The Foundation For The Defense Of Citizens Against State Abuses (FACIAS) has called for a change in the legislation of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM) in order to correct the legal anomaly that keeps in office the already famous judge from Mangalia, Ancuța Popoviciu, the one who judged the tragedy of 2 May. In addition, FACIAS has launched an online petition for her dismissal, following a series of gaffes committed by the judge.
The Superior Council of Magistracy rejected the proposal to suspend Judge Ancuța Popoviciu from her post, who showed a total ignorance of the case she is judging - the accident on 2 May in which two young people lost their lives. The SCM's decision raises many questions, as it could not be challenged. The question must be asked: why? The law permits the interested party to challenge the SCM's decision, which in this case is the judge. In order to rectify this legislative anomaly, FACIAS has called for the urgent amendment of Article 52(2) of the CJEU's Rule of Procedure 2 of Law No 305/2022 on the Superior Council of Magistracy. Furthermore, FACIAS has initiated an online petition requesting the suspension of the judge and the amendment of the SCM legislation. The petition can be accessed here.
Meaningless questions asked by judges
In the final hearing of the case, Judge Ancuța Popoviciu once again provoked public indignation with irrelevant questions directed towards the families of the young people who perished in the accident. For instance, the mother of the young man killed by the drugged driver, Vlad Pascu, was asked a series of irrelevant questions, including whether she was scared when she found out about her son's death, the nature of the relationship between the parents and the murdered girl, and the cost of the funeral. The audience in the courtroom expressed outrage at the illogical and irrelevant questions posed by the judge, attributing this to a lack of comprehension of the accounts provided by the families and other young people involved in the accident and the case itself. It is worth noting that at the initial hearing, the presiding judge inquired as to the presence of the deceased young man in the courtroom.
Equality before the law
This is what FACIAS is calling for by amending Article 52 of Law 305/2022. Specifically, the Foundation proposes to amend the above-mentioned law as follows:
Article 52, paragraph 2, states that the decision ordering the suspension from office must be taken in accordance with the provisions of this article. (1) may be appealed against within five days of the communication by the suspended judge or prosecutor, and, where appropriate, if the request for suspension is rejected, by the holders of the disciplinary action or the persons injured by the disciplinary misconduct. The decision on the appeal is made by the five-judge panel of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, which may not include voting members of the Superior Council of the Magistracy.