A different way of seeing Romania's justice I

                ”Here, in Romania, first they arrest you and only afterwards search for evidence.”

                                                                                  Marcel Tundrea (1950-2007)

Marcel Tundrea was in the nineties the victim of a judicial error. He spent twelve years in prison convicted for murder and rape and his release happened not long before his premature death. Nobody can predict how many such mistakes that their justice made in the last decade Romanians will discover sometime later. None seems to care also. An objective is clear anyway – Romania has to prove her justice reforms only with corrupt politicians imprisoned. CVM recent reports didn’t look beyond yet. The veil of fighting high – level corruption is quite blinding. Romanian  citizens need a justice that is a professional one not because gets politicians in prison but because various ordinary causes are solved properly and rightfully. The problems presented below are merely a short depiction of what silently happened in last years Romania. Not only the rich and famous persons involved in state affairs  made abuses of law but also those inside the law system not to forget politicians that appear to be “immaculate champions” of any anti-corruption struggle. Let analyze data published by the National Anti-Corruption Directorate. In 2011 they had to solve 6615 dossiers but failed to adopt a resolution in half of them (3302). Common sense says time is needed to gather evidence. But how can be sure a Romanian citizen that this is the only explanation. What if there are other reasons? Nobody knows how fervent and passionate prosecutors are about the files they have on their desks or drawers. Nobody knows if they use the right criteria to decide the list of priorities. The National Anti-Corruption Directorate was praised by Brussels although an additional question must be asked. In 2012 the National Anti-Corruption Directorate declared roughly 90 % rate of success (works validated by Courts). Checking their arithmetic using the available figures the result doesn’t seem so convincing.  But Romanian judiciary can also be described by other dossiers and events that allow a frightening thought that justice might have been used selectively as a political weapon. Taking those into account and finding solutions should become not only Romania’s judicial system imperative goal but EC’s as well.

1. Last autumn a young Japanese student Yurika Mauno, aged 20 was murdered near Bucharest. Because she was a foreigner and there were a lot of media reports everybody promptly found out who the killer was. His name is Vlad Nicolae and wasn’t prior arrested although there were suspicions that he committed before 4-5 other violent crimes. At least one prosecutor, Dunca Wilhelm asked for Vlad Nicolae only a thing that he has not to leave his domicile town for 30 days. A report was filled at the Superior Council of the Magistracy in this particular case but there is no decision yet. In Romania might be that many other non-prosecuted and therefore non-convicted felons are free on the streets because the state institutions praised or not in CVM reports don’t function well. Such situations seem to draw some attention in certain conditions, mainly if the victim is from another country. Because the focus on reforming Romanian judicial system was on corruption, a strange phenomenon is present here. White collar criminals must certainly be arrested to set and example for the rest of the society, to be questioned and not allowed to influence witnesses but violent felons don’t have to obey the same rule. But  a custom that is quite concerning settles quietly: first detain and then look for evidence. There may be some judicial errors in prosecuting and convicting in other countries but in Romania such a case appears to indicate another trend, that of a justice that is not professional yet.

2. Last summer in Romanian took place the referendum for president’s Basescu suspension. For some it looked like an unbearable surprise that so many Romanians voted for him to leave office (over seven million people). That thought might be the cause of some unprecedented huge actions organized by local prosecution offices under General Prosecutor’s coordination and by the National Anti-Corruption Directorate’s prosecutors. It seemed they wanted to investigate wrongly cast ballots. But the way those were conducted is also an example of trespassing over legal procedures in last year’s Romania. No European guardian appeared to notice that as well, after reacting fiercely to other bending of the rules when denounced by Constitutional Court. What was illegal? People living in rural areas woke up seized one morning wherever they were in there houses, in the streets or attending religious services at their churches. Local prosecution offices didn’t present them summons as they should’ve had according to Civil Code Procedures and they didn’t know if they were considered witnesses or defendants although prosecutors showed them Holy Bibles which cannot be used in both situations. After media’s response the second wave of local prosecutor and the first of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate investigators begun to respect normal lawful proceedings and asked villagers to come to local Police Stations. In such cases when law enforcing officers do not respect the rules themselves is there a problem if media broadcasts reports? 

