The Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) on Wednesday rejected the referral from the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) regarding the new draft law of the Bolojan Government on the reform of magistrates’ pensions and ruled that the legislative act is constitutional, officials of the Constitutional Court told AGERPRES. 

The ruling was issued after five postponements.

At a hearing on 16 January, all nine CCR judges were present, but the ruling was deferred to allow further study of several documents, including an independent accounting report submitted by the High Court a day earlier. 

Two previous hearings were unable to proceed after four judges failed to attend, arguing various reasons including being called to work on non-working days and short notice of the meetings.

The High Court, led by Lia Savonea, announced on 15 January that an expert report indicated that, under the government's proposals, magistrates' service pensions could fall below pensions calculated solely on the basis of contributions, and the document was sent to CCR judges.

The draft law provides for a gradual increase in the retirement age to 65 and stipulates that pensions cannot exceed 70 per cent of the net salary received in the final month of service. 

The Superior Council of Magistracy issued a negative opinion on the draft. Judges and prosecutors called for pensions to remain close to their final salary, while Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan insisted on the 70 per cent ceiling.

An earlier version of the reform was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court on 20 October following a challenge by the High Court, on ground that the government had failed to seek the consultative opinion of the Superior Council of Magistracy within the legally required timeframe.

In early December, the High Court's United Sections voted unanimously, with all 102 judges present, to challenge the new draft as well.

The High Court maintained that the bill effectively abolished service pensions for magistrates who do not meet retirement conditions at the time of its entry into force and could result in future pensions falling below those in the public system. It also argues that the legislation undermines judicial independence and contradicts previous rulings of the Constitutional Court, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. AGERPRES (RO - writing by: Mihai Stoica; EN - writing by: Adina Panaitescu)