(Bucharest, 11.01.2014) Blog Monica Macovei
Ponta’s disappearance has only one explanation: the fear
Victor Ponta attacked directly the judiciary, mocked the honest work of some judges and prosecutors and then flew into hiding.
The fear of not being held accountable has made Ponta choose the most cowardly attitude: to hide.
Ponta must be held accountable:
- For the relentless attacks on the judiciary, the rule of law and the democracy in Romania;
- For keeping in the office, in the “most rightful Government” – as Ponta said, a minister sent to trial for fraud – Liviu Dragnea;
- For the Government’s adoption of unconstitutional laws, like the law on decentralisation;
- For secretly adopting emergency ordinances;
- For being incapable of designing a Strategy for using European funds for Romania for the next 6 years.
The Government, as public institution, has the duty to promptly and correctly inform the public about the Prime minister’s agenda and his whereabouts.
Ponta has behaved these days as an intoxicated driver who hits and runs, hoping that no one will catch him and hold him accountable for his deeds. Romania cannot not be driven by an intoxicated driver, so Ponta has to resign.
(January 8, 2014) Monica Macovei – Political opinion
Ponta the liar finally said a truth: the “organizational culture” of PSD is that of an “organised criminal group”. Ponta is Capo di tutti capi.
The appeal in the trial of the defendant Relu Fenechiu (PNL), ex-minister in the USL Government led by Victor Ponta, was held yesterday January 7, 2014. Fenechiu is accused by DNA that he re-sold dozens of overpriced old transformers (which apparently were junk iron) to the power company Moldova, using 46 fraudulent public procurement procedures where the companies of Fenechiu were constantly declared winners. The damage to the public budget is of approximately 2 million euro. Fenechiu was sentenced by a first instance court to 5 years in prison and the last appeal is pending before the Supreme Court.
Monday, January 6, when Nastase was sentenced to 4 years and taken to prison, PSD insulted and threatened judges and prosecutors, accusing them of producing political cases, while PNL sent only a dull press release. Ponta declared “We have more courage than them. It was us who defended Fenechiu more than them. They have another type of organizational culture.”
Among the bunch of lies that Ponta uses to intoxicate everyone day and night, he finally tells a truth: PSD is a gang of “courageous people” whose target is to steal and whose “organizational culture” is to protect each other against justice.
Behind the red logo of PSD, with three roses, it is not actually a party, but an “organized criminal group”. A party – even a left wing one – should promote the wealth of everyone, not only of a group of thieves who want to enrich themselves with public money, our money.
The PSD’s “organizational culture” of supporting the criminality, which Ponta talks about, is confirmed by the dialogue from 2012 between Victor Paul Dobre and Ioan Rus, two ex-ministers in the USL Government, not “courageous” enough to carry out the orders received from the USL to fraud the referendum of 2012.
According to the transcripts published by the media, when the party asked them to change under their signature the voting lists in order to fraud the voter turnout at the 2012 referendum, one of them was asking: “Would it be better to leave this organized criminal group!”, while the other was saying “We might be stupid, but really dumb we are not! […] I really don’t want to spend my old age in prison!”.
The declarations of Ponta of 7th January 2014 prove that all the attacks against the judiciary, since USL has taken the power in Romania in 2012, have not been momentary glitches or accidental reactions, but premeditated actions that follow a clear plan to hit and control the judiciary, so that they can quietly steal, unhindered by any state institution or by any judge or prosecutor.
This way, Ponta places all the PSD members in the “organized criminal group”, as if they were some obedient vassals complying with the orders received from the party to be guardians of thieves and corrupt people of PSD and USL. Has someone the courage to take a stand?
Ponta is Capo di tutti capi of this “organised criminal group”.
(Bucharest, 07.01.2014) Blog Monica Macovei
Ponta speaks like a Communist: for him any political adversary is a “Nazi” and a “Fascist”
The irresponsible statements made by Ponta trample the memory of tens of millions of victims of Nazis and Fascists.
Yesterday`s statements of the PSD president and prime minister Victor Ponta, accusing me of thinking like a “Nazi” and a “Fascist” are a lie and an insult to those who have suffered under the Nazi and Fascists reigns of terror around the world. The fact that Ponta, the author of these irresponsible statements, is the head of the Romanian Government brings serious harm to Romania and to Romanians.
Ponta’s statements are identical with those of Iliescu and the communists: any political adversary is a “Nazi” and a “Fascist”.
Under the Nazi dictatorship of Adolf Hitler, as well as under the Fascist regimes around the world, tens of millions of people have lost their lives and serious crimes against humanity were committed, condemnable by any democratic country that respects human rights. Calling someone a “Nazi” today is a very serious insult that is punishable in Germany.
By irresponsibly and maliciously using the terms “Nazi” and “Fascist”, Ponta is mocking the historical significance of the Holocaust and of the crimes of Nazism, and he is again spreading around the world a negative image of Romania and of Romanians.
There are two precedents already in this regard from the Social Democratic Party, the party that Ponta is leading I am referring here to the statement of Minister Dan Șova, who has denied the Holocaust in Romania, and to the nomination at the Romanian Constitutional Court of Lucian Bolcaș, an admirer of the former Romanian pro-Nazi ruler Ion Antonescu. With the current irresponsible comments, Ponta followed in their footsteps.
The free movement of Romanians in the European Union is a fundamental right of the common European market, a right that I have long supported and promoted. I am glad that as of January 1, 2014, the Romanians can work in all EU countries without a work permit. The Romanians who work in the EU member states bring benefits to the economies of these countries and paytheir taxes and contributions. Prestigious publications such as The Economist and Frankurter Allgemeine Zeitung have welcomed the lifting of work restrictions for Romanians in Great Britain and Germany.
I don’t agree with the proposal to fingerprint the Romanians and Bulgarians, who are citizens of the European Union, and that can traveland workfreely anywhere in the European Union. Obviously, once settled in other Member States they must not abuse the welfare system, just as they should not abuse it in Romania. We do not support lies and falsehoods neither at home, nor in the European Union, for which we all have to pay from our pockets, but we support the honest work.
The danger for Romania today does not come from the statements made by some EP members, but from Ponta himself. Through his irresponsible statements to protect the corrupt politicians, Ponta is scaring and concerning any reasonable person who is accustomed to the rule of law found in democratic countries.
Ponta and USL are responsible for the repeated attempts to remove Romania from the Western world and the European Union.
For making the irresponsible and unfounded accusations of “Nazi” and “Fascist”, for protecting the corrupt politicians, and for attacking the judiciary and the rule of law, becoming as a result a great danger for Romania, Ponta has to resign as prime minister.
(Bucharest, 06.01.2014) Blog Monica Macovei
Sentencing Adrian Năstase to four years in prison is a lesson for corrupt politicians
Sentencing Adrian Năstase to four years in prison for taking bribe is a success of the judiciary and a lesson for all politicians who are corrupt and who steal. Justice works independently and politicians should not commit anymore corruption offenses, they should not steal anymore, because they will go to jail as any other citizen who breaks the law.
Now no one can credibly maintain anymore that the criminal files of National Anticorruption Directorate and judged at the High Court are politically influenced. These files went to the courts, as desired by the defendants, including Năstase. Năstase’s file became public once it reached the court and the judges of the High Court sentenced Năstase based on the real evidence provided in the case file.
Ponta hypocritically and deceivingly complained that Năstase was harassed his all life. I remind you that, as minister of Justice and at the prosecutors’ request, I asked the Chamber of Deputies to lift the immunity of Adrian Năstase in order for searches to be conducted in Zambaccian and in Cornu (n.r. houses of the defendent Năstase). My request was denied by the massive vote of Socialist MPs, headed by Ponta. Maybe today we would have learned even more about the bribe taken if those searches would have been made.
PSD defended Năstase then and is still defending him now. PSD politicians say today that they are standing by Năstase. This means that they support corruption and stealing, as Năstase was sentenced to four years in prison for taking bribe. PSD politicians who claim to be at his side can all go join him in prison.
