Aftermath of the Romanian revolution
Having seen the broadcast of the Ceausescus’ execution Romanians still could not believe that they were free. Soon after, they started celebrating though and demanded full democracy. However, implementing democracy did not come easy. As a first step some former Communist Party and police leaders, as well as Securitate officers were convicted, although the role of the army in the suppression of the protesters was overlooked. In spite of the fact that army leaders were responsible for a higher number of deaths than Communist Party leaders, they received amnesty. A few years after the initial convictions, Iliescu pardoned most of these former leaders.
Gica Popa, the judge who sentenced the Ceausescus to death allegedly committed suicide a few months after the execution. Rumours say that he was killed as a revenge for the death of the Ceausescu couple, however the circumstances of Mr. Popa’s death were never investigated.
Iliescu disappointed the people too. He wanted to make peace with the Soviet Union after the fall of the twin dictators, however the people did not want their lives to be affected by any remainder of Communism. They demanded full democracy and started demonstrating against the new government formed by the National Salvation Front. After a few months of suspension, the Securitate was re-organised with the reason that security, order and peace became crucial factors.
The situation of the Hungarian minority did not improve either. Even though László Tőkés became a member of the National Salvation Front and a minority party and the Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania (Romániai Magyarok Demokratikus Szövetsége – RMDSZ) was formed together with civil society organisations, including the Pro Europa Liga, nationalist unions, like Vatra Romaneasca emerged as well, leading to a conflict in Tirgu Mures (Marosvásárhely) in March 1990 where Romanian attacked Hungarians. Romanians were afraid that Hungarians would want independence and Transylvania to be attached to Hungary again. Instead of Mr. Tőkés new proponents came onto the scene during these events: Community leader Károly Király and writer András Sütő, whom Romanians beat up so severely that he lost sight of one eye. The government stayed inactive until the very last moments. As a result of this incident, foreign investors avoided the country and a lot of the inhabitants left.
Corruption was thriving in post-Ceausescu Romania. Since people lacked experience in market economy, new traders could easily mislead them by selling cheap goods at a significantly higher price. Many of these new traders included former Securitate officers who were not punished by their acts and became wealthy businessmen often playing a parallel role both in trade and in politics.
Change began slowly after 1996, when guilty verdicts were delivered against major army officers who had commanded violent operations before joining the National Salvation Front or had been promoted within the military hierarchy, including Victor Atanasie Stanculescu and Mihai Chitac. The two military leaders directed the violent suppression of demonstrators in Timisoara, having left 72 dead and 253 wounded.
After elections of candidates who turned out to be inappropriate to lead the country, Iliescu returned to power in 2000, having nullified the conviction of army officers and slowing down the investigations of the National Council for the Study of the Securitate Archives.
Following the new electoral cycle in 2004 the investigations started again. Traian Basescu became President of the country and set up the first independent judiciary with a determination to end corruption and to serve true justice in a democratic country. A committee was established to investigate the crimes during Communism. This was a first step towards the separation of powers. Besides the arrests of corrupt politicians and former traders an attempt to indict high ranking officers from the army, police and Securitate forces as well as civilians, including Iliescu was initiated. Although the case was closed down in 2007 by civilian prosecutors, who argued that the statute of limitations (15 years for murder in Romania) expired in 2005.
The government of Basescu also achieved Romania’s accession to the EU, sending an independent representative to the EU Parliament, Mr. Tőkés himself.
After the decision of the Romanian Constitutional Court in 2007 to exempt civilians from prosecution for military violence and thus to block efforts to prosecute Iliescu, the Association 21 December, representing the victims of the revolution brought a relevant case to the European Court of Human Rights. Association 21 December argued that the Romanian justice system breached Article 2 (regarding the right to life) and Article 8 (regarding the right to privacy) of the European Convention on Human Rights. This case was followed by numerous other cases concerning human rights breaches during the revolution. The European Court of Human Rights ruled in the Association 21 December case that despite the objective difficulties inherent to an investigation of the events during the revolution, there was no justification for the inactivity of the authorities over such a long period of time. The delay and the closure of criminal proceedings justified the breach of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Furthermore, the Court confirmed that the reference to the statute of limitations did not justify the closure of the investigations with the authorities remaining inactive following the widespread use of lethal force against a civilian population.
The Romanian revolution and the fall of Communism in Eastern Europe had a relevant impact on international justice as well. Since the end of the 1990s, a broader international law regime developed, stipulating that amnesty regulations are inadmissible under international law, as are statutory limitations and all other laws impending prosecutions for grave human rights violations. This regime has been applied in various judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights since the 1990s.
As a result of the European Court of Human Rights’ decision, Association 21 December persuaded the Supreme Court of Romania to re-open the investigations into the crimes of the Romanian revolution. The judges stated that due to the magnitude of violence these cases were not subject to the statute of limitations. Thus, an indictment in December 2018 was filed against Iliescu, however according to Ceausescu’s prosecutor, Dan Voinea, the charges will be dropped again due to inconsistencies in the evidence.
Regarding the Hungarian minority in the country, their number had dwindled to 20% of the population. The Romanian Constitution does not recognise them as factors contributing to the constitution of the state, hence their collective rights as a minority are not secured. Hungarians in Transylvania feel that the current political authority wants to divide the country again into regions, where Hungarians could not form a majority necessary for autonomy. The bleeding of former Hungarian institutions, including Medical University in Tirgu Mures continues. The mentioned university was melted into the Technical University of Romania. Another example is the Protestant Mikó Székely College, which was nationalised by Romania, with the reason that it could cease to be the Hungarian state’s property. In the summer of 2019, atrocities similar to the one in Tirgu Mures in March 1990 broke out due to a debate regarding the ownership of a military cemetery in Transylvania.
As a consequence, Hungarians in Romania tried to build up a close relationship with Hungary and especially with Hungary’s Prime Minister and his ruling party. In my opinion, this relationship is an unhealthy one though, as Hungary’s governing party is remarkably hostile towards civil society and human rights organisations, having even turned Mr. Tőkés against them. Sadly, the priest mentions these organisations as “fake civil society organisations” nowadays, forgetting about their previous role in the past. However, Hungarians in Romania still need the help of human rights and international minority organisations, with the aim of a peaceful cohabitation and a reduction of the hostilities between the two nations as there is no prospect in sight that the Treaty of Trianon will ever be withdrawn.
Romanians feel that the revolution did not fulfil their wish for democracy. The lack of a proper investigation into the killings during the revolution and the economic difficulties still have a sad impression on the nation. While some regret the execution of the Ceausescus, others have left the country in the hope for a better life in another EU Member State or elsewhere.
Source:
Raluca Grosescu: The Trials of the Romanian Revolution, Cultures of History Forum (17.01.2019), DOI: 10.25626/0093.
Sebastian Răduleţu, National Prosecutions as the Main Remedy in Cases of Massive Human Rights Violations: An Assessment of the Approach of the European Court of Human Rights, International Journal of Transitional Justice 9, no. 3 (2015)
Bácsfainé Dr. Hévízi Józsa: 1989 előtt és után – hogyan semmizte ki Románia az erdélyi magyarságot?, Erdélyi Napló (16.02.2019)
Recorder
Association “21 December 1989” and Others v Romania, Application No. 33810/07, 24 May 2011
The Irish Times
Cover by Pixabay
