Romanian Presidential Election

Romania’s presidential elections will be held again on 4 and 18 May 2025. The Constitutional Court annulled the original vote of November 2024 on 6 December, citing foreign interference and irregularities. Independent candidate Călin Georgescu, a nationalist and EU and NATO sceptic, had won a relative majority in the first round. On 9 March 2025, Georgescu was barred from running in the new elections by the Central Election Commission. A new ruling cited his inability to uphold democratic values, referring to previous rulings by the Constitutional Court. This sparked national protests and demonstrations and attracted international attention. Supporters view it as a triumph of militant democracy, while critics accuse the institutions of electoral manipulation.

Following the commission’s decision clashes between his supporters and police broke out. The decision was later upheld by the Constitutional Court. Virtually unknown before the election, Georgescu was a former senior civil servant. He rose to prominence through a coordinated social media strategy and illegal and undeclared payments to social media influencers. In the days leading up to the vote, approximately 25,000 previously inactive TikTok accounts began amplifying his content, helping it go viral. According to the Romanian intelligence service, the election was also targeted by roughly 85,000 cyberattacks on the country’s electoral IT infrastructure, with Russia allegedly responsible. The Kremlin denies these allegations, although Georgescu’s positions are clearly in line with Russian strategic interests. He is known for his far-right nationalist views, his opposition to continued aid to Ukraine and his advocacy of distancing Romania from Western alliances. These positions made him a highly polarizing figure both domestically and internationally. After the annulment, he received vocal support from prominent U.S. figures including Vice President J.D. Vance and businessman Elon Musk. Georgescu was able to appeal to rural areas, foreign Romanians and those disillusioned with politics. He was successful in exploiting the broad social divide between the urban and the rural, the educated and the marginalised, modern values and traditional identity. This divide will continue to shape the dynamics of the election.

George Simion, the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), has emerged as Georgescus successor, seeking to inherit his electoral base. Simion, a 38-year-old nationalist and outspoken critic of the political establishment, shares Georgescu’s anti-system rhetoric and nationalist positions. Despite the similarities, he lacks the media reach and momentum of his predecessor. While polls suggest he could lead in the first round, analysts question whether his support is broad or mobilizable enough to ensure a second round victory. Meanwhile, Bucharest mayor Nicușor Dan has emerged as the leading reformist candidate, running as an independent and attracting support from the centre-right, including former PNL and USR voters. Known for his technocratic style and focus on anti-corruption and urban governance, Dan benefits from a reputation as a political outsider. Crin Antonescu, the candidate of the ruling coalition (PSD, PNL, UDMR), relies on party infrastructure but faces internal resistance and lacks public enthusiasm. Recent polls suggest that Dan would defeat both Simion and Antonescu in a run-off, making him the current frontrunner in a polarised political climate.

Beyond the candidates, the state of democratic institutions in Romania remains the other key issue. Trust in the state, its institutions and the political system has declined in recent years. This is due to repeated government changes, persistent instability and the absence of meaningful reform. In addition, many voters believe that corruption, nepotism and abuse of power are widespread. Although the Constitutional Court justified Georgescu’s exclusion on the grounds of protecting constitutional values, critics argue that it introduced a new and controversial interpretation of the Romanian constitution. Under the new ruling, candidates were judged on their “democratic commitment”. This broke with long-standing legal precedent. Although intelligence reports cited Russian influence in the annulment, no hard evidence was made public. This has led to accusations that the court acted in the interests of certain political forces, particularly the ruling coalition. As a result, some see the decision not as a defence of democracy, but as a strategic use of legal mechanisms to engineer a preferred election outcome. This perception reinforces conspiracy thinking, deepens institutional distrust and fuels the belief that the state protects the elite from the people rather than representing them.

In democratic systems, unlike authoritarian regimes, even extreme or system-critical candidates must be tolerated, making them more vulnerable to internal and external manipulation. Georgescu benefited from this openness. While the cancellation of the election and his exclusion were legally justified, they moved within a legally and politically ambiguous space—and are perceived by parts of the population as politically motivated. This perception reinforces conspiracy narratives, deepens distrust in state institutions, and intensifies social polarisation. Romania faces the challenge of defending democratic principles without further eroding public trust. To do so, it must strengthen transparency and define clear standards for political candidacy. Investments in cybersecurity are needed to protect elections from digital interference. Combating disinformation requires greater efforts in media literacy and civic education. At the same time, reforms in the judiciary and public administration remain essential. Romania is not alone in facing such hybrid threats. In the long run, only strong and resilient democracies can serve as reliable partners within Europe.