(Bucharest, 07.10.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
Ponta identifies himself with defendant Dragnea and substitutes himself for the judges
Victor Ponta’s message of support for Liviu Dragnea, who was prosecuted for defrauding the 2012 referendum, puts an equal sign between him and defendant Dragnea, between USL and the referendum fraud.
Ponta says that everything is similar to the “Stalinist trials”, even though the file had just been sent to court and only the judges can pronounce themselves as to whether Dragnea is innocent or guilty, according to the evidence contained in the file.
Instead of waiting for the decision of the court, Ponta is lying, as he always is, discussing political files and the investigation of those who voted at the referendum. The file is not against voters themselves, but against those who defrauded the vote. NAD’s press release clarifies these aspects: Dragnea coordinated a “complex informatics system” which was used to defraud the referendum’s result, being aided by 74 persons, who are also under prosecution. Therefore, it is not “half a country”, ie, the citizens who voted at the referendum, that are being prosecuted, but only those who contributed to the defrauding of the referendum.
Ponta is trying to gain popular sympathy and to take as “witnesses” all those who voted, in an attempt to ditch a criminal prosecution for fraud. Ponta’s game of solidarity with the defendants in the referendum trial will negatively impact Romania’s image, right before the CVM report and a decision regarding Romania’s Schengen area membership. A premier who is substituting himself for the judges, announcing the outcome of trial prior to its conclusion and who shares solidarity with the defendants is neither credible, nor responsible.
If Ponta considers himself “As guilty as Liviu Dragnea” then he must leave his position as head of the Government and join the camp of the defendants, to whom he feels so close.
(Bucharest, 03.10.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
The USL gang threatens the Justice system. Ponta should stay home, he wasn’t born prime minster.
If Ponta says to Papici that he wasn’t born chief prosecutor, then I say to Ponta that he wasn’t born prime minister either. In any case, the biggest difference between Papici and Ponta is that Papici has contributed to the cleansing of the country and to Romania’s EU accession, whereas Ponta is trying to subdue prosecutors to control trials and people, and missed Romania’s Schengen area membership. In short, Ponta is wrecking Romania.
Ponta ordered that the heads of the Anticorruption Section of NAD must go, and Cazanciuc and Nitu’s slaves executed Lucian Papici and Mariana Alexandru. The latter two played instrumental roles in the prosecutions of important politicians, some of them having been convicted already: Adrian Năstase, Monica Ridzi, Cătălin Voicu, Gigi Becali, Decebal Remeș etc. Today, we have proof that Nitu’s appointment as Romania’s Chief Prosecutor was a catastrophe for Romania. Ponta acted as the leader of a gang of crooks who want to ditch prosecutions, ditch the justice system, and get away without paying for what they steal. And all this because he changed the prosecutors overnight.
By eliminating prosecutors who have proven to be very good, it is evident that:
- Ponta does not want independent and professional
- Ponta wants control over files where politicians are
Many of the politicians who said that their files are political and that they want to get in front of the judge were convicted. Thus, the activity of prosecutors was confirmed on the basis of real evidence. These prosecutors must be promoted, not eliminated. And those delegated by Mr Nobody Nitu will be eliminated if they will not comply with Ponta’s orders. This is up to them and to their power of holding against Ponta’s pressures. Prosecutors, like judges, must resist, Ponta will not be prime minister forever.
(Bucharest, 27.09.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
Fair and professional judges and prosecutors must be congratulated and encouraged. Nobody must give into Voiculescu’s threats
Dan Voiculescu’s first instance conviction to five years’ imprisonment constitutes evidence that his prosecution is not political, but based on real evidence.
All the politicians that were investigated and convicted said they were victims, that political files were fabricated against them. Sorted, nobody believes them anymore! We already have a series of convicted politicians, that is, judges decided that they are guilty based on the evidence collected by prosecutors and delivered in front of the judge. It’s a good thing that the justice system works well and is heading down the right path, without fearing politicians. This is the only way to increase public confidence towards the courts.
I believe that no prosecutor would take the risk to build fictional files, just like no judge would convict in the absence of evidence. Judges have no reasons to risk their career, and politicians can’t change them, as they are appointed for life. In addition, the arguments of judges become public after they present reasons for the decisions they took, these also revealing the evidence on which their decisions are based. Their duty to enact justice is one owed to society, not to politicians, businessmen, or other wealthy and influential persons who, at one point or another, are brought to face justice.
First instance convict, Voiculescu, is not recanting: he is threatening fair prosecutors and judges, who analyze evidence and facts without looking at who the defendant is, that he will “return”. And it is to them that Voiculescu’s declaration, quoting from The Terminator, is addressed – “I will be back”. Hitherto, Voiculescu has done nothing apart from attempting to embarrass the justice system, including when he resigned from Parliament twice in order to move his file from a court to another in order to buy time and escape a decision from the High Court of Cassation and Justice. But the judges from the Bucharest Tribunal were also able to convict him, on the basis of evidence.
These judges, prosecutors and policemen who do their job correctly and professionally must be congratulated and encouraged, and their group must be enlarged through the power of their examples: investigating and convicting politicians or influential businessmen, despite their wealth and political connections. Justice and anticorruption reforms function through these magistrates.
(Bucharest, 26.09.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
Hrebenciuc admits: the fight against corruption “creates difficulties for us”. USL works at a new slogan: Leave our corruption alone!
Viorel Hrebenciuc is complaining during Parliament sessions that yet another law stands in their way, and indicated a new goal of USL: Law 78/2000 concerning the prevention and sanctioning of corruption, “creates difficulties” to USL MPs, just as Hrebenciuc admitted. “Any phone call you make to help a local council from your electoral college constitutes influence peddling”, said the SDP strategist, Viorel Hrebenciuc, to his colleagues in Parliament.
Hrebenciuc’s lie is evident to all who know and respect Law 78/2000, a piece of legislation meant to deter those who want to turn to corruption to solve their personal or political party issues when they become MPs.
Not any kind of help is influence peddling. Any kind of aid granted by breaching the law, by giving or receiving bribes, through influence peddling, preferential criteria or by causing prejudice to the state’s budget constitutes corruption.
If PSD is complaining that corruption is causing them “difficulties”, should we take it that PSD/USL politicians’ decisions are taken exclusively through corruption?
I do not believe that it is a coincidence that Hrebenciuc’s criticism of Law 78/2000 is launched around the same time as Antonescu’s proposal that local council representatives should no longer be held to account for breaching the law of incompatibility and that all those currently under investigation or prosecution for conflicts of interests should be granted amnesty.
These days, USL is working on a new slogan: Leave our corruption alone!
It must be reminded that we entered the EU on the basis of the promise that we will apply these laws, just as we did hitherto. If USL or politicians from other parties no longer want anticorruption, we will become the black sheep of the EU once again; Hrebenciuc and others like him, regardless of the parties they are members of, are working towards getting us out of the EU and preventing millions of Romanians from working in EU countries, thousands of youths from studying abroad, and us all from advancing on the path of democracy. Hrebenciuc is no longer leaving home? His time had passed, the time of unpunished corruption and miners’ strikes. Hrebenciuc and others like him want to turn back time to the dirtiest periods.
(Bucharest, 25.09.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
Antonescu wants corrupt and incompatible mayors and proposes to elected local officials a dirty barter.
PNL President, Crin Antonescu, wants mayors, counselors, and county council presidents to break the law without being punished.
This buffoon of Romanian politics does not give up and proposes two things:
- Amnesty for those convicted of conflicts of interest
- Allowing incompatible mayors to escape the law by introducing an appeal in the interest of the law, this would have to be initiated by Ponta’s friend, Chief Prosecutor Tiberiu Nitu.
Antonescu’s calculations are that mayors who broke the law will help him gain votes at the presidential election, as a sign of their gratitude for helping them escape the law. Antonescu proposes to local elected officials a dirty barter.
Conflict of interest, just like bribery, murder, burglary and blackmailing, is a criminal offence, as stipulated in the Criminal Code, and is sanctioned by up to five years’ imprisonment. Antonenscu’s proposal clearly tells us that, if you’re a USL politician in Romania, it’s no problem being a criminal too: you will escape if USL is in power, because Antonescu and USL will pass a special law in order to help you escape. Antonescu confuses the Romanian state with a mob gang, protecting those who commit crimes on their behalf.