3. According to CVM recent reports the European Commission seemed to be pleased by the National Anti-Corruption Directorate evolution after Romania’s accession to the European Union. Daniel Morar was in office even before 2007. Unknown at that time in Brussels he begun to become a public figure in Romania soon after he was appointed as head-prosecutor because of the Fleet Dossier. In that particular case president Basescu (among others) was indicted for selling in some questionable conditions many Romanian ships. Soon after Daniel Morar was appointed an unexpected turn took place. Before Daniel Morar being in office experts found a prejudice of 300 million $, afterwards Daniel Morar asked for another appraisement of the damage and, surprise, the result that came in was zero. Nobody requested a third opinion about such a huge difference. Because of his new expert report and of an ill-signed document which Daniel Morar didn’t correct, the Fleet Dossier was quashed and all 79 suspects were considered free of any charges, except president Basescu. He had to wait to conclude his term because of his immunity. Anyway the case was getting closer to prescription.

There should have been another investigation regarding president Basescu about buying and selling some land with questionable prices. The specialized institution, National Agency for Money Laundry filed it with this number S/IV/1014/17.09.2004. Later at a journalist request they declared that such a case is classified information. Daniel Morar’s National Anti-Corruption Directorate didn’t seem to react to any newspaper article related. A mention must be made, if someone uses the search engine on the National Anti-Corruption Directorate’ s  official site doesn’t find any press release about President Basescu’s situation after 2003. Last summer when referendum was on course some rumor surfaced. The National Anti-Corruption Directorate which appeared to have investigated that money laundry case decided not to prosecute president Basescu but no official information came from them.

Euro-bondurile intr-un fel de varianta de compromis?

Au fost  considerate o posibila salvare, refuzata insa si pentru ca sunt destui care nu cred ca solidaritatea rezolva orice, in special solidaritatea fara limite ce poate incuraja abuzul. Cum probleme Greciei n-a disparut, ba s-a agravat se mai discuta inca despre euro-bonduri, insa fara sa existe angajamentul (ne)asteptat de piete. Pentru ca ma consider o pro-europeana care nu uita insa ca UE este si va fi un conglomerat de state cu variate caracteristici, nici mie nu mi se pare in regula ca ecomomiile puternice sa traga ponoasele pentru cele mai slabe. Suntem insa intr-un moment de criza cand ar cam fi nevoie de solidaritate. Insa, cu masura. Ma intrebam ce s-ar intampla daca Banca Centrala Europeana (ori un alt organism central) ar putea emite euro – bonduri pentru a atrage fonduri cu ajutorul carora sa rascumpere macar datoriile stringente ale Greciei. Pentru ca euro-bondurile sa nu devina toxice acestea ar trebui sa fie lansate in conditii speciale, fiind adica purtatoare de dobanda stimulativa, dar fixa. Reintoarcerea lor la organismul emitent ar trebui realizata la termenul prevazut (scadenta) la valoarea nominala + dobanda. Desigur ca n-ar putea fi puse pe piata cu o scadenta prea indepartata pentru a nu deveni inatractive (daca nu pot fi vandute pentru castiguri mult peste valoarea lor nominala va exista un interes moderat din partea marilor speculatori). Ar fi deci o solutie mutuala pe termen scurt. Grecia ar avea obligatia de a –si racumpara datoriile sub forma de euro-bonduri (valoare nominala +dobanda) de la BCE (ori un alt organism central) care ar actiona si ca un fel de „FMI” din interiorul Uniunii Europene ce pune si conditii pentru a se asigura ca-si va recupera banii.

Dupa razboi multi viteji??? se arata

Zilele astea vanzarea Cuprumin a starnit o droaie de discutii. Pentru ca nu ma pricep la domeniul exploatarii cuprului si nu stiu care ar fi pretul corect, gandul mi-a zburat la altceva. Pare sa fi cauzat o legitima ingrijorare doar pentru acum, deoarece  e vorba de ceva rezerve pe care altii nu le au oricum, dar care nu sunt inepuizabile. Se vor consuma in niste ani, mai ales in cazul unei exploatari intensive. De asta nu stiam cata dreptate sa dau celor care au vandut sau cat sa-i invinovatesc? Intr-un fel, pentru ca mi se parea oarecum neimportanta valoarea zacamantului (oricat nu intra in activele companiei, e greu de crezut ca li s-ar fi retras licenta cu usurinta, poate doar sa fi renegociat vreodata redevente mai mari) si a tranzactiei recent incheiata m-am gandit la ceea ce ar putea sa fie semnificativ. Nu am fost o ecologista infocata, dar trebuie sa recunosc ca industriile de reciclare au luat avant. In aceste conditii nu mai e important doar un zacamant care e epuizabil ci recuperarea lui si dupa prima si dupa a nu stiu cata folosinta. De aceea mi-as fi dorit sa vad o altfel de politica economica inteleapta a statului care ar fi trebuit sa nu vanda in graba tocmai pentrut a-i conditiona pe exploatatoriii de cupru cu gandul la ce va fi mai tarziu. As fi vrut sa le ceara  sa construiasca in zona si o unitate de reciclare care ar putea aduna resurse si de la altii. Nici nu stiu daca in lume exista companii miniere care s-au orientat si catre re-prelucrarea cuprului. Simteam insa  nevoia sa facem ceva care sa “traga” un pic de viitor asupra noastra, iar daca acesta nu se prefigureaza inca, chiar sa-l intrezarim noi.

