Global Integrity Report

Romania Home

Facts

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2008 Assessment

Romania: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Romania: Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Election Integrity
Indicators		Score
17	Is there an election monitoring agency or set of election monitoring agencies/entities?	100
18	Is the election monitoring agency effective?	75
19	Are elections systems transparent and effective?	83

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

Is there an election monitoring agency or set of election monitoring agencies/entities?

17: In law, is there an election monitoring agency or set of election monitoring agencies/entities?

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Biroul Electoral Central (BEC)

The Electoral Law, 35/2008 [ LINK ]

Is the election monitoring agency effective?

18a: In law, the agency or set of agencies/entities is protected from political interference.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: The Electoral Law, 35/2008 [ LINK ]

Peer Review Comments: The agencies are run by political appointees. It might be argued that these appointments are politically balanced, although in practice this is not always the case.

18b: In practice, agency (or set of agencies/entities) appointments are made that support the independence of the agency.

Score:

100

Comments:

References: - Nicoleta Popescu, lawyer and civil society activist, APADOR-Helsinki Committee, Bucharest - Adrian Sorescu, civic activist and elections monitor, Asociatia Pro Democratia (APD), Bucharest

18c: In practice, the agency or set of agencies/entities has a professional, full-time staff.

Score:

100

Comments: For a long while Romania did not have a permanent Electoral Authority. It was set up only in 2004, through Law 373 / 2004, and put in charge of the logistics of the electoral process and the control of party finances. It remains a weak institution, however, as it has never been able to substantially control the funds of any party and publicly report the findings (it only collects self-reports from party treasurers). Moreover, its voters' database has always been a mess.

18d: In practice, the agency or set of agencies/entities makes timely, publicly available reports following an election cycle.

Score:

100

Comments: It does, if by "reports" we mean election results, including detailed breakdown of data by constituencies, etc. There are no other reports released by BEC.

18e: In practice, when necessary, the agency or set of agencies/entities imposes penalties on offenders.

Score:

100

Comments: Procedures are awkward, as this agency (BEC) must refer the cases to courts. In general, BEC is perceived as reluctant to act against frauds.

Are elections systems transparent and effective?

19a: In practice, there is a clear and transparent system of voter registration.

Score:

100

Comments:

19b: In law, election results can be contested through the judicial system.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Electoral Law, 35/2008

19c: In practice, election results can be effectively appealed through the judicial system.

Score:

100

Comments: The deadlines and procedures for such appeals are very restrictive; solid evidence provided by rival groups or NGOs on electoral fraud are regularly dismissed on procedural grounds.

19d: In practice, the military and security forces remain neutral during elections.

Score:

100

Comments:

19e: In law, domestic and international election observers are allowed to monitor elections.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Electoral Law, 35/2008

19f: In practice, election observers are able to effectively monitor elections.

Score:

100

$Scoring Criteria :: 100 Score Criteria: Election observers have unfettered access to polling sites, counting stations, and voters themselves. The government does not interfere with the observers\' activities. <p>50 Score Criteria: Election observers generally have access to polling sites, counting stations, and voters but encounter restrictions in certain areas. The government may impose burdensome regulatory or bureaucratic requirements on observers to discourage their involvement. <p>0 Score Criteria: Election observers\' movements are significantly limited by the government and many polling and counting sites are restricted or barred from observers. The government imposes so many bureaucratic or regulatory burdens on the observers that their mission is rendered ineffective.$

Comments: