Senate's Juridical decision to recommend prosecutors not to open a criminal inquiry against former Prime Minister Adrian Nastase was qualified by Transparency International as anti-Constitutional, a press release for informs. The organization draws the attention that, by giving grounds to the decision such as "procedural flaws" comes against the purpose of the Parliamentarian immunity and that the Parliament can not act as a substitute of the Court.

Transparency International Romania expressed its indignation with the decision of the Senate's Juridical Commission, to reject the launching by anti-graft prosecutors of a criminal inquiry against Nastase.

TI-Ro argues that the positive or negative notice the Parliament is entitled to give has as only purpose the protection of Parliamentarians against possible abusive inquiries, not to decide whether fair evidence exists or not, in order to continue an investigation.

Even more, the evidence can not be considered unless the criminal inquiry is launched, not in the previous stage, of Parliamentarian approval. "The only warrant the Parliament has is to decide whether the object of an inquiry is abusive or not", the press release reads. To prove the innocence or guilt of a citizen or to say whether the evidence is solid or not is a job for the Court.