The High Court of Cassation and Justice presented the reasoning in the case that led to Dominic Fritz losing his mandate as mayor of Timișoara

The High Court of Cassation and Justice ruled that Dominic Fritz acted “knowingly and deliberately” when he signed the administrative documents for a Zonal Urban Plan (PUZ) that could have benefited architect Răzvan Negrișanu, the person who had lent him money during the election campaign.

According to the reasoning behind the final decision, Fritz knew that he was Negrișanu’s debtor, a fact also mentioned in his asset declaration. The court rejected the claim that the mayor’s signature had been merely formal or automatic and pointed out that he could have delegated the duty to the municipality’s secretary general, even though the deputy mayors had not yet been elected.

The High Court of Cassation and Justice stated that the existence of a conflict of interest does not depend on an actual gain being made; it is sufficient for the act to have been capable of generating an advantage. The court also considered it relevant that Negrișanu abstained from voting on the PUZ in the Local Council, precisely to avoid a conflict of interest.

Dominic Fritz was declared to be in a conflict of interest by the National Integrity Agency after receiving a loan of 25,000 lei from the architect. He challenged the decision but ultimately lost at the High Court of Cassation and Justice on June 18. Subsequently, following the promulgation of the Integrity Law, his term as mayor of Timișoara ended, and his duties were taken over by Deputy Mayor Ruben Lațcău.

Read also Dominic Fritz on snap elections: “We must no longer treat snap elections as a constitutional curiosity, but as a real political solution” / What will Luca Niculescu’s government look like / What the designated prime minister says