On Wednesday 8 March, the Court of Justice of the European Union decided (Case C-53/23) that the rules on which the appointment of public prosecutors in Romania is based are not incompatible with EU law.
A professional association of Romanian magistrates had challenged the appointment of certain prosecutors responsible for investigating cases of corruption in Romania. It considered the national rules on which these appointments are based to be incompatible with EU law, and therefore inapplicable, in that in practice they prevent associations of magistrates from challenging the appointment of prosecutors responsible for prosecuting judges in criminal cases, making the admissibility of such appeals dependent on the existence of a legitimate private interest.
The case was referred to the Court of Appeal in Pitești, Romania, which referred the matter to the Court of Justice of the EU to determine whether these Romanian procedural rules comply with EU law.
The Court found that the national legislation in question did not conflict with European Union law in that the latter “does not require professional associations of judges to be given the right to challenge decisions relating to the appointment of public prosecutors“.
The CJEU justified its decision by stating that no provision of Union law “generally requires Member States to guarantee professional associations of judges the right to challenge any incompatibility with Union law of a national measure relating to the status of judges”.
Furthermore, the mere fact that national regulations do not authorise these associations to lodge such appeals “does not suffice to generate legitimate doubts as to the independence of Romanian judges”. (Original version in French by Isalia Stieffatre)