Antonescu’s logic is toxic and profoundly corrupt: he wants to the change the law to cover up illegalities. The rule of law is the exact opposite: laws are made to be respected and for the people (local elected officials are also people) to adapt their actions accordingly.
Antonescu doesn’t want us to have an honest political class, which pays due regard to the interests of citizens, but an incompatible, corrupt, gang of crooks that steal public money without being punished.
Even though Antonescu had no contribution to Romania’s EU accession, he now wants to get us out of the Union with our heads bowed in shame. The only solution for the national and European dignity of Romanians is for Antonescu to resign, because he threatens law and justice in Romania.
(Bucharest, 24.09.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
Adina Valean learned her lesson from USL: Lies and inconsistencies
The liberal MEP Adina Valea now says that people are “rallying and voting” against the Rosia Montana project, which is exactly what the PNL would do.
Ms Valean is trying to make us forget how, in 2010, she took representatives of the Rosia Montan Gold Corporation (RMGC) to Brussels, to attend a debate about Rosia Montana. The January 2010 invitation to the event organized by Adina Valean and sponsored by RMGC, published in the press, leaves no room for interpretations: “Rosia Montana Gold Corporation, with the support of Ms Adina Valean, MEP and vice-president of ALDE (Alliance of Democrats and Liberals for Europe), invites you to participate in the seminar “To make Europe a leader in sustainable and responsible mining””. Ms Valean sent the invitation only to RMGC supporters, for example, to lawyer Ana Diculescu Sova and to Horea Avram, on behalf of the company.
Moreover, the person who publicly pointed out the 2010 debate’s hypocrisy was none other than her party colleague, Renatte Weber. Now, nobody in the NLP, not even Ms Weber, chastised Adina Valean, who is lying to us.
I am not letting myself fooled and it is very clear to me: Adina Valean remains the one who supported RMGC, including through the Brussels event, and who said that the Rosia Montana project is “as expert opinion shows, in accordance with cutting edge technological standards” (details here)
Ms Valean’s inconsistency, about whom one can no longer tell when she’s telling the truth, is typical for USL, which fools the Romanian public everyday with empty promises.
(Bucharest, 23.09.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
The credibility of the Bucharest Bar – under challenge
Criminal convict Adrian Nastase is an embarrassment for the legal profession and must be excluded from it. The Bucharest Bar will loses is credibility and legitimacy if it decides not to exclude convict Nastase.
Law 51/1995 art.14, let. a), obliges the Bucharest Bar to exclude convict Nastase from the legal profession because he was “definitively convicted by the decision of a court to a term of imprisonment for committing an intentional crime, liable to affect the prestige of the profession”.
It is evident that retaining the bar membership of a convicted lawyer affects the profession’s prestige and decreases public confidence in the legal profession. Additionally, by keeping Nastase in the bar, honest and professional lawyers will unjustifiably forfeit their credibility before the Romanian public.
(Bucharest, 15.09.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
I call upon Ioan Oltean to resign from his position as PDL Vice-President
As vice-president of the PDL, Ioan Oltean takes decisions for and on behalf of the party. According to Article 103 paragraph 1 of the Party’s statute, the vice-presidents are “the leaders of political action and represent the image of the party.” The managerial function which Ioan Oltean holds obliges him to put the interests and the image of the party first.
Only USL, which has no ethical or moral criteria, maintains people under criminal investigation in top leading positions, even ministers. On the other hand, PDL maintains ethical criteria and respects justice.
The DNA press release announced the start of the criminal investigation against Ioan Oltean. The release stated that the prosecutors’ resolution for starting the criminal investigation was due as Mr. Oltean used ” the influence or authority of the position as Vice-President / General Secretary of a political party, for the purpose of obtaining for himself or for someone else, money, goods or other undue [services], an offence committed through repeated acts and also with the offence of favoring the perpetrator.”
According to the Code of Ethics, in the case of Ioan Oltean, the situations stipulated in art. 3 paragraph 4.3 (“strong references of committing crimes, especially corruption, fraud, organized crime or other serious acts of criminal nature, which seriously damaged the credibility of the person concerned and, implicitly assumed the objectives of the party”) and paragraph 4.12 (“the official capacity used by members of the party in public office or leadership within the party to obtain advantages of any nature, for themselves or for others”) might be applicable in the Ioan Oltean’s case.
Compliance with the Code of Ethics is mandatory for members of the PDL.
(Bucharest, 07.06.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
The Social Liberal Union (USL) has one purpose in politics: to obstruct the Judiciary
The ever more frequent attempts of USL to call to order prosecutors, including through the amendment the liberal senator Chiuariu proposed to the Constitution requesting the mandatory presence of any person when called before a parliamentary committee, shows:
- USL politicians fear a fair and impartial justice;
- Willingness to threaten and intimidate all the prosecutors;
- Violation of separation of powers, the principle that is the essence of democracy.
Chiuariu’s argument that prosecutors are not part of the judiciary is ridiculous and far from serious. However, it is irrelevant whether or not prosecutors are part of the judicial authority, as long as they are the only ones who investigate and send to trial and politicians are afraid exactly of investigations and want to stop them.
USL is almost writing in the new constitution that only the party members of the Social Democrat Party, of the National Liberal Party and of the Conservative Party will make laws and conduct criminal investigations.
It is not the only unconstitutional amendment adopted by the Committee chaired by Crin Antonescu, for whom the sovereignty of the people means nothing and therefore he does not respect in the result of the 2009 referendum: a single chamber in the Parliament and maximum 300 MPs.
(Bucharest, 27.05.2013) Blog Monica Macovei
A disgraceful proposal for the image of Romania made for the European Court of Auditors by Prime Minister Ponta
The hearing of Mr. George Pufan, government Ponta’s proposal for the membership of the European Court of Auditors and barely endorsed by the Budgetary Control Committee with 14 votes for and 13 against, was shameful for Romania’s image. This candidate has no experience in auditing and there are doubts about how he accomplished his studies in Accounting.
Mr. Pufan, whose profession is constructions engineer, obtained a bachelor’s degree in Accounting in conditions which are at least unclear: he was enrolled full time in Galati, while his workplace was in Bucharest – he was Secretary General of the Court of Auditors. It is inexplicable how he could be in two different places at the same time for 4 years at University in Galati, and working in Bucharest. The distance between Bucharest and Galati is 250 km. He got minimum grades in the courses with relevance for the position at the European Court of Auditors. In addition, according to media reports he recently changed his CV (details here).
Moreover, to one of the questions asked by the European Court of Auditors (ECA), in his written answers, Mr. Pufan copied almost 3 pages from a textbook of the Court of Auditors of Romania. It is no wonder that Mr. Ponta proposed Pufan: they have something in common: plagiarism with the copy/paste method.
The European Court of Auditors controls European money. Is USL’s objective to weaken from the inside the European institutions controlling how European money are used?
Ponta put today again Romania in an embarrassing situation. The candidature of Mr Pufan, passed by one vote difference in the Budget Control Committee, shall be voted by the European Parliament in plenary session 10-13 June 2013.
(Bucharest, 24.06.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
Equal law for all
In front of the law, all men are equal. This is a law principle that must be obeyed by everyone, irrespective of the position or the political affinity held. A state that is healthy from the legal point of view is one in which the law is equally enforced for all.
The respect of the law is the only reason I will keep taking a public stand, even if this may hurt party or private interests.
I also do it for all the honest citizens that consider – as I do – that the respect of the law does not mean being “evil” or having an “inhumane” attitude. It is the warranty of the lawful state itself.
(Bucharest, 24.06.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
Enforce the law!
I urge the Romanian authorities to end the state of confusion and absolute ridicule, willingly kept and maintained, concerning the judicial state of the convicted Adrian Nastase, and to enforce the law.
The convicted Adrian Nastase is currently under arrest, according to article 422 paragraph 1 of the CPP (Criminal Procedure Code), and based on the warrant issued by the Bucharest Court for the execution of the 2 years imprisonment. The arrest of the convicted was done by police officers abilitated to enforce the warrant, in the evening of the 21st of June 2012.