Tichete „Fabricat in Romania”

M-am bucurat auzind tot mai des in ultimul timp ca o crestere a consumului intern n-ar face rau economiei de pe la noi. In urma cu niste ani intelesesem doar intr-o oarecare masura temerile celor reticenti in aceasta privinta. Problema echilibrarii balantei comerciale nu e de ici, de colo cand tot romanul se vede cu bani in mana si e atras mai ales de ceea ce vine din import. Cum pentru 2012 „prudenta” e cuvantul de baza in privinta cresterilor salariale din sectorul bugetar ma gandeam ce bine ar fi sa se acorde plusuri de venituri care sa se cheltuie exclusiv pe marfuri fabricate in Romania. Nu e foarte usor sa institui un sistem de tichete destinate achizitionarii de produse romanesti, dar nici extraordinar de greu, daca ar fi sa ne gandim la tichetele de masa, cadou, etc.

Intrebari

1.Teama de nimic – Mi-as dori sa fiu contrazisa, desi e putin probabil, dar am senzatia ca in cazul CDS-urilor ne temen de ceva ce doar pare ca exista. Cum piata acestor instrumente este una predominant speculativa te intrebi de ce tremura toata lumea in fata cotatiilor CDS? In aparenta raspunsul e clar, bancile iti adauga un plus de dobinda potrivit acestora. As mai avea si in acest caz o nedumerire, nu cumva bancile tin seama de cotatiile unui produs financiar nascut mai mult din dorinta unora de a face bani din nimic, pentru a imprumuta cat mai scump? Adica pentru a face profituri indecent de mari.

2. O fi bine si eficient la noi, la Bucuresti, sa fie entitati separate Elcen si Radet? Ditamai disputa in privinta penalitatilor istorice pentru ca unii produc, iar altii doar distribuie o anume forma de energie. Se poate discuta mult despre rostul cogenerarii intr-o astfel de situatie, dar as vrea sa remarc altceva. Cum noi avem doua unitati pe acest „flux tehnologic energetic” al termoficarii orasului, o sa tot vedem cum fiecare isi apara pozitia fara a incerca sa colaboreze prea mult, adaugand si doua cote de profit la pretul „unicei”gigacalorii pe care ne-o dau.

Nevoie de Razvan Olosu

Un roman a a preluat fosta fabrica Nokia din Bochum pentru a produce mobile&accesorii de lux. La noi, cu toata criza, luxul se cauta. Pe dl. Olosu il suna cineva, poate simte nevoia sa-si extinda productia? Nu cred in neinterventionismul absolut in economie, ba chiar simt  nevoia acum de oameni cu perspectiva care sa incerce sa caute o solutie si alti investitori, macar pentru divizia de cercetare de la Jucu.

Utopie sau nu?

As avea o dorinta pentru romani si Romania, cel putin pentru o anume perioada. As vrea sa nu se mai foloseasca titluri si titulaturi, nici chiar pentru persoanele aflate intr-o functie, dar, desigur, nici pentru fosti. La noi, precizarea titlurilor in formulele de adresare este de mult timp o formula de lingusire, mai ales cand titulatura respectiva nu e meritata. Se intampla des, nu? Doar vorbim atat de o societate care promoveaza non-valorile, care acorda diplome fara acoperire si care nu a reusit sa-si statueze acele repere fundamentale ce ar face-o sa functioneze eficient si sa fie fiabila. Ce ar fi daca am renunta la chestiile pompoase si am folosi in adresare numai dle. si dna. urmate de nume persoanei in cauza? Pentru ca adevaratele valori reusesc sa se impuna numai prin numele lor si poate asa vom reusi  sa ne selectam mai corect elitele. In definitiv, ma gandesc de decenii la un lucru, personalitatile intra in istorie prin numele lor, titlul sta scris intotdeauna cu litere mici, abia dupa o virgulita.