Valentin Ceausescu’s Fortune: Righteous Restitution

17 years after the Revolution, the Bucharest Court of Law supported the decision that gave back the goods, jewelries and art objects to Valentin Ceausescu. The objects had been confiscated from him and his brother, Nicu, in December 1989.

THE MAZE. Arrested on the 25th of December 1989, held in prison for nine months under the accusation of having undermined the national economy, but never found guilty of any crime, Valentin Ceausescu tried hard to get back his goods taken from him while he had been arrested. In 1996, charges have been dropped in the cases of Valentin Ceausescu as well as in the one of his sister Zoia and brother Nicu. The same decision said all the goods were to get back to their owner. The decision only resisted for a short period, because it had been annulled in 1999. The goods had been taken away from him again. 11 months later, in 2000, this solution was annulled as well and the decision in 1996 was valid again. For another short period of time too, because in 2001 another decree validated the confiscation of the goods of the Ceausescus. In 2004, Valentin was able to get to Court the decisions of the General Prosecutors’ Office.

DECISION. Yesterday’s motivation reconnected the innocence of the sons of Ceausescu with the illegality of maintaining a confiscation. "No matter the analyzed situation, as far as Ceausescu Valentin and Ceausescu Nicu are concerned, no crime can be mentioned. (…) There is no proof in this investigation to show the activities of Nicu and Valentin Ceausescu have harmed the interests of any person, like the ones mentioned by the prosecutor. They can’t be accused of undermining the national economy either", says the motivation. The documents also show that, even if the children of the two dictators have benefited from all the financial advantages offered by their parents, they cannot be punished for not checking the legal character of the goods they enjoyed having. The Court said the correct measure is to drop charges, because the facts don’t exist, but not to end the legal investigation, which would have allowed the authorities to keep the goods.