Lia Savonea says ECHR ruling must be analyzed with all its nuances
Five Romanian judges have lost their final challenge at the European Court of Human Rights over delayed salary arrears, as Strasbourg judges ruled unanimously that the state’s budget constraints and staggered payouts did not violate their fundamental rights. Romanian magistrates who complained to the European Court of Human Rights in 2024 over the non-payment of their salary arrears definitively lost their lawsuit after a panel of seven judges at the European court deemed the requests manifestly ill-founded on October 22.
Strasbourg Court Rejects Judges’ Claims as Manifestly Ill-Founded
The European Court of Human Rights dismissed the applications filed by five Romanian judges and former judges who had sought to recover salary arrears, News.ro reported. Reunited in a seven-judge chamber, the court declared the complaints manifestly ill-founded on October 22. The applicants argued that delayed payments and staggered enforcement violated their right to property and their right to a fair trial. The Strasbourg court found that the executive branch operated within a reasonable margin of discretion given difficult economic conditions, noting that national courts should not substitute themselves for public authorities in choosing budgetary and economic policies.
Supreme Court President Calls for Nuanced Reading of Strasbourg Ruling
High Court of Cassation and Lia Savonea stated that the European ruling must be analyzed with all its arguments and nuances rather than through selective interpretations. Contacted by HotNews.ro, Savonea said she took note of the decision and maintained that it reconfirms fundamental principles including the binding nature of final judicial decisions, the separation of powers, and the legality of staggering financial obligations under specific conditions. She added that the judicial system respected the staggering mechanism without abandoning rights recognized through final rulings. The High Court of Cassation and Justice announced that it maintained the decision of the Bucharest Court of Appeal in the lawsuit filed against the Government for the payment of judges’ overdue salaries. The European Court mentions the supreme court and the Constitutional Court in its decision, noting that the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the High Court of Cassation contributed to reshaping the legal framework regarding judges’ remuneration. Lia Savonea stated that the CEDO decision must be analyzed with all arguments and nuances, coming after the European Court of Human Rights criticized the supreme court and the CCR in the decision concerning magistrates’ salary arrears.
Strasbourg Ruling Follows Order to Pay Magistrate Arrears
The Strasbourg ruling arrived just one week after the High Court of Cassation and Justice ordered the government to pay approximately 1 billion euros in salary arrears to magistrates within ten days, following a decision maintained from the Bucharest Court of Appeal, Digi24 reported. The National Liberal Party welcomed the European court’s outcome, stating through its press office that the judgment validates the stance of the former executive led by Ilie Bolojan and reinforces the separation of powers regarding public funds, according to Adevarul.ro. G4Media noted that the arrears originated after the supreme court and the general prosecutor’s office increased prosecutor and judge salaries by 25 percent in 2023, retroactively applied from 2018, leading the government to stagger payments as public expenditure pressures mounted. The decision marks the fourth time that a European court has sanctioned policies promoted by High Court of Cassation and Lia Savonea. According to the government, for 2026, the High Court of Cassation and Justice and the General Prosecutor’s Office, as credit authorizers, requested the allocation of a total sum of approximately 1,400,000,000 EUR as unpaid arrears stemming from judicial decisions and administrative rulings, including interest, as noted by CEDO. The state paid the amounts it considered owed to magistrates under judgments delivered between 2006 and 2010, through successive annual installments staggered between 2008 and 2015. Following the ÎCCJ decision, the Victoria Palace reacted by announcing that the Bolojan Government tried to avoid this situation through all legal appeal paths, including at the CCR.
