This paper analyses Romanian constitutional case law in terms of using foreign precedents and comes to the following conclusions:
In the first place, references to foreign precedents are not always made by the Constitutional Court itself, but by those who bring an action before the court and who use as arguments the case law of foreign states.
Secondly, the Romanian Constitutional Court makes references to foreign precedents without considering them as an argument for the decision to be made.
Thirdly , in some cases, reference tot foreign precedents is only used in separate opinions of judges of the Constitutional Court, these separate opinions having no legally binding effect.
Fourthly, such references to foreign precedents are only sporadic, without a permanent or repetitive nature, while frequent references are made by the Constitutional Court to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
All these references of national constitutional judges to foreign precedents must be understood as part of the dialogue between judges in order to create an universal legal heritage. This dialogue must not be seen as an opposition between national law order and international law order.