Scandal - Basescu Demands House in Exchange

The Chief of the State avoids clearing up the things regarding the house in the 2nd Stefan Mihaileanu Street by saying only that this was a legal deal. In the meantime, the President demands a work residence from the state.

"TARGETS". The house in the Mihaileanu Street, as well as the one in Otopeni, is vulnerable to the possible threats against President Taraian Basescu.

A key-information is missing from the statements of the Chief of the State regarding his house in the Mihaileanu Street: did Traian Basescu sign or not a statement on his own responsibility saying that he hadn’t owned any house and that he hadn’t transferred any? Yesterday, the President refused to give precise answers, saying only that this was a legal deal. "I publicly take the responsibility of a legal contract for buying the apartment in the 2nd Stefan Mihaileanu Street", he said.

The specialists say that this kind of a statement should have been in the file that Mayor Traian Basescu handed in when he signed the rent contract - the 14th of August 2002, as well as in the moment of the buying, on the 4th of February 2003, the date on the sales contract. According to the contract between Traian Basescu and the Administration of the Real Estate Fund, the sale was based on the Law no. 112/1995. The respective law provides that the lessee that lived in the house at the time of the law’s validation (in 1995) only can buy the house. There is also an extra condition: the lessee shouldn’t have owned or transferred any houses after 1990.

However, when he purchased the house in the Mihaileanu Street, the Chief of the State already owned a house: the mansion in the Bucuresti-Ploiesti road (bought on the 21st of October 2002), a mansion which he donated to his daughter, Ioana, in November 2002.

ANNULMENT. The solution that the Chief of the State chose for getting out of the scandal appeared after the buying of the house in the Mihaileanu Street, is the annulment of the sales contract. It is a hard thing not to wonder why would he want to annul a contract he says it is legal? The statement on Sunday night doesn’t give an answer for this question. The statement invokes his wish of "clearing up his locative issue" and "the respect towards the public opinion".

The legal advisers say that the only way for annulling the contract is the appeal to the Court. Counselor Doru Giugula believes that, in this case, President Traian Basescu would lose the money and the house as well. "The Court of Law is the only one able to annul this contract. In this case, Basescu would have to denounce himself by explaining he had illegally purchased a house. Therefore, he will lose the house as well as the money he paid for it", says Giugula. If this were not the case here, how much would Basescu ask in exchange for the 640 million lei? 19,301 USD at that time equals 22,850 USD today, according to yesterday’s currency rates. How could AREF justify the loss of 3,500 USD? On the other hand, he might ask for money for his investments in the house…

ANOTHER HOUSE. However, the Chief of the State gives up on the house in the Mihaileanu Street. "At this time I have to ask for a house from the RA-APPS, because the house in the Mihaileanu Street, as well as the house in the 1st NR (National Road) are not in accordance to the security measures usually taken for Romania’s President", Basescu argued.

DENOUNCEMENT. SDP (the Social Democratic Party) will submit a penal denouncement at the Prosecutor’s Office of the High Court of Appeal and Justice against citizen Traian Basescu, accusing him of work abuse and fraud, Senator Antonie Iorgovan announced. He states that the chief of the state could be trialed for these crimes, because his immunity is only for political opinions, as well as the ones of the Parliament members. "No one forced citizen Traian Basescu to commit these crimes", Iorgovan argued.

MIHUTU: "I DIDN’T SIGN" Yesterday, the AREF director, Luminita Mihutu, refused to answer precisely whether Traian Basescu put in the file a statement saying that he was not the owner of another house. "The buying was made in accordance to the valid legislation. The house is now a private property, and I am not in any position to provide any information about it", was Mihutu’s only statement. However, she wanted to say she didn’t sign the sales contract, which has her name and stamp, but the contract has the signature of the sales manager. (Oana Stancu)

COURT ANNULMENT "The house has already been registered in the land registry and the only way to annul the contract is the Court’s decision. According to the Law no. 112, Basescu didn’t meet the terms for buying a nationalized house, because he had previously owned and transferred another property. The Court of the 2nd District can put the sides in the previous situation, like the contract was never signed", advocate Catalin Dancu stated for us yesterday.