After three weeks of intense media attention, the Parliamentarian Commission for president Basescu's Suspension only managed to present a long list of accusations, without presenting any evidence to support allegations.

The final report simply refers to a series of addenda which, they claim, cover over 700 pages.

The Constitution breaches Basescu is accused of include "rendering the Constitutional Court timorous" or designating a prime minister without consulting all parties. The addenda may become secret in case MPs decide so and the people, called to express their vote in a referendum for Basescu's suspension, may never know what evidence the Commission had for its conclusions.

In brief:

- the seven pages of the report contain accusations, but no arguments whatsoever;

- MPs take into account the Constitution only when it's to their advantage;

- the report calls for a criminal investigation against the Integration Minister, but no law articles are invoked to support the demand;

- the addenda may become a secret because it contains data about the activity of intelligence services.

Accusations and conclusions:

1. political supporter attitude;

2. detouring the electors' intention by designating a prime minister before consulting all political parties and without any consideration for the electoral result;

3. brutal interventions in the Parliamentarian activity;

4. generating a climate of political instability and an artificial governmental crisis;

5. bringing a severe prejudice to the entire Parliament, described as a "dump house clinically dead", and to the Government, also depicted as "serving groups of interests";

6. subordinating the intelligence services and demanding the resignations of their heads;

7. assuming the right to legislation initiatives;

8. constantly acting as to submit the Government and taking its place on occasions;

9. forming institutions on the spot, like the National intelligence Community

10. abusively taking part in a Govt. session that wasn't scheduled to discuss problems in the president's area of competence;

11. refusing to name ministers nominated by the prime minister;

12. demanding publicly what files must gain priority in justice;

13. asking judges to resign;

14. commenting on the solidity of convictions

15. rendering the Constitutional Court timorous;

16. accepting procedures that included illegal phone taps

17. failing to present a national defense strategy;

18. patronizing economy players;

19. having personal initiatives in foreign policy

The end of the document refers to criminal acts, but also without any arguments.