After the arrest, while in custody of the police officers members of the criminal enforcement team of the General Police division of the city of Bucharest, the convicted, due to self-inflicted wounds, could no longer be transported to the Rahova prison, where he was supposed to execute his sentence, but to a hospital unit, for medical care.
Therefore, at this date, the convicted Adrian Nastase has the detainee status, is under arrest by the power of the warrant for the execution of the sentence issued by the Bucharest Court, even if he has not actually been taken to prison yet.
Excerpts from the Criminal Procedure Code:
Art.420 – (1) The sentences of imprisonment and life imprisonment are enforced through the issuance of the execution mandate. The execution mandate shall be issued by the delegated judge of the execution court on the day on which the decision of the first instance court becomes final, or in certain cases, on the day of the receipt of the excerpts provided by art. 418 para.3 (namely from the higher court which rendered the final judgment – n.n.) ……………
(2) In case the convicted person is free, in the same time with the issuance of the execution mandate for the imprisonment sentence or life imprisonment sentence, the delegated judge shall also issue an order forbidding the convicted person to leave the country. …………
Art. 421. – (1) In order to put in force the execution mandate, two copies shall be sent to the police, in case the convicted person is free …….
(3) In case the convicted person is free, the execution authorities listed in paras. 1 and 2 have the duty to take the measures provided by law in order to put in force the mandate for the execution of the sentence and the order forbidding the convicted person to leave the country, on the day of their reception.
Art. 422 – (1) On the basis of the execution mandate the police shall proceed to the arrest of the convicted person. A copy of the mandate shall be handed to the arrested person who shall be taken to the nearest detention centre, where the police shall hand over the other copy of the execution mandate.
(11) In order to put in force the execution mandate issued on the basis of a final conviction sentence, the police may enter the home or residence of a person without the person’s permission, as well as in the offices of a legal person without the permission of its legal representative.
(7) The chief of the detention place shall mention in a minutes the date at which the convicted person started the execution of his/her sentence (this being the date of the effective deprivation of liberty of the convicted person, namely the moment of his/her arrest by the police – n.n.).
This is why I remind all the requests addressed yesterday to Minister Rus and ask him to tell us:
1) Who approved the visits of Adrian Nastase by fellow PSD members, other politicians or people that were not relatives of the detainee ?
2) Were all these people ever controlled, as the law on the execution of sentences states it ?
3) Were there more than a visit per day and 4 per month ?
4) Who established that, after surgery, the convicted Adrian Nastase can not be incarcerated and treated in the hospital of the Rahova prison, the best hospital prison in the country, also thanks to doctor Serban Bradisteanu, former PSD senator and himself under investigation by the DNA?
(Bucharest, 22.06.2012) Political declaration – Monica Macovei
You do not like them? Then come and take their place!
Speech at the founding Convention of the New Republic party
In this very moment, in this very instance, in this room history is being made. A new political class is being built, one who is educated, responsible, who wants to change this country. The messages the Oak (the logo of the New Republic) stands for are huge, but simple and clear: ” I do not lie”, “I do not steal”, “I want”, “I can”, ” let’s be together”. And also, “stealing kills”.
From the bottom of my heart I congratulate all those of you here, the ones in Romania, Mihai and Mihnea for the courage, the audacity, the power you have had to create a new structure, a new party in Romania. This is a very difficult task, and therefore I congratulate you from the bottom of my heart. You are the only ones that have done this so far, while the rest of us, we have just spoken about it.
Let us build together, and I am sure that we can, a new political class that replaces the thieves, the uneducated, the liars, the corrupt, and the plagiators. Let us bring home the students that study hard abroad at prestigious Universities and who, when coming back, can not find a job because all the jobs are already occupied by the political clientele. I know a lot of students at Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge that tell me: ” I want to come home, I know about energy, I am good at this and that…nobody replies to any of my applications. And all my attempts have hit a brick wall. The political clientele is in power. We must change this fact and bring back the ones abroad.
And we also have to take into account the 50% of Romanians that have not voted for anyone, who do not believe in any of these parties and who await for a new party, a new political force. This is why I also say: we have until fall to build a Right platform, all of us who believe in these values, who are clean, honest and lucid; let us unite ourselves and provide an alternative for which these people, 50% of the Romanians, can vote. And I would also like to talk about the private sector, the people who work, pay taxes, are honest and who are correct and responsible. To the 1.800.000 Romanians who support us all: state employees and all others, retired people or those who need assistance. It is these people we should thank, and we should propose to them an economical, fiscal, and tax reduction agenda that should help them because, I repeat, they are the ones supporting this country.
I have many times heard people say “I am disgusted”, “they are all the same” and “I am not going to vote anymore”. They sit and watch TV, they say this and then they switch to another channel and maybe watch a movie. I say to these people: the greatest risk for a democracy is people who are inert. So, if we just sit and say: “we are disgusted” but do not do anything about it, then we are moving at a fast pace towards a dictatorship. Therefore, to those of you who no longer believe in this political class, I say: “If you do not like them, then come and take their place”.
I am coming back to the idea of the Right platform. We must be together, it is going to be a very difficult fight at the next elections, we will fight against people who use theft, lies, the acquisition of votes, promises they never intend to keep, and sometimes even violence to keep this all party establishment. Why ? To steal, to get rich. And look, when they must pay, they elude the prison.
I will finish by saying that I have always stood by you during this construction, true, more in spirit and by talking to a few of the colleagues. I will keep standing by you. I will now phrase a sentence from the Beliefs of the New Republic because I like it very much since it resonates with me: ” In order for evil to triumph, all you need is the good people standing aside “. This is why I tell good people who do stand aside and who feel disgust towards today’s politicians: “Come with us. Let us occupy the political scene!”
And one last sentence: ” I will not give up and I will not let you either !”
(Bucharest, 22.06.2012) Political declaration – Monica Macovei
Questions for Minister Rus. The correct answer is resignation
I. The gesture of Ioan Rus, the Minister of Administration and Interior, to call the convicted Adrian Nastase and negotiate a preferential treatment for bringing him to jail is unacceptable. And it remains so, even if the minister werew to promise in public that from now on he would call all convicts to imprisonment from now on and ask them how they would like to be taken to prison.
a) Why a minister of the Romanian Government would call Adrian Nastase to offer him a preferential treatment for taking him to jail to serve his penalty, that was unanimously established by a panel of five judges from the highest court?
b) How many people who are criminally convicted is the Minister calling to ask them how they would prefer to be taken to jail? In cars with dark windows? Without handcuffs? From the garage or by the front door?
II.Adrian Nastase has already started to serve his two-years imprisonment, being held in custody. This is what minister Rus is telling us: “He is now held in custody. As we speak, he is serving his first day of the sentence… Security is ensured by the Ministry of Interior “(the source here).
Therefore, every day spent in the Emergency Hospital Floreasca is being deducted from his sentence which, according to the judges’ ruling, he should be serving in prison.
Once the serving of his sentence has started, Adrian Nastase falls under Law 275/2006 on the execution of penalties and Order no. 2714/C/20.10.2008 of the Minister of Justice:
- Persons deprived of liberty can be visited by their husband or wife or relatives up to the 4th degree included. With the consent of the person held in custody, they can also be visited by other persons, with the written approval of the prison director;
- The duration of the visit varies from 30 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the number of the visit requests and the existing facilities. Persons held in custody may benefit from one visit per day.
- Persons in preventive arrest and convicted persons for whom the penalty execution regime has not been established yet may benefit from 4 visits/month;
- Persons held in custody and hospitalized outside the penitentiary system can be visited with the approval of the prison director and with the approval of the supervising doctor, in the presence of a worker from the visits unit of the penitentiary.
Minister Ioan Rus should explain why he is tolerating a violation of the law and why is he providing Nastase with a privileged treatment.
a) Who approved that Adrian Nastase should be visited by members of PSD, other politicians or people who were not related to the detainee? The visit requests and the approvals should be published.
b) Were these persons subject to control, as specified by the law on the execution of penalties?
c) Were there more than one visit per day and 4 per month? If yes, why was the law violated and who will be held liable for this?
d) Who established that, after the surgical intervention, the convict Adrian Nastase cannot be imprisoned and treated in Rahova Penitentiary hospital, the best equipped penitentiary hospital due to doctor Serban Bradisteanu, former PSD senator and also indicted by DNA (see here)
All the visits (other than those of the lawyer or family) received by the convict Adrian Nastase without the approval of the prison director are illegal.
