. He was the winner of the first tour of the initial elections and seemed to be about to win the second tour.

However, in an unprecedented movement, two days before the second round, in December, the Constitutional Court in Romania canceled the elections, citing some declassified information that spoke of foreign interference through some videos from Tiktok. If you still make the drastic decision to cancel the elections 48 hours before the voting sections are opened, you should have concrete evidence and present these peremptor and public evidence. But it didn’t happen. « The authorities have not yet offered concrete evidence of Russian interference in elections, frustrating the Romanians, » said the Department against the global misinformation of the BBC on April 25.

You do not have to agree with any of Georgescu’s political statements to recognize that what happened in December was revolting. The cancellation of the second round because the winning potential is a critic of both the EU and NATO (and, to recognize, this is the real reason for the cancellation of the elections) is the antithesis of democracy. To her praise, Elena Lasconi, who would have been a counter -candidate for Georgescu, thought the same. « The decision of the Constitutional Court is illegal, amoral and shattering the essence of democracy and elections, » she said.

We have the result that the Brussels mahog times wanted so much. The Romanian people finally voted « correct » for a cute, sensitive, pro-ueo and pro-nato candidate

Things got worse in February. Georgescu was detained by the police and charged, even when he was going to register for the reschedule elections. The most popular politician in Romania was forbidden to leave the country. But there were big protests – guess what – no conviction from the EU. Instead, US Vice President JD Vance criticized the cancellation of elections – and was even attacked because he did it.

And now, in May, we have the result that the Brussels mahog times wanted so much. The Romanian people eventually voted « correct » for a cute, sensitive, pro-uho candidate, the « liberal » mayor of Bucharest, Nicușor Dan, who defeated the nationalist-bad conservative with Georgescu named George Simion. This time, there is no need to cancel the result. The result can remain. The crisis ended. Ursula von der Leyen and Guy Verhofstadt are in ecstasy. Europe has won! Like the Irish voters who had to go to the ballot box again, after the first time they rejected the Lisbon Treaty, the Romanians finally voted « correctly ». But what happened in Romania should worry us all. If we truly believe in democracy, then voters are everything. If they want to choose a candidate labeled by « far right » or « extreme left », this is only about them.

Please note how the speech of the « liberal » elite « moved from » democracy « to » democratic values ​​ ». It is a crucial difference. If the « democratic values » beat democracy, then you have opened the way for the prohibition of the candidates who adopt « wrong » positions in the vision of power, whatever it is.

It’s not just about Georgescu. Another populist-nationalist Romanian politician Diana Şoșoaca was forbidden to the presidentials in November and the repetition of the elections. It was forbidden in November because it made statements … wait for the formulation … « contrary to democratic values ».

Ask your next question. Do you think that, in 2025, to any candidate who has anti-EU visions, antito in a country of strategic importance in Europe will he be allowed to win some elections? Marine le pen? Received prohibition. We always criticize other countries because they have falsified choices, elections in which only the « officially approved » candidates have only, but we, in the « Democratic West » are not closer to this situation? «