x close
Click Accept pentru a primi notificări cu cele mai importante știri! Nu, multumesc Accept
Acest site utilizează fișiere de tip cookie pentru a vă oferi o experiență cât mai plăcută și personalizată. Îți aducem la cunoștință faptul că ne-am actualizat politicile pentru a ne conforma cu modificările propuse aduse de Directiva (UE) 2002/58/EC ("Directiva E-Privacy") si de Regulamentul (UE) 2016/679 privind protectia persoanelor fizice in ceea ce priveste prelucrarea datelor cu caracter personal si privind libera circulatie a acestor date si de abrogare a Directivei 95/46/CE ("Regulamentul GDPR").

Înainte de a continua navigarea pe www.jurnalul.ro, te rugăm să citești și să înțelegi conținutul Politicii de Cookie și Politica de Confidențialitate.

Prin continuarea navigării pe www.jurnalul.ro confirmi acceptarea utilizării fișierelor de tip cookie. Poți modifica în orice moment setările acestor fișiere cookie urmând instrucțiunile din Politica de Cookie.



Autor: Ion Cristoiu 23 Ian 2007 - 00:00

It took no more than a second for the magistrates to take a decision in the case of the note invoked by Elena Udrea and confirmed by Traian Basescu. The note doesn’t have any penal significance.
Actually, the President himself, knowing that there is no possible way to get Calin Popescu Tariceanu with the note, wanted to say it was an interesting note at most. In order to get sure this disclosure doesn’t turn against him like a boomerang, he did two more tricks:
a) he avoided reading the note live on prime time.
b) he made it a part of a longer sequence of facts that the PM would have done in the name of certain groups of interest to make it look a lot worse than it was.
Contrary to the opinions of the jurists, of the politicians, of several analysts, the Romanian General Prosecutor said on TV that, "in theory", the note could be seen as an act of corruption.
On Thursday, the 18th of January 2007, on Antena 3, Professor Emil Constantinescu, a professional jurist and former Romanian President, emphasized the judicial flaws of this statement. The Prosecutor General looked like a model that paid for the Law school just to have a diploma. The professional incompetence of the person brought from Sibiu to be named the General Prosecutor of Romania has been strongly analyzed during the past days.
However, there is a much more serious consequence of the public opinion of Laura Codruta Kovesi.
She dragged a national institution with a clear neutral status in a political battle.

By trying to make the pink note penal, Laura Codruta Kovesi involved the General Prosecutors’ Office in the fight between the Palaces. The statement was in the clear favor of one of the sides.
Which side?
Traian Basescu’s side, of course!
Of course, there is no valid ground to take the pink note into Court. In the same way in which the Alro note shouldn’t be the cause of an investigation. From this point of view, the official statement of SDP (the Social Democratic Party) is a simple exercise of rhetoric.
The pink note diversion is a simple diversion in the much wider context of the electoral crusade started by Cotroceni against NLP (the National Liberal Party). All the data want to make the NLP leading board appear as being an important member of the corruption groups. However, Traian Basescu avoided saying the gesture of Calin Popescu Tariceanu had been one of corruption. He was pretty sure that there would be enough politicians to do it for him. He was right. There were a lot of words indicating the acts of corruption of the PM. The leaders of the Liberal Democrat Party were the main accusers. For this diversion, Traian Basescu received unexpected help from the General Prosecutor of Romania. With her injurious intervention, Laura Codruta Kovesi had spectacularly and irremediably stood out as a soldier of Traian Basescu.

The General Prosecutor is able to influence the electorate. By admitting that, in theory, the note could be considered the cause of an investigation, Laura Codruta Kovesi gave an important helping hand to Traian Basescu in the electoral battle against Calin Popescu Tariceanu.
This is how the intervention of Mrs. Kovesi gets to be one of the most serious ones in the context of recent scandals:
1) it is an attempt to involve the politically neutral institutions in a strictly political battle. This can only have disastrous consequences for Romania.
2) it confirms the suspicion according to which the General Prosecutors’ Office and the NAD (the National Anticorruption Directorate), institutions whose heads depend on the Monica Macovei - Traian Basescu couple, have been and still are instruments used in political battles. Renate Weber crossed the t by demanding the resignation of Laura Codruta Kovesi. It is a temporary action. The final crossing of the t will be done only when the General Prosecutor and the NAD Chief Prosecutor won’t depend on the Minister of Justice and the President.

Translated by SORIN BALAN
Citeşte mai multe despre:   traian,   english,   general,   codruţa kovesi,   note,   prosecutor,   laura codruta,   general prosecutor

Serviciul de email marketing furnizat de