The only correct attitude, judging by the answers that a whole country is waiting, is Minister Rus’ resignation.
(Bucharest, 16.06.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
The political assault lead by Ponta against public institutions
Ponta and the USL are occupied with the political subordination of the state’s institutions, in order to satisfy their political clients, and they are doing this at the speed of light.
1. The USL changes the directorship of the state Television, arguing that it is concerned with the financial situation of the institution. A lie! If this were the true reason, the USL would have appointed a real manager or a team of economists to find solutions. Ponta and the USL only wish to politically occupy the state television, and not to salvage it financially.
2. Ponta transfers the ICR from under the authority of the Presidency (where it has been functioning ever since 2003) to the subordination of the Parliament, arguing that the ICR was politicized and not transparent. Or, the decision to subordinate the ICR to the Senate does not mean anything other than the politization of this cultural institution, since the persons appointed there will be designated on political criteria, through political vote. Furthermore, this decision has been taken through an OUG (Emergency Ordinance), although there is no such emergency in changing the status of the ICR.
3. Interior Minister Rus changes the directorship of the National Archives, without any official reason. At the National Archives, one could consult the archives of the PCR (the Romanian Comunist Party) and of the Central Committee.
4. Also without any public explanations or without event justifying the emergency, Ponta changed the directorship of the Institute for the Investigation of the Crimes of Communism and the Rememberance of the Romanian Exile.
5. With the same velocity he has changed the componence of the Ministry of Education’s ethics committee while this very committee was investigating the plagiarism accusations brought against PSD member Ioan Mang.
USL’s political interests are much stronger than the needs of the people, that have been forgotten by Ponta & comp. Not a single economical measure has yet been adopted by the Ponta government, it has all been a lie.
(Bucharest, 12.06.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
Congratulations, Emil! Congratulations, dear people of Cluj!
The people of Cluj have proved to us that honesty in politics can win. All of us Romanians need to learn from this !
(Bucharest, 9.06.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
I support Emil Boc. The people of Cluj deserve to be respected, and not threatened.
I went to Cluj Napoca to support Emil Boc because I admire his courage and the power he has to submit himself once again, by coming back home, to the vote of the people of Cluj. The people of Cluj have already trusted him twice and I am convinced that they want him again as mayor, because he has turned a grey city with no investments into one full of life and energy.
Ponta was in Cluj on Thursday as well, to support the candidate Nicoara, a PNL senator about which the only thing known by the public opinion is that he was watching movies on his laptop during plenary sessions.
Ponta understood to support the USL candidate by threatening the people of Cluj, saying that if they voted for Emil Boc, they “would be isolating themselves” from the rest of the country”. What was understood by the journalists I talked to is that he would cut the financing for Cluj Napoca.
I remind the people of Cluj and all the Romanians that the development projects financed through European funds are made and promoted by the mayors and the presidents of the county councils, and if they are well elaborated, they will also be accomplished.
Any hostile attitude from Ponta, any intervention at the central level of blocking the local projects means the politicization of a process handled by the EU and the crass violation of the European rules.
Ponta told us in Cluj how he wants to lead the Government: in a discretionary and preferential manner, for the political clients.
But there’s also us in Bruxelles to take care of the Romanian communities.
(Bucharest, 7.06.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
The red flag team is being rebuilt. The Ponta Government is endangering the MCV – One month with Ponta
In just one month after being invested, the Ponta Government has managed to induce a huge prejudice to the confidence that Romania had gained in the European area with respect to the fight against corruption. The public statements and the actions perpetrated in this short period by a government that answers at party headquarters to people charged with corruption or accused of conflicts of interests, seriously endangers the MCV (Cooperation and Verification Mechanism) report in July.
* 3rd of May 2012 – Ponta presents the government programme in which the Justice chapter is covered on only two pages, while the fight against corruption is barely mentioned in two paragraphs. None of the recommendations of the intermediary report of February 2012 of the European Commission were taken seriously by the Ponta Government. (In this report were contained, amongst others, the following proposals: “Romania should improve the way in which it is handling the judicial procedures and the cases of high-level corruption and to improve the dissuasive manner and the coherence of judicial sanctions”; “to prove the existence of some positive results regarding the pronunciation of sanctions upholding the decisions of the National Integrity Agency”; “to prove that it has reached convincing results with respect to the retrieval of assets proceeding from criminal activities or money laundering”) ;
* 1st of May-7th of May (the day of the investiture) – Ponta defies the public opinion and is the first one to breach the principles listed in his own government programme by proposing as members of the Government controversial figures, with incompatibilities or being investigated for conflicts of interests: Corina Dumitrescu, Ioan Mang, Victor Alistar – were withdrawn, but Rovana Plumb, Daniel Constantin or Mircea Diaconu have remained;
* 8th of May 2012 (first meeting of the Government) – Ponta transfers the State Inspectorate in Constructions (ISC) from the subordination of the Ministry for Development to his own subordination;
* 11th of May 2012 - Ponta dismisses the directorate of the State Inspectorate in Constructions;
* 16th of May 2012 – Ponta brings back Simona-Maya Teodoroiu as state secretary in the Ministry of Justice, position she was also holding in 2004, and who, with the then minister, Rodica Stanoiu, left Romania with red flags on Justice.
* 17th of May 2012 – Ponta declares that he is favourable to the appointment of the Chief Prosecutor of the DNA and of the Attorney General by the CSM (Superior Council of Magistrates), without the involvement of the Minister of Justice and of the President, and that “very soon” we will come back to the 2004 system, when the appointment of the Attorney General and of the Chief Prosecutor of the DNA depended exclusively on the CSM. This means Ponta is ready to breach the commitments assumed by Romania upon entering the EU. The Cooperation and Verification Mechanism states that the procedure for the appointment and the dismissal of the Chief Prosecutor of the DNA should not change, as should also not change the law regarding the organization and the functioning of the DNA ;
* 18th of May 2012 – Ponta appoints Grajdan as director of the State Inspectorate for Constructions;
* 22nd of May 2012 – The High Court for Cassation and Justice receives from the ISC, an institution of the State, now directly subordinated to Ponta himself, a letter through which Grajdan withdraws the State Inspectorate in Constructions from the trial of the defended Nastase Adrian, motivating that there was no prejudice ;
* 22nd of May 2012 – Justice minister Corlatean states that the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism should be “redefined” by “restricting its area” ;
* 24th of May 2012 – the deputy Secretary General of the Government, Dan Mihalache, states that “certain corrections” need to be operated at the DNA and ANI, despite the positive appreciations the two anti-corruption agencies are constantly enjoying in the MCV reports;
* 24th of May 2012 – Ponta dismisses Grajdan, at the pressure of the public opinion ;
* 27th of May 2012 - Corlatean states, without giving any evidence, that the Attorney General and the Chief Prosecutor of the DNA are “under suspicion of subordination and political influence” and that concerning the appointment of the new Chief prosecutors, we must not “remain blocked in the same discussion of the same magistrates switching office”. His statement obviously contrasts the findings of the experts of the European Commission that, for years, have been writing in the MCV reports about the impartial investigations of the prosecutors.
* 27th of May 2012 – Corlatean pronounces himself on the case of the ISC case and on the “Trofeul Calitatii” file, although his position as minister forbids this. Corlatean stated that the ISC had informed “for many years” its withdrawal from trial of the defended Nastase, “that there exists a desistment and a communication linked to the fact that there is not, in reality, a prejudice”, even though he was being contradicted by the official information sent out by the DNA, and that in the file of the defended Nastase “the investigation has lasted too long”;
* 31st of May 2012 – Ponta talks about the anti-corruption Strategy with Mircea Diaconu, the minister investigated for conflicts of interests, the same day this minister had been invited to the Prosecutor General’s. Diaconu said he did not go to be auditioned by the prosecutors because he had a dentist appointment.
