Narrating Victim-hood

Abstract

test that communist-era actors have been prevalent and important in both the political and judicial fi elds. Hein explains the transition in Romania by using the concept of ‘patrimonialism’, manifested in a ‘highly personalised, authoritarian, or semi-authoritarian regime’ (324). In both Romania and Bulgaria, Hein observes how the judicial institutions at all levels were constantly subject to political interventions, and yet the new constitutional practice was nevertheless continuous, thanks to the adherence to the law by some of the relevant actors. He grants that the political organization in Bulgaria was more stable than in confl ict-ridden Romania. Progressively, in both cases, the impetus to eff ect essential changes manifested itself in the desire to join the EU. For both nations, the author off ers a careful account of the legal struggles against the political background of each country, showing how their constitutional expansions refl ected broader political contexts. Hein points out that in the constitutional developments of both countries, foreign consultants exerted a signifi cant eff ect to ensure the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, particularly in view of EU membership conditions during the accession process. In light of certain proceedings that many today would prefer to forget, the transformation of power in Romania in 2004 and the election of Băsescu as president meant a break with the enormous politicisation of the judiciary by the Iliescu government between 2000 and 2004. Minister of Justice Stănoiu replaced almost all of the prosecutors assigned to investigating corruption and the events of December 1989; he suspended the implementation of verdicts against former army generals with regard to the order to shoot in December 1989; and he cancelled rulings related to the return of property. Judicial salaries were frozen in order to intimidate members of the apparatus, resulting in increased susceptibility to corruption. PSD Prime Minister Năstase publicly called for a pro-government law that completely shut down the legal fi ght against corruption. Hein refers to ‘a comprehensive re-politicisation of law enforcement, judicial and self-management activities of the judiciary’. He calls this phase the obscurest era of the judiciary in postcommunist Romania (358). The issue of the ‘suspicion of self-promotion of the political elite’ (445) after 1990 is discussed again and again. Hein convincingly concludes that in both countries the ‘effi ciency and consistent independence of the judiciary institutions remain precarious’ (462). The author presents a content-rich study that is analytically, argumentatively, and stylistically of the fi rst order, which would merit publication in Romanian and Bulgarian as well. Indeed, this is one of the fi rst thorough, knowledgeable, and balanced presentations of intertwined legal and political developments in postsocialist Eastern Europe.