Who is Călin Georgescu and Why Did Romania’s Elections Get Canceled?
Populist outsider scares Constitutional Court into undermining democracy.
No one saw him coming until – literally – election day. Mr. Călin Georgescu had long been a politician wannabe, but few knew of him, and even fewer thought he had any chance of success. It was as if Ms. Marianne Williamson had suddenly won the U.S. Democratic primaries overnight and was marching to the general election final, en fanfare.
Like Ms. Williamson, Mr. Georgescu also espouses syncretic beliefs – ranging from Eastern Christianity to New Age spirituality. He too promises to "heal the soul of the nation" and makes peace the focal point of his political messaging.
His platform, titled "Water, Food, Energy," is a mixed bag: a blend of right-wing populism, environmentalism, communitarian ideals, and neo-Malthusian ideas reminiscent of the "Club of Rome," where he claims he was once a member before publicly denouncing it. He is adamant that public resources should be publicly owned.
Yet, he has a penchant for making outlandish claims without batting an eyelash. For instance, he predicts water will become more expensive than oil and that Romania will achieve global dominance by constructing the first-ever international water pipeline.
Mr. Georgescu has also made apologetic remarks about controversial historical figures like Corneliu Zelea-Codreanu, a proto-fascist folk hero summarily executed on royal orders, and Ion Antonescu, Romania’s World War II leader formally executed for war crimes by the postwar communist regime. “True history will hail them as heroes,” he once said but has since avoided the topic. Also, he is extremely skeptical of climate change and vaccines.
Despite his controversial views, much of what he says resonates deeply with a majority of people. With a soothing voice and collected demeanor, he speaks of peace and prosperity – not just convincingly, but in a way that nobody else has tried in recent memory.
However, the role of president in Romania comes with limited prerogatives. A president cannot directly influence taxation or property policies but does have significant authority over defense and foreign policy. This means Mr. Georgescu would have the final say on whether to support Ukraine with weapons – or even troops. He is among the few candidates to unequivocally oppose such support.
---
These elections were expected to be the most uneventful in recent Romanian history, featuring a lackluster lineup of candidates. The ruling but polarizing party's Prime Minister, Mr. Marcel Ciolacu (PSD), seemed destined for an easy final against fringe candidate George Simion (AUR).
In the days leading up to the election, polls showed Mr. Georgescu as a surprise contender with about 5% of the vote. Exit polls on election day hinted he might narrowly qualify for the runoff. Then came the official count: a stunning upset. Mr. Georgescu came in first by a wide margin, securing 23% of the vote. Panic and chaos ensued.
President Klaus Iohannis convened the Council of Defense and suggested Russian interference in the elections. Intelligence agencies declassified reports pointing to suspicious TikTok funding activity, but the allegations were widely ridiculed. Many saw them as a disgrace to agencies that boast NATO’s highest intelligence budgets after the U.S. and U.K.
Not a shred of actual evidence of Russian interference was provided, then or later. Police attempted to investigate Mr. Georgescu’s bodyguards, sponsors, and campaign influencers but found no proof of any wrongdoing. While Mr. Georgescu reported "zero expenses," financing by third parties is in a legal gray area and makes for, at most, a misdemeanor.
A vote recount was ordered after another surprise: Ms. Elena Lasconi (USR) narrowly surpassed Prime Minister Ciolacu for second place. The recount confirmed the initial results, leading to their validation by the Constitutional Court.
Most mainstream parties, media outlets, and civil society rallied behind Ms. Lasconi and launched a blitzkrieg campaign against Mr. Georgescu, dredging up all the uncomfortable truths and quite a few "useful" exaggerations. Yet, polls showed that popular support for him remained steadfast, with projections suggesting a landslide victory in the runoff – potentially 60% or more.
Early voting had started on Friday, abroad, with some tens of thousands of ballots already cast when the people waiting in line heard the announcement: The elections are canceled. Go home!
The Constitutional Court had walked back on their previous decision and made a new one stating just the opposite: based on the unclassified reports, because some "state actor" gave one of the candidates an unfair financial advantage and disproportionate visibility, elections will start all over from scratch.
---
The Court’s decision, the first of its kind in its 33-year history, broke legal precedent by acting ex officio, after unsuccesfully asking Ms. Lasconi to file a complaint. Even more shocking was the unanimous ruling, overturning earlier dissenting opinions that such matters were outside the Court's jurisdiction.
Legal scholars are divided: some see this as a constitutional coup, while others view it as a painful but necessary measure. Almost none, however, consider it strictly legal. Comparisons have been drawn to Austria’s 2016 election redo over technicalities, though that instance ultimately upheld the original results.
Though not explicitly stated, it is widely expected that Mr. Georgescu will be barred from running again, something that never happened in a Western democracy. An ominous precedent had been set months earlier when the Court disqualified Ms. Diana Șoșoacă for her sympathetic stance toward Russia. That controversial decision, made by a narrow majority, had been viewed as a ploy to boost Mr. Simion’s chances and indirectly help Mr. Ciolacu. Ironically, it redirected support to Mr. Georgescu, creating the current crisis.
Another contentious aspect of the Court’s ruling extends President Iohannis’s term beyond the constitutional limit of December 21 to an indefinite date, but technically not possible earlier than spring 2025.
President Iohannis, unpopular after fostering an uneasy coalition between PSD and PNL, surprised everyone by announcing – hours before the Court’s decision was published – that he would remain in office. This marks the first time a European leader west of Russia or Belarus has extended their term beyond constitutional limits.
---
Having unsuccessfully sought a leadership role with the European Commission or NATO, Mr. Iohannis faces growing opposition. His legitimacy is now questioned by Mr. Georgescu’s supporters, disenchanted former backers, and even some "sovereignist" parties like Mr. Simion's AUR, who announced street protests.
Mr. Georgescu urged his supporters to avoid protests, advocating for legal challenges instead, but he also warned the constitutional judges of potential imprisonment and "eternal doom" if they did not reverse their decision.
With the Court’s authority final, legal appeals are unlikely to succeed, however no scenario can be completely ruled out at this stage. Their pursuants are hoping to at least force the prime-minister to set the date of elections sooner rather than later.
Mainstream parties are scrambling for a new candidate to challenge Mr. Georgescu – or whoever the people might favor. Bucharest’s mayor, Mr. Nicușor Dan, has stepped forward, hoping to unify opposition parties even against their will, as he has done in the past. However, while possibly the best shot available, his country-wide appeal is at best flimsy.
Meanwhile, Mr. Georgescu seems to be waiting for whatever comes his way while putting out Tiktok videos almost daily, to be viewed and cheered by millions.
---
There's no telling on how this might end:
– The current Constitution has lost consensus credibility and it's hard to ever get it back;
– The current president doesn't seem interested in anything except not leaving his cushy seat any time soon;
– Mr. Georgescu's supporters still want to vote for him, or for someone more or less like him, or at least not for anyone that the mainstream politicians and bureaucrats agree upon.