Certainly, there are more statements and decisions that show us the intentions of the Ponta Government with respect to Justice, that announce the restoration of the Nastase-Stanoiu regime.
Ponta and his colleagues want us to go back to Amarie’s PNA, that was investigating only what PSD decided in the party meetings, to Voicu’s networks in Justice, to the arrogance towards the European Commission and to the breach of the assumed commitments, like it was the case before December 2004.
Because of this attitude and because of the policy promoted by the Nastase government, where Ponta and Corlatean did their apprenticeship, in December 2004, Romania had red flags on Justice, high level anti-corruption, that only through an honest dialogue with the European Commission, through serious anti-corruption measures and the insurance of a true independence of magistrates was I able to have them removed.
I am afraid that Europe might sanction the Romanians themselves for the unconsciousness and the incapacity of Ponta, Corlatean&comp to relinquish themselves from party and personal interests.
(Brussels, 29.05.2012) Political statement – Monica Macovei
Corlatean vs the Judiciary
Corlatean Part 1
Does it not strike you that Mr Corlatean is giving up his robe as Minister of Justice to put on that of the attorney of the defendant Nastase?
ñ In the press release of the 25th of May 2012, the DNA (National Anti-Corruption Directorate) states that (a) the State Inspectorate in Constructions (ISC) constituted itself as a prejudiced party, during the 2008 prosecution and (b) one week before Ponta’s intervention to change the directorate of the ISC, this Institution actually sent a letter to the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ), stating that the prejudice was even higher than the one originally observed.
ñ After the DNA press release, the Justice Minister Corlatean publicly stated, on the 27th of May, that the ISC had informed ” several years ago” (?) of its withdrawal from the trial of defendant Nastase, “that there is a desistment” and a communication linked to the fact that, in reality, there is no prejudice” (contradicting the official information sent out by the DNA)
Why is the Minister of Justice Corlatean telling us what the ISC has written during the procedures, when this is the job of the defended Nastase, of the DNA, and ultimatly, that of the judges ? Why does the Justice Minister, through this statement, take the side of the defended Nastase ? And how does the Justice Minister know what exactly the ISC has written, and why does he then point out to the journalists their “ignorance” of this element? When and how did he see the file ? Why does the Justice Minister intervene in favor of a defended ? Does it not strike you that Mr Corlatean is giving up his robe as Minister of Justice to put on that of the attorney of the defendant Nastase ?
Corlatean Part 2
Ponta and Corlatean are afraid of just, professional and free judges and prosecutors who proved that only the law matters, and not the political function.
Other recent stands of minister Corlatean that worry me:
1. Corlatean stated that the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism should be “redifined by restraining the area”; I am afraid that “restraining the area” might mean the elimination of the evaluation of the anti-corruption results of the DNA, of ANI, of the judges and also of the politicans’ actions with respect to the independence and the course of justice;
2. Corlatean pronounced himself on the file of the defended Nastase, arguing that “the investigation lasted too long”, although the position he holds as minister of Justice forbids him to pronounce himself on a trial currently in court;
3. Corlatean launched, without any proof, serious allegations against the Attorney General and the Chief Prosecutor of the DNA, saying that they are “under suspicions of subordination and of political influence”.
I remind Mr Corlatean that only since 2005 the magistrates have become free to investigate and trial any politician, from whatever political party, be it from the governing coallition or from the opposition. This is why, in the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism established in December 2006 it is written: “upon the progress made up to now, upon the continuation of professional and impartial investigations linked to accusations of high level corruption”. In that period, Ponta and Corlatean were voting against any anti-corruption law.
Now, the USL leaders are in a hurry to seize the power with only one goal in mind: to remove the criminal charges the PSD, PNL and the PC members are faced with and to strengthen or recreate the networks of political influence on justice. It is the just and free magistrates, independent of whatever political influence, who have proved that only the law matthers, and not the political function, that are inspiring fear to Ponta, Corlatean and the USL members. Of course, they will lie with a smile on their face when they will try to fool the Europeans, with all sort of invented stories that are only meant to hide the truth: we do no longer want to be investigated nor do we want our statements of fortune and interests checked !
P.S. As I and others have asked, the State Inspectorate in Constructions has sent a new note to the High Court of Cassation and Justice asking to take act of the nulity of the previous note through which the person appointed by Ponta has tried to rescue the defended Nastase. Naturally, the next act we await for is the resignation of Ponta himself.
(Bucharest, 27.05.2012) Press statement – Monica Macovei
Ponta’s and his mentor’s, Adrian Nastase, “scheme” is still functioning
The scheme is still functioning, as long as the letter sent by the former head of the ISC, Grajdan, to the High Court of Cassation and Justice is not cancelled by a new letter of the State Inspectorate in Constructions (ISC); or by Ponta himself, provided that he recently subordinated this institution.
Of course, the judges might not take into consideration Grajdan’s letter, but why should we leave the scheme produce its effects? Ponta and the ISC must send a letter to the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
And, if Ponta fired Grajdan because he “made a mistake”, then also Ponta must resign because he also made a mistake when he initiated and applied the scheme following these steps:
Step 1: On May 8, during the first meeting of his Government, Ponta placed the ISC under his direct subordination;
Step 2: Ponta fired the former head of the ISC.
Step 3: Ponta nominated a new head of the ISC, Mr. Grajdan.
Step 4: Immediately, Grajdan sends an official letter to the High Court of Cassation and Justice with respect to the criminal file of Nastase, by which he pretended, in the name of the ISC, that the Institute was not prejudiced by Adrian Nastase and his co-defendants, a claim that is contrary to the documents priory submitted by the Inspectorate to the file.
Step 5: Ponta dismisses Grajdan from the office; that is just throwing dust in people’s eyes. Dismissing Grajdan from office was a mere manoeuvre of a more elaborate scheme, as long as the letter sent to the judges was not withdrawn.
Until now, Ponta did not answer to any substantial question and I do not believe that he will; he just arrogantly throws some “excuses” in our face. They are not enough. Ponta has to leave because he is taking large steps towards the restoration of the Nastase-Stanoiu system, when the criminal files were decided in party meetings and not by the prosecutors. He has to leave because he endangers the rule of law.
Ponta can do one last favour to Romania: to resign
(Press conference, May 25, 2012 – transcript)
After the events of the past few weeks and, especially, past few days, Ponta can do one last favour for Romania: to resign. He premeditated a scheme to help USL members, starting with Adrian Nastase, to escape criminal liability. Ponta is practically restoring the Nastase-Stanoiu system.
The fact that Ponta dismissed the head of the State Inspectorate in Constructions (ISC) is insufficient. The problem remains unsolved. Ponta must appoint a credible person to re-establish the situation immediately and send a letter to the High Court of Cassation and Justice until the next hearing, in order to represent the state’s interests and recover the prejudice caused to the Inspectorate in the “Trofeul Calitatii” criminal file – as this Inspectorate became a civil party in the lawsuit in 2009, being prejudiced with a certain amount of money. Moreover, one month ago, the ISC mentioned that the value of the damage caused to it was even higher than previously indicated in the 2009 letter, i.e. 7,500,000 RON or around 1,800,000 Euros. This is the next step that needs to be taken urgently today. I repeat: the appointment of a credible person that would send such a letter to the High Court until the next trial hearing is imperative.
The situation at the ISC is not a coincidence, being part of a scheme premeditated by Victor Ponta. The purpose is to save Adrian Nastase and, probably, others and to obstruct the judiciary. To put it briefly, the facts are known, but I will shortly restate them in order to better highlight the scheme.
In Ponta’s first Government meeting, he subordinated the State Inspectorate in Constructions to the office of the Prime Minister directly; he then appointed a new chief right away; and on the day following his appointment, this new chief makes a decision, his first one as head of this institution, saying: there is no prejudice at ISC anymore in Adrian Nastase’s criminal case, and afterwards he immediately sent this letter to the High Court of Cassation and Justice. He must give some explanations about how he reversed the analyses, studies and calculations previously made, but that’s an issue the Inspectorate should solve. The scheme, I repeat, has been developed by Victor Ponta, so he is the one bearing the entire responsibility for it. He used a state institution to save a friend, a party colleague, he tried to rescue Adrian Nastase from criminal liability. For this reason alone, I repeat, Ponta should resign.
