Today’s decision by the Central Electoral Bureau (BEC) to exclude Călin Georgescu from the presidential competition on 4 May 2025 is an act of responsibility and a strong signal to protect the legitimacy of the electoral process. This is not a political manoeuvre to obstruct a popular candidate, but a necessary measure to ensure respect for the law and safeguard national security, at a time when Romania faces delicate internal and external challenges.

The charges against Georgescu and the context of the annulment of the elections

The BEC’s decision comes in a particularly critical context. The November 2024 presidential elections were annulled by the Romanian Constitutional Court after the publication of desecreted documents that revealed Russian interference in favour of Georgescu. This discovery cast a very serious shadow over the integrity of the vote and made it imperative to exercise the utmost caution when selecting candidates for the new elections.

In February 2025, Georgescu was placed under judicial supervision on serious charges, including false statements on his campaign financing, dissemination of information potentially destabilising for the country and incitement against the constitutional order. The seizure of millions of dollars in cryptocurrencies traceable to his associates and the investigations into his alleged links with Russia confirm institutional concerns. Allowing his candidacy could have jeopardised democratic stability and the reliability of the entire electoral process.

Political reactions: between accusations of ‘coup’ and defence of democracy

The decision to exclude Georgescu provoked mixed reactions in Europe and Italy. Matteo Salvini, deputy prime minister and leader of the League, called the measure a ‘euro-golpe’, claiming it was a plot to prevent the victory of an inconvenient candidate: ‘Rejected in Romania the candidacy of Călin Georgescu. A Soviet-style euro-golpe. First they annul – with open ballots – the election he was winning, then they arrest him, then they even exclude him from the elections for fear that he will win. Forget ‘rearming Europe’, here we have to re-found it to defend Democracy.”

Marco Lombardo, a senator from Azione, spoke in the opposite direction, reiterating the need to defend democracy from outside interference: “The Georgescu affair shows how necessary and urgent it is, at European and national level, to have a Democratic Shield to stop foreign interference BEFORE the vote and to protect citizens’ trust in electoral processes.”

This is the direction taken by the bill that Azione will present on Monday 10 March at the Chamber of Deputies, entitled ‘Establishment of a democratic shield to defend the free exercise of the right to vote‘. The measure aims to counter the dissemination of false or manipulated content through information channels and social media, and to prevent the flow of funds from foreign states or organisations under their control, aimed at altering the electoral process. The presentation will be attended not only by Lombardo himself, but also by party secretary Carlo Calenda, together with deputies Matteo Richetti, Ettore Rosato and Federica Onori.

Why a legislative framework is needed

The Romanian affair confirms the difficulty of the context in which the institutions had to operate to defend democracy. The decision to exclude Georgescu, while appearing drastic, reflects the need to avoid external interference and to safeguard the country’s stability at a time of crisis. However,resorting to measures of this kind exposes the judiciary to the risk of having to make up for the shortcomings of politics, assuming a ‘creative’ role that does not belong to it.

It is here that the draft law presented by Azione takes on an even more central value: offering a clear and shared regulatory framework to block foreign interference and illicit funding flows, without having to resort to exceptional solutions. In a Europe shaken by destabilising thrusts, Azione’s initiative therefore appears even more opportune and necessary, because it restores to politics the full responsibility of protecting free democracy, without forcing the judiciary and electoral authorities to make emergency interventions that undermine citizens’ trust in institutions.