This is the reason given by the court. Used google translate on paragraph 14 (on page 3) from this document: <a href="https://www.ccr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Hotarare_32_2024.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.ccr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Hotarare_32_20...</a>
Who's not smelling a rat ?<p>"In the present case, the freely expressed nature of the vote was violated by the fact that voters were misinformed through an electoral campaign in which one of the The candidates benefited from an aggressive promotion, carried out in circumvention of the national legislation in the field of electoral and by abusive exploitation of the algorithms of social media platforms. Vote manipulation was all the more obvious as the electoral materials promoting a candidate did not carry the signs specific to electoral advertising according to Law no. 370/2004. In addition, the candidate also benefited preferential treatment on social media platforms, which had the effect of distorting the manifestation of the will of the voters."
Am I missing something? It sounds like Russia made some posts on TikTok but then they say Russia took "aggressive hybrid action" without explaining it. Is that just a scary way of saying tiktok posts? This article is so vauge about what Russia allegedly did that was "aggressive".<p>If a foreign government making posts on tiktok is enough to make an election illegitimate, then do they really think their previous election was legitimate? Surely there was some bad actor doing the same thing in previous elections?
That is remarkable. I wish the article could be more detailed. I'd be fascinated to read more about their thinking. (They may well not have issued a more detailed document yet.)<p>I don't know anything about Romanian courts. I'm not even sure if the US Supreme Court would have that authority. Our Court basically has the authority that it takes and we let it take, since the Constitution is incredibly vague about what the court really does, but I can't imagine it canceling elections unless the vote-counting process itself became suspect.<p>In the US, a foreign disinformation campaign is just plain legal. We may not like it, but people will insist on their right to vote on whatever basis they want. About the only limit is that you can't literally buy votes, and even that isn't so sure any more.
More discussion: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42339819">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42339819</a>