I said this scheme was premeditated. We have this ISC and Nastase case, and we have a second case – that of the Ministry of Agriculture and Mr. Dan Voiculescu. I am convinced that this scheme also includes the appointment of Mr. Dan Constantin as minister of Agriculture. Dan Constantin owes a huge sum of money to Mr. Voiculescu, and in turn Mr. Voiculescu has a pending criminal lawsuit in which he is accused of causing a damage of 60 million Euro and in which the Ministry of Agriculture is a civil, i.e. prejudiced, party. Therefore, I think the next step that Ponta and his team are envisaging is to make a similar letter appear from the minister of Agriculture, the one who is leading the Conservative Party and is hugely indebted to Dan Voiculescu.
This shows that Ponta has come to power with the mission and purpose to try to help these people escape criminal liability and, obviously, to stop the course of justice. There are pending trials which need to be allowed to continue without any political intervention. However, Ponta intervenes politically!
In my opinion, this scheme also covers another move that is under preparation – if it has not been made already – according to the press information: the appointment of Mr. Serban Nicolae, former PSD senator, who was not been elected in the last elections, as State Secretary in the Ministry of Interior. I remind you that Mr. Serban Nicolae from the PSD is the lawyer of PSD senator Catalin Voicu, who was bragging he had an entire judiciary network – prosecutors, judges and police officers alike – to decide the outcome of trials. Let me quote once again that famous sentence: “the network is operational and if we did not obtain an acquittal, we obtained a suspended sentence”. Mr. Voicu is currently being tried by the High Court of Cassation and Justice for corruption-related offences. If the information is real and it is to be put into practice, the appointment of this person’s lawyer as State Secretary at the Ministry of Interior is the next step of this scheme contrived to put the network to work.
Let me remind you one more thing about this scheme. Very recently, the Minister of Justice, Mr. Corlatean, said that the Mechanism for Cooperation and Verification must be redefined by restricting its scope. This is how I interpret this scope restriction: “let’s take out some of the benchmarks, so that the European Commission should no longer check DNA (National Anticorruption Directorate), ANI (National Integrity Agency) or what the judges or politicians are doing”, because the Mechanism also refers to political will and to politicians’ attitudes. So this is a worrying statement, being part of the same scheme and of the purpose of his coming to power.
Another worrying statement, also very recent, has been made by the secretary general of the Government, Mr. Mihalache, who said that some corrections must be made in the functioning of ANI and DNA. I understand these corrections as amputation of power, of attributions, so that these institutions should continue to exist only on paper. I have just one comment about this affirmation related to DNA and ANI: DNA and ANI have been constantly praised in all European Commission’s reports throughout the past years. So we have something which is functional in Romania. When something is functional in Romania, you don’t want to correct it, or change it, instead you want it to continue to function, to move forward. The fact that the two institutions work well is obviously a great disturbance for the USL.
Through these unprecedented actions, Ponta is sending to the whole of Europe the message that an independent judiciary is not convenient for the USL, so, from this standpoint, Ponta is a direct threat to Romania’s position in the EU and in the world. Practically, Ponta’s actions will have, as a direct result, a negative assessment in the summer CVM report and a negative evaluation in all European chapters related to the political interference in the act of justice.
I wanted to hold this press conference to say these things because I do care a lot. I have the feeling that everything we have worked so hard to build is falling apart, that is an independent judiciary system: prosecutors, judges, police that inquire, condemn or acquit, judge anyone freely, any politician, including those in power. Or, Ponta’s message and action of the past few days have shown this is what he wants to tear down. His message would be: “USL members, you can steal and you will not be punished! Ponta is taking care of you!”
Finally, I would like to say that all these bad things are due to the fact that we have brave judges and prosecutors, who have done their job and continue to do so, and who investigate, judge and condemn politicians, including politicians or especially politicians from any political party, be they in power or in the opposition. It is precisely because they are afraid of these judges and prosecutors that they undertake these actions, such as those I have just listed, the latest one being that at the ISC.
I would like to convey to the magistrates the message that the people stand by them, support them and that they have to be brave and strong in order to enforce the law and do justice.
(Bucharest, 23.05.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
A new lie from Ponta, Antonescu, Voiculescu
The electoral law that proposes the majority vote in one round and the elimination of the electoral threshold has been voted. Its advantages and disadvantages are already being discussed publicly, and the majority of the civil society is against it.
Taking this out of consideration, the USL mocks the will of the electorate expressed in the 2009 referendum, when more than 7.7 million Romanians chose to reduce the number of MPs to 300, and more than 6,7 million wanted a Parliament with a single Chamber.
When in the opposition, the USL bragged about having a draft law to reduce the number of MPs. Today, it had the opportunity to publicly display at least a drum of honesty. USL missed this opportunity and confirmed to us the path the USL government will take: lying.
(Bucharest, 23.05.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
The defendant Nastase lies to the judges
I have stated publicly that the USL puts pressure on the judges, but that the judges will disregard it and will render correct verdicts.
Since my name is often brought up by the defendant Nastase and his lawyers, with the purpose to mislead the judges and the public opinion, I render below – in written and in video – the referrals I made about the magistrates during the TV talk-show “Sub semnul intrebarii” on B1 Tv, on the 17th of May 2012.
It becomes obvious that the only one putting pressure on the judges is the defended Nastase Adrian, through the lies he tells and the arrogance he displays, especially since Ponta came to power.
The first intervention (at 01:08:52 )
“Moderator: Explain to me, the justice reform that took place during the last years, about which you have spoken yourself several times, why would it be endangered now by the coming to power of another team, what exactly can happen ? If things were well done, if the reform was solid, what could change so rapidly, what do you fear the most ?
Answer: But I want to answer the very essence of your question: why am I afraid ? I am afraid because there have already been statements, by the current minister of Justice, Mr Corlatean – I remind – “if Adrian Nastase is acquitted, the attorney must be arrested”, also I remmeber the human wall he organized in Pitesti with his party colleagues, so he does not have an attitude towards justice in the sense of respecting its independence and I am afraid that he will intervene. Besides this, were modified…
Moderator: How can he intervene ?
Answer: I remember the Voicu network. Do you remember it?
Moderator: But that guy was a lawyer, a shady MP…
Answer: I do not know – a shady MP. He is a PSD senator that is back in the Romanian Senate and who was stating that he had a network in Justice, and who was also saying, I quote “where I did not obtain an acquittal, I obtained a suspension”. There may be more networks of this kind, we learned about this one in particular, so one is able to act. Furthermore, the law regarding the responsibility of the magistrates was modified half a year ago, and the Justice minister can ask, for instance, the start of a disciplinary action against a judge or an attorney. And here, coming back to the case we have these days, Adrian Nastase even “amused” me, in reality he saddened me. A journalist or someone else asked him: “But if you could ask the minister of Justice to do something and disciplinary investigate the same judges that are judging you, would you do it ?” And Adrian Nastase replied ” Of course, I would do it”. So yes, it can be done, it is written in the law and he knows it very well. This was nothing but a direct threat, that may have seemed veiled to the public opinion who is unfamiliar with this issue.
Moderator: Mr Nastase says: the one judging me right now is the former deputy of Morar from the DNA.
Answer: Wait a minute, this was a direct threat aimed at the judges, at those who judge, and at others who judge politicians from the USL. Yes, the Justice minister can ask the disciplinary investigation of a judge or of an attorney.
Moderator: So judges are that sensitive, they did not immunize themselves not even a bit during this period when they were however offered enough freedom to act and to judge.
Answer: I too believe and hope and wish that these judges who judge political casess, because it is about them that we are talking, and not about the ones who judge the common person, are strong and resist these pressures, and that they are not part of any network and truly respect their call and do justice. We see what happened these days with these requests for postponement, with the tries to reach the postponemt deadline.
