Social media interference and unknown funding: this is the reason the Romanian Court annulled the vote | EUROtoday

Listen to the audio model of the article

The first indication of irregularity was given instantly by him. Calin Georgescu-Roe, candidate for the presidency of the Romanian Republic initially admitted to the poll along with Elena Varica Vasconi, had declared zero leu (Romanian forex) as his electoral marketing campaign finances to the Electoral Authority. A press release “in contradiction” with intelligence data; incongruent with “the scope of the electoral campaign”; and opposite to the information {that a} candidacy “involves significant expenses”.

The transparency of financing – additionally for social networks (“they should be required to communicate data on political communication and sponsors”) – is among the many elements analyzed by the Romanian Constitutional Court within the causes for the sentence with which it annulled the process for the appointment of the brand new head of state. Just 5 pages – translated into Italian by the journal Nomos – which opened a world political and technical debate, echoed yesterday within the Constitutional Quaderni seminar of Il Mulino.

«The electoral process was vitiated all through its whole course and in all phases by a number of irregularities and violations of the laws», write the 9 judges explaining the explanations for a disruptive determination, which brings to account Russia’s hybrid battle of Vladimir Putin, however attracts criticism on the Court itself from those that contest her aiding the prime minister in workplace, the social democrat Ion-Marcel Ciolacu, who got here third within the competitors.

In the explanations, the judges recall the responsibility of constitutional management, the basic safety of each the “electoral rights of citizens and the foundations of the constitutional order, essential premises for maintaining the democratic character and the rule of law”. According to them, nonetheless, the voters’ vote was “manipulated” and equal alternatives between the candidates had been “distorted”, “through the non-transparent use of technologies and artificial intelligence, as well as through the financing of the electoral campaign from undisclosed sources.”

Specifically, “one of the candidates benefited from aggressive promotion, carried out by circumventing national legislation and abusively exploiting social algorithms.” For the judges, Calin Georgescu “benefited from preferential treatment on social media, with the effect of distorting the will of the voters”. A framework through which the Court deemed it essential to intervene, invoking the “responsibility of the State to prevent any unjustified interference” and the “duty to deal with the risks generated by disinformation campaigns which can compromise the integrity of electoral processes”.