[ad_1]
The Sibiu court on Friday rejected the validation of the re-elected mayor of Sibiu, Astrid Fodor, reports a press release from the court.
„It is made public that, by the decision delivered in the Sibiu Court in the council chamber, on 10/16/2020, in file no. 9486/306/2020, the request made by the Electoral Board of the Municipal District of Sibiu – nº 1, for the validation of the mandate of mayor of Sibiu, attributed to Mrs. Astrid Cora Fodor, after the local elections held on 27 September 2020 ”, is shown in the statement of the Court of Sibiu.
According to the cited source, “Ms. Astrid Cora Fodor’s request for intervention was rejected as unfounded.”
An appeal against the decision can be filed within two days, according to the Sibiu Court.
What happens if the mandate of a mayor is not validated?
In the city of Sibiu, the elections for the position of mayor can be resumed in three months, in case the Court upholds the decision of the Court, which did not validate the mandate of Mayor Astrid Fodor, specified Mircea Cretu for the county prefect .
“Mrs. Fodor has the solution to appeal the decision of the Court to the court. The court can invalidate or validate the mayor. If it is validated, the normal procedure begins, in case of invalidation, the elections continue to be organized at the proposal of the mayor. prefect, within 90 days, by the Romanian Government ”, explained prefect Mircea Creţu, by Agerpres.
Why can’t Astrid Fodor be the mayor of Sibiu, even though she won the election?
Astrid Fodor ran for the post of mayor of Sibiu on September 27 for the Democratic Forum of Germans in Romania, winning the elections with a percentage of 43.05%, followed by the liberal candidate, Adrian Bibu, who obtained 31, 13% of the votes, according to the final results of the Provincial Electoral Table.
The National Integrity Agency recently announced that it has communicated to the entities that validate the mandates of local elected officials data and information about candidates for local elections who are under a 3-year ban from holding an eligible office, according to the art. 25 of Law No. 176/2010. Also on this list is the mayor of Sibiu, Astrid Fodor.
According to ANI, Astrid Fodor was in a state of incompatibility between September 27, 2012 and July 3, 2014, since she held both the position of deputy mayor of Sibiu and the quality of member of the Board of Directors of the College National “Samuel von Brukenthal” Sibiu.
Likewise, ANI said, Astrid Fodor was in a state of incompatibility and as a result of maintaining her membership in the Kindergarten Board of Directors with extended program no. 37 Sibiu, between September 27, 2012 and July 3, 2014, thus violating the provisions of art. 87 par. (1) on. d) of Law no. 161/2003.
In accordance with the legal provisions, the validation of mandates is carried out, where appropriate, by the court in whose territorial radius the electoral district for which the elections were held or the court in whose district the respective unit is located. administrative-territorial.
Therefore, art. 25, para. (2) of Law no. 176/2010 stipulates that “The person relieved or removed from his position in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1) or against whom the existence of the conflict of interest or the state of incompatibility has been established is deprived of the right to exercise another position or a public dignity that, subject to the provisions of this law, except electoral, for a period of 3 years from the date of issue, cessation of the respective public office or dignity or legal cessation of the mandate; if the person has held an eligible position, they will no longer be able to hold the same position. If the person ceases to hold a public office or dignity on the date of verifying the state of incompatibility or conflict of interest, the 3-year prohibition operates, according to the law, from of the date of permanence of the evaluation report, respectively of the final and irrevocable decision of the court that confirms the existence of a conflict of interest or incompatibility status “.
Regarding the aforementioned article of law, by Decision No. 418/2014, the Romanian Constitutional Court determined that the provisions of art. 25 par. (2), second sentence, are constitutional to the extent that the phrase “same function” refers to all the eligible functions provided for in art. 1 of the same law.