The second intervention
Moderator: I have before me an article from the journal Puterea signed by Mihai Palsu, who is an experienced journalist, and that says this: “It is rumored that enormous pressure has been put on the five – we are still talking about the Nastase file – and that already two of the judges have given up to wrongdoings more or less pecuniary that it might be tried to buy up the majority, that is 3 out of 5. The other 3 were Traian Basescu’s fallen angels, well in their mind, the panel of judges that are judging Adrian Nastase’s appeal is composed of the judge Livia Doina Stanciu, the president of the ICCJ (High Court of Cassation and Justice), Florentina Dragomir, Maricela Cobzariu, Sofica Dumitrascu and Ioana Alina Ilie. The 5 have postponed the trial until the 23rd of May” and – Palsu says – : “I refuse to think that Nastase’s lawyers are trying to drag on the trial beyond the 10th of June deadline, when the criminal act is prescribed.
Answer: I only have a comment to make: I want to send out a message to the judges judging this case, and all the cases concerning politicians, that they have to be strong, that they are appointed for life, and that people expect justice from them and that everyone from abroad follows them and knows exactly what decisions they are taking and how the trials are going. Mrs Sofica Dumitrescu, if I remember it well, decided the release of Hayssam and I believe she was also a judge – I believe it is mentioned in this article – in one of the trials in which Nastase was acquitted. To conclude, my message for all the judges is the following: to do justice, to give just solutions, and to know that everyone is looking at what they do “.
(Bucharest, 16.05.2012) Blog Monica Macovei
Nastase mocks the judiciary and the public opinion
The discussion in the court room, as provided by Hotnews.ro, from May 2 and May 10 trial hearings in the criminal case called “Trofeul Calitatii”, in which the defendant Nastase Adrian was sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment by a first instance court, are relevant to the Ponta Government’s attitude towards the judiciary (this Government is, in fact, led by Nastase and Voiculescu). The coverage of the two hearings can be read here and here.
The defendant Nastase Adrian and his attorneys defied the panel of judges and repeatedly submitted requests for postponements, without having any considerations on the substance of the case. The defendant Adrian Nastase does not have any proof against the criminal offenses written down in the file; thus, he suggests to the court panel that more important than his trial hearings is a party meeting, he invokes pleas of unconstitutionality, requests for challenging the court prosecutor or requests for postponements of the trial because out his 5 attorneys, one is missing etc.
The defendant Adrian Nastase even insinuatingly threatens the judges, when answering to a well-targeted “question”: “If you tell me which legal text I can use for asking this, then I shall do it (n.r. sending the judiciary inspection to the Supreme Court for investigating the judges who are conducting his trial hearings)”.
I am sure that the coverage of the trial hearings in Adrian Nastase’s criminal lawsuit have already been translated by embassies and sent out to European chancelleries; they can see for themselves how Adrian Nastase mocks the judiciary and the public opinion.
The defendant Adrian Nastase’s defying attitude and his threats against the prosecutors and judges are in line with the recent statements of the new minister of Justice, Titus Corlatean: “if Nastase will be acquitted, then the prosecutor must be arrested”. All these threats to the independence of the judiciary are a clear confirmation that the Nastase-Ponta Government must be closely monitored, both internally and externally, with respect to its relationship with the judiciary system.
(Bucharest, 14.05.2012) Press statement – Monica Macovei
Mang’s resignation is not enough, Ponta should leave as well!
It has been more than a week and Victor Ponta has taken no decision in the case of minister Ioan Mang, accused of plagiarism. The lack of reaction from the prime minister in the case of serious accusations brought to the minister of Education, the very one who has to prepare these days the national evaluation and the A-levels, can only worsen the situation and to increase the mistrust of students and parents in the education system.
You can not tolerate a minister of Education on which there are suspicions that he steals texts written by others and signs them in order to obtain academic degrees and, in the mean time, ask the students and parents to trust the school and the quality of education.
The request sent to the Romanian Academy is just a useless delay of the decision to dismiss minister Mang, that Ponta refuses to assume. Even more, it represents an offense to the correct teachers and to the electorate.
From now on, Mang’s resignation becomes insufficient and will not be able to repair people’s mistrust in the Ponta Government. Victor Ponta needs to leave as well, since he has proved to lie when he wrote in the government programme he would obey the laws “without exceptions, without derogations and without excuses”.
(Bucharest, 03.05.2012) Press statement – Monica Macovei
Corlatean wants to arrest the prosecutors of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA)?
Titus Corlatean, the proposed Justice Minister, stated that the prosecutors who investigated the former prime-minister Adrian Nastase in “Zambaccian” case should be arrested if defendant Adrian Nastase, Corlatean’s mentor, were to be acquitted.
Mr. Corlatean’s firm opinions, regarding the manner in which prosecutors should be working (“the prosecutor should be arrested if Nastase were not convicted” – see link) and be held responsible for the drafting of their indictments, are a real danger to the independence of the prosecutors and an act of intimidation against them.
It is unacceptable that a potential Justice Minister is firmly convinced that, should the defendants in a case be acquitted, it is the prosecutors who are to be arrested.
Let us not forget also that Titus Corlatean defended Mr. Constantin Nicolescu (president of the Arges County Council) during the latter’s appeal against a judge’s preventive arrest decision, and he was also present at the rally organized in Pitesti in his support, together with Ponta, Nastase, Severin, Hrebenciuc etc. Thus, there is a risk that Titus Corlatean would try to influence the judiciary, so that PSD (Social Democrat Party) members would not be investigated, arrested or convicted.
I would not be surprised if we were to find out that the decisions about who should be investigated were taken again during party meetings, like in the time of Rodica Stanoiu and Adrian Nastase.
(Bucharest, 02.05.2012) Press statement – Monica Macovei
They were afraid of MRU and thus dismissed him from office. Ponta started by lying.
1. They were afraid of MRU
The trio Voiculescu – Ponta – Antonescu defeated MRU by buying up MPs or recruiting them with promises. Why? Because he was preparing to raise the salaries of the public servants and especially because the approval rates of the former Prime Minister were going up. They were afraid of MRU and therefore dismissed him from office.
2. Ponta begins his mandate with lies
Ponta lied when he declared that “the foremost priority of his proposed Government is the respect of the law, without exceptions, without derogations, and without apologies”.
Victor Alistar (proposed for the position of Minister delegate for governmental strategies, transparency and relation with the civil society) is incompatible with the exercise of any public function (including that of minister). The incompatibility was decided by the National Integrity Agency (decision no. A/1130/I.I/20.07.2009, final as of 7 August 2009). According to this decision, for 3 years (until 7 August 2012), Victor Alistar can not hold any public function. Furthermore, this interdiction has already been enforced by the decision of the Constitutional Court, which decided in its judgement (no. 54/25.01.2011) that, due to the National Integrity Agency’s decision, Victor Alistar can not be a member of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM), a position illegally acquired in the Senate, also with the help of the socialists and liberals.
This information is public and Ponta knew it. So even before being voted into office by the Parliament, the Ponta Government has begun its mandate with a lie and a proposal contrary to the law. The purpose of this lie was to establish a useless and ridiculous ministry for the political client Alistar. Each minister and agency should take its decisions in a transparent manner, and this depends on the minister/director, not on yet another ministry. The Ministry of Transparency looks as if taken from “Animal Farm”.
In any case, the incompatible Alistar is not just an accidental straying of Mr. Ponta; rather, it seems to define the beginning of the mandate of the Social-Liberal Union’s (USL) government. Corina Dumitrescu, the wife of socialist Cristian Dumitrescu – Head of the Education Committee in the Chamber of Deputies – is in a quasi-identical situation. She is now the proposed Education Minister. Elected in 2011 by socialists and liberals as a civil society representative in the CSM, she should have resigned, as required by the law, in 30 days, from her position as rector (president) of the Dimitrie Cantemir University. She chose not to resign. Mircea Diaconu, the proposed Minister of Culture, was also declared incompatible in a first instance court. Irrespective of the final decisions in the cases of Dumitrescu and Diaconu, such situations of incompatibility should have been sufficient reason for these people not to be proposed as ministers.
This is why I say that Ponta does not know what integrity means, nor does he really care about it. He proves, from the very beginning, that the Socialist-liberal Government’s priority is the exception, the derogation, and the non-abidance of the law; just like his mentor and defendant Nastase Adrian.