* ---- *

Girly glitter comments from www.GirlyTags.com

Great president or small president ?

All means accepted by the Fundamental law to remove from office the head of state are legitimate since Traian Basescu hasn't met by far the obligations conferred by the Constitution, on the contrary, he has done everything possible to block the reform in Romania. However, this is politicians' business and it will be the citizens' too when they have the occasion to decide, under circumstances different from those of the referendum. If we analyze the PNL (National Liberal Party) proposition aiming at a major change of a constitutional nature relating to the president's status, we must leave aside the person Traian Basescu. The fundamental law cannot be changed on account of the fact that we like a person or not or because a person is harmful or beneficial. There are different reasons that should prevail. That is why, starting the reality we have, for establishing a limit line between presidential attributions and the Executive's, and a bad Constitution that generates, as we've seen, tensions and crises between the Palaces, we must opt without prejudices for the best structure which it should be turned into. We do not need a semi-presidential republic, that's clear. But what is it better to have ? Is it good for us to have in the future a parliamentary republic or a presidential republic ?
Any of the solutions is, for certain, better than the semi-presidential republic. That's because in any of the two options, the war of fundamental state institutions can be avoided, to their benefit and, eventually, to the citizen's benefit. The citizen's sick of quarrels, scandals, plots leading nowhere or crisis blocking the reform and delay development. So, if we talk about the reform of the political class, let's do it starting from the top.
If we are to have a presidential republic, before making an option, we might have to look carefully towards the United States, as they surely have the most functional presidential republic. How are things organized there ? The elected president of the United States is the chief of Executive as well. Therefore, if things go well, he is the one winning laurels. If things go bad, it's him again to catch it hot. You will never hear an American president cursing the Government. Never ! Things are the same the other way round: no Government would attack its president. In the most frequently met hypothesis among the Western democracies, that of a parliamentary republic, the situation is, again, relatively simple, as far as attribution delimitation is concerned. That's because in this scenario, the president has no executive attributions. Consequently, he has no right to interfere in the governing relating matters, or to comment them, from his quality of a head of state. He has a rather representative role. In a parliamentary republic, the political class installs the president and, when he becomes undesirable, the political class is again the one that removes him. This is done, as a rule, by the agency of the most important democratic institution, the Parliament.
As far as I am concerned, I opt for the formula of a parliamentary republic. That is because I do not consider Traian Basescu a dangerous individual, doing more bad that good, but simply because I'm terribly afraid of the effects the absence of a long democratic tradition might have in Romania. One's temptation, no matter who the individual is, to use power for himself and in the citizens' interest is huge and ubiquitous. Moreover, the citizen himself, illiterate in matters of politics and somehow tipsy, is tempted to label as week a Democrat president and to unconsciously throw himself into the arms of a father, perceived as a providential someone.
So, a president elected by the Parliament would be good.

Sorin Rosca Stanescu
Ziua Marti 4 Septembrie 2007 http://www.ziua.net/english

BOR accuses CNSAS

The Romanian Orthodox Church (BOR) questions the capacity of CNSAS (National Council for Research on the Communist Secret Service Archive) to give objective verdicts and accuses the campaign launched against the Orthodox clergymen. "We have witnessed during the past weeks a campaign backed up also by some members of the CNSAS College who have launched serious accusations, unproved in any way, against some passed away Orthodox clergymen, by the publication of some questionable denouncements from the ex-communist secret service archive", states the Patriarchy in a press release, as quoted by Rompres News Agency. The Patriarchy accuses this attempt of humiliating the Church and the troubling of the elections for the new Patriarch, that are to be held on September 12. Moreover, BOR appreciates that the historic context of the communist times have to be explained and made known in detail before assessing the different actions of some clergymen.

Cristian Andrei
Ziua Marti 4 Septembrie 2007 http://www.ziua.net/english

CNSAS, treated with refuse

-- High clergy accuse the College of interference
The CNSAS (National Council for Research on the Communist Secret Service Archive) College faced yesterday the refuse of the high clergy to come to hearing, the only one who answered the request of the institution being the Archbishop of Alba, Andrei Andreicut. On the other hand, Archbishop of Suceava and Radauti, Pimen Zainea, Bishop Arges, Calinic Argatu and Bishop Arad, Timotei Seviciu, didn't honour the CNSAS request. The Metropolitan Bishop of Cluj, Alba, Crisana and Maramures, Bartolomeu Anania, informed, by a press communiqué, that hew considered the approach of the College as an interference in the internal affairs of BOR (Romanian Orthodox Church), and Metropolitan Bishop Daniel denied any collaboration with the former communist secret police.
Andreicut: I have disburdened my soul
Archbishop of Alba Andrei Andreicut came to the seat of CNSAS tomake clarifications relating to his collaboration with the communist secret police (Securitatea). (...) After the hearing, Archbishop of Alba Andrei Andreicut said he didn't have a network file, but an informer file. Moreover, he said the Securitate harassed him during the communist regime and then he offered each journalist an issue of his book, written in 2001, "Fairy-tales makers are gone". The Archbishop of Alba said that the book contains many pages of his file and it shows he didn't do political police activities. Andrei Andreicut admitted he had collaborated with Securitatea out of constraint, but he claimed he didn't harm anyone.
Bartolomeu Anania: Interference in the BOR affairs

HH Bartolomeu, Metropolitan Bishop of Cluj, Alba, Crisana and Maramures, criticized in a press release the approach of CNSAS, which he considers as interference in the Church business. HH Bartolomeu Anania said he had been surprised to receive an invitation to be heard by CNSAS, and the invitation be made at the request of the Romanian Civic Forum. "Such an invitation was addressed to other colleagues from the Holy Synod as well and it was launched about the day the Romanian Orthodox Church is to elect a new Patriarch. It bears all the signs of an inconceivable interference in the internal affairs of an autonomous institution", explained Bartolomeu Anania, according to a NewsIn release. The Metropolitan Bishop of Cluj was also disturbed by the way in which he was called to hearing, at a fixed date and hour, and said this practice reminded him the "awful times when he could be taken out of his cell anytime, during the day or at nighttime, and brought through the darkness of the black-lens glasses to be interrogated by the investigators of the Securitate".
Metropolitan Bishop Daniel denies any collaboration
The Metropolitand Bishop of Moldova and Bucovina, HH Daniel, said yesterday he had no knowledge of a file on him that might attest his collaboration with the former communist secret police. Sources in the College stated last week that the name of the Metropolitan Bishop of Moldova appeared in a minute of SIE (Foreign Intelligence Service) dated 1990, which indicates the fact that he had collaborated with Securitatea, but his file had been burnt.
HH Daniel assures, for the time being, the patriarchal lieutenancy, after the death of Patriarch Teoctist.

Cristian Andrei
Ziua Marti 4 Septembrie 2007 http://www.ziua.net/english