Romanian protests: Is a victory over corruption in sight?

Public opposition could be close to toppling a decree that would offer amnesty for officials convicted of abuse of power.

Vadim Ghirda/AP
A man holds a banner with the initials of the ruling Social Democrat party (PSD) during a protest in Bucharest, Romania, on Wednesday, Feb. 1, 2017.

Public outcry in Romania over a government decree that would decriminalize official corruption for sums of $47,800 or less is roiling the cabinet of prime minister Sorin Grindeanu, with the business minister resigning in protest of the decree and the country's justice minister – who was architect of the decree – temporarily ceding his duties. 

In a Facebook post announcing his resignation, trade and business minister Florin Jianu said it was “the ethical thing to do” while clarifying that his conscience was “clean” on matters of professional honesty, according to Reuters:

"How am I going to look [my child] in the eye and what am I going to tell him over the years? Am I going to tell him his father was a coward and supported actions he does not believe in, or that he chose to walk away from a story that isn't his?" 

Romanian president Klaus Iohannis has also come out against the decree, announcing on Thursday that he would ask judges in the country’s highest court to annul the order.

The shakeup comes a day after some 250,000 people took to the streets in cities around Romania to protest the measure, in the biggest demonstrations since the fall of the communist government in 1989. That outcry seems to testify to the force of public support for an anti-corruption push that got legs with Romania’s 2007 entry into the European Union, whose commission helped pressure it into reforming its notoriously corrupt politics.

As Kit Gillet reported for The Christian Science Monitor in 2015, that push hasn’t been without its setbacks. But other failed attempts by lawmakers to rein back punishments for abuse of power seem to point to progress:

Last November, just days after an anticorruption candidate won Romania’s latest presidential election, lawmakers were once again called to vote on a controversial amnesty bill. This one would have opened the way to releasing any inmate serving up to six years in prison for non-violent crimes – which would have included most of those serving time for corruption.

This time the vote was almost unanimously against the bill.

If there were clear-cut signs that no one is now safe from investigation, it has been in recent weeks, as first Udrea, the former presidential candidate, was arrested, and then Iulian Hertanu, the brother-in-law of Romania’s Prime Minister Victor Ponta, was detained. Mr. Hertanu was allegedly involved in embezzling funds worth around 1.75 million euros.

“The area of untouchables has gotten smaller and smaller with time,” says Ms. Stefan, the anticorruption expert. “People are seeing for the first time, if you steal you go to jail, no matter who you are. This is the way it should be, but we need to keep the momentum.” 

Prime Minister Grindeanu says the measure, presented along with a draft bill on jail pardons, will ease overcrowding in prisons and align the criminal code with recent rulings from the constitutional court. Critics call it a way of pardoning officials, like the leader of the ruling Social Democratic party, who have been accused or convicted of abuse-of-power crimes. Among those critics is Romania’s anti-corruption czar, Laura Codruța Kövesi, who calls the decree a blank check for legislators to abuse public office. 

“It is a project by emergency decree which will very severely affect the anti-corruption fight, basically if this project is adopted, the fight against corruption becomes irrelevant,” she told Euro News.

This report contains material from Reuters and the Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.