Talk:Politics of Romania

Untitled
human rights in Romania —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.139.171.82 (talk • contribs) 10 November 2006.

Parliamentary or semi-presidential system?
There are some inconsistencies on this topic:

1. In the head sentence, Romania is presented as a parliamentary system.

2. In Semi-presidential systems article Romania is listed as a semi-presidential system.

3. In List of European Union member states by political system Romania is shown as a parliamentary system. Deciding which of this two systems should be kept is somewhat difficult. Here is a list of arguments I could find:

Pro semi-presidential
1. The President of Romania is directly elected 2. The Prime Minister of Romania is nominated by the President of Romania 3. The Prime Minister is invested by a vote from the Parliament of Romania and can be dismissed by a vote of no confidence. 4. The President has the authority to dissolve the Parliament, but only in strict conditions. 5. The President does not have the authority to dismiss the Prime Minister (article 107, section 2 of the Constitution of Romania).

Pro parliamentary system
1. The President of Romania has no specific attributions other then those specific to a ceremonial figure-head.

Based on these arguments I'd have to conclude that Romania is a de facto semi-presidential system with a strong system of checks and balances that limit the authority of the President. Bogdantudor 16:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not agree. All of this is also true for Finland and Austria, yet those are clearly parliamentary system. Direct election is completely independent from this issue, by the way. I'm absolutely certain that Romania is a parliamentary system as much as Finland and Austria; it's just that they are parliamentary systems which have reserved a few controll powers for the president. Compare the three with France and you will see they are not semi-presidential. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 11:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd have to agree with Nightstallion's points here. The notion that Romania is a semi-presidential system is based on the misconception that 'it has a president, therefore it has to be presidential'. It's definitely a parliamentary system (but the mistake is so widespread throughout several Wikipedia articles that I don't have the time to go and correct it).Vlaflipje1982 (talk) 14:32, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Future Accession to the European Union?
The article currently phrases as follows:

"The government's overriding objective has been accession for Romania into the European Union, scheduled to take place in 2007 or 2008."

Is Romania scheduled to join the European Union or has it already at this point? mdkarazim 22:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

of vs. in
Why "Politics in Romania", when all the other articles are "Politics of..."

ES Vic (talk) 16:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Noted. Requesting move now. Lockesdonkey (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Important notice
The government section of the "Outline of Romania" needs to be checked, corrected, and completed -- especially the subsections for the government branches.

When the country outlines were created, temporary data (that matched most of the countries but not all) was used to speed up the process. Those countries for which the temporary data does not match must be replaced with the correct information.

Please check that this country's outline is not in error.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact The Transhumanist.

Thank you.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:34, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 2017 Romanian protest - banner (1).jpg