Position on the invitation to “dialogue” sent by the High Court of Cassation and Justice to civil society organisations
3 December 2025 – The signatory organisations respect the constitutional role of the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ÎCCJ) in administering justice alongside the other courts established by law, and in ensuring the uniform interpretation and application of the law by other courts. They recognise the role of the courts in protecting the rule of law.
For precisely this reason, we consider it necessary to explain publicly why we will not attend the meeting announced by the leadership of the ÎCCJ, through an invitation addressed to a limited group of non-governmental organisations. Our refusal does not reject dialogue as a democratic principle. On the contrary, dialogue is welcome when there is transparency, institutional accountability and a clear legal framework. In its present form, however, the invitation raises serious concerns about legitimacy and appropriateness.
1. Inviting only certain organisations raises questions about the dialogue’s genuine character
The invitation was sent to a limited group of organisations without stating the criteria used to select them, while a substantial share of civil society’s critical voices was excluded. Genuine dialogue requires participation by all relevant actors, rather than selection based on unclear, opaque criteria that excludes actors with critical positions. This practice reflects a desire for controlled consultation, rather than dialogue, and does not reflect society’s voice as a whole.
2. The ÎCCJ has no institutional mandate to initiate this kind of dialogue
Under the Constitution and legislation in force, the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM), rather than the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ÎCCJ), is the constitutional authority with the express mission and duty to guarantee judicial independence and represent the judiciary as a whole in its relationship with society and the other branches of government. This is why the CSM includes elected representatives of judges and prosecutors, ex officio members and representatives of civil society.
The ÎCCJ has no powers to organise or coordinate institutional dialogue with civil society on matters concerning the judicial system as a whole. It represents only part of the judiciary, and there is no relationship of subordination between the High Court and the other courts, nor does it represent the whole judiciary. In this context, the initiative risks creating a precedent in which the supreme court exceeds its mandate and assumes powers that do not belong to it.
3. The recent context provides no minimum guarantees for credible dialogue
In recent months, developments have raised serious concerns about judicial independence. These include frequent CSM statements against critical voices in civil society, the press and the legal community, and controversial decisions, including the recusal of a judge for intending to refer a question to the Court of Justice of the European Union. This crosses a red line in the erosion of the rule of law, a point also stressed by representatives of academia.
4. Civil society’s role is to challenge discretionary or abusive uses of power and flag matters of public interest concerning democracy, the rule of law or the judiciary, rather than provide symbolic validation
Civil society attends such meetings to represent the public interest, not to serve the ÎCCJ’s institutional image. Given the topics unilaterally set for discussion, dialogue at this time will take place in a framework where rules are not transparent, participant-selection criteria are unclear, and the entire initiative appears more a legitimising exercise than a consultation.
In conclusion, the signatory organisations remain open to genuine dialogue built on respect for the legal mandate, institutional transparency and equitable participation. Without these conditions, we cannot attend the proposed meeting because doing so would contradict our mission: defending the rule of law through critical, responsible and independent action.
Signatory organisations:
Agent Green
Asociația CIVICA
Bankwatch România
Centrul pentru Politici Durabile Ecopolis
Corupția Ucide
Comunitatea Declic
Evoluție în Instituție
Federația Inițiativa Timișoara
Freedom House România
Fundația Eco-Civica
Grupul pentru Dialog Social
Inițiativa România
Societatea Timisoara
Voluntari în Europa
