A top Romanian court on Tuesday rejected an appeal by far-right politician Calin Georgescu to lift a ban on his candidacy in the presidential rerun.
He won the first round of last year’s race before the same court annulled the election.
The ruling by the Constitutional Court in the capital Bucharest, which was unanimous, came two days after the Central Election Bureau rejected Mr Georgescu’s candidacy for the May election.
It was not immediately clear on what grounds the court made Tuesday’s decision, which is final.
Hundreds of Georgescu supporters who had gathered near the court, many waving Romanian flags, responded by chanting “Thieves!”.
Supporters of Calin Georgescu react during a protest after Romania’s Constitutional Court upheld a ban on his candidacy in the presidential election rerun, in Bucharest, Romania (Vadim Ghirda/AP)
The bureau had cited in its decision on Sunday the Constitutional Court’s ruling last year to cancel the elections after allegations of electoral violations and that Russia had run a co-ordinated online campaign to promote Mr Georgescu, who ran as an independent.
The decision to cancel the election was made two days before the December 8 runoff.
Mr Georgescu had denounced his ban on Sunday as “a direct blow to the heart of democracy worldwide” and said: “Europe is now a dictatorship, Romania is under tyranny!”
The court’s decision on Tuesday is likely to inflame tensions in the European Union and in the Nato member country, which has been gripped by a protracted political crisis since the election was cancelled last year.
The first round of the rerun is scheduled for May 4. If no candidate wins more than 50% of the ballots, a runoff will follow on May 18.
Romania’s far-right – which holds about a third of seats in the country’s legislature – will likely seek to replace Mr Georgescu’s candidacy, the deadline for which is March 15 at midnight.
Many observers have speculated that his close political ally, George Simion, could take up the mantle.
“We will decide tonight what is happening next because we are facing a huge blow against democracy and the rule of law,” Mr Simion, the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians, told The Associated Press after the ruling on Tuesday.
“There is no democracy in Romania, (I) hope we will restore it.”
The court’s final decision came after prosecutors launched a criminal investigation against Mr Georgescu last month, accusing him of “incitement to actions against the constitutional order”, supporting fascist groups and false declarations of electoral campaign funding and asset disclosures.
Before the November 24 election, Mr Georgescu, who is under judicial control and has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, had polled in the single digits and declared zero campaign spending.
Allegations quickly emerged of electoral violations and Russian interference. Moscow denied that it had meddled in the election.
Mr Georgescu has praised Russian President Vladimir Putin and questioned Ukraine’s statehood in the past, but says he is not pro-Russia.
Romania’s decision to annul the election, and this week’s ban on Mr Georgescu’s candidacy in the redo, has been strongly criticised by US Vice President JD Vance, Elon Musk and Moscow.
Russian state news agency Tass quoted Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov as saying on Tuesday that any election without Mr Georgescu’s participation “will have no legitimacy”.
That remark came a day after Mr Musk asked in a post on his X account: “How can a judge end democracy in Romania?”
Elena Lasconi, the leader of the Save Romania Union party, who was set to face Mr Georgescu in the scheduled runoff last year, said after the court’s decision that “Romanians need to regain their confidence in the institutions” and that “We are more divided than ever”.
“I understand that some people are angry and others are happy about this decision,” she wrote on Facebook.
“But we cannot celebrate without thinking that there are still consequences: frustration, deepening divisions and growing distrust in our institutions … Our democracy is fragile and such a decision should remain an exception, not a rule.”