Minister of Justice, Cătălin Predoiu, publicly apologises after announcing in an interview that the husband of former DIICOT chief (the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism), Giorgiana Hosu, has been acquitted, although the final decision is expected in February. Dan Hosu, the husband of the former DIICOT chief, was sentenced in 2020 to a suspended sentence of 3 years in prison in a corruption case.
After several postponements, the Bucharest Court of Appeal is expected to give a final ruling in the case in February. The controversial statement, which raises questions, was made in an interview with Europa FM.
Cătălin Predoiu was asked on Wednesday in an interview for Europa FM whether he was satisfied with the work of the heads of the Public Prosecutor’s Offices, including Giorgiana Hosu, who resigned after her husband was sentenced.
“And subsequently acquitted. We could say that she resigned, truly honourably, because of a hypothesis that was not materialised in the end,” Minister Cătălin Predoiu replied.
Later, the Minister of Justice came back with a statement apologising and saying that the information about the acquittal came from “unofficial sources”.
“I would like to make it clear that the ministry’s apparatus has no responsibility in spreading this erroneous information, the fault lies entirely with me because I did not verify the information received from unofficial sources,” the minister explained.
Former USR (The Save Romania Union) Minister of Justice, Stelian Ion, is calling for Predoiu’s resignation or dismissal.
According to him, the announcement based on unofficial sources of the solution in a criminal case due to be decided in February is very serious and disqualifies Predoiu from holding the office of Minister of Justice.
Is this a statement that should lead to the replacement of minister Predoiu? We asked Georgiana Iorgulescu from the Centre for Legal Resources.
“In Romania, normality is hard to define and understand nowadays. I mean we are somewhere at the edge of democracy, especially during this whole period of COVID, post-COVID and what is happening now in the country, plagiarism, non-plagiarism and things like that.
Now, going back to Mr Predoiu’s statements, I don’t know, there could be two possibilities, I’m speculating now, I have no choice… The first possibility is, let’s say a less guilty possibility, in which someone, it doesn’t matter who, unintentionally passed on such information to him regarding the acquittal of the husband of the former head of DIICOT and then, indeed, he didn’t verify it and spread further, even though he wasn’t asked.
There is also a second possibility, in which someone, unofficially, definitely told him these things, and that person could have known what was about to happen.
That would be a totally troublesome possibility, as if someone had access to what is about to be ruled by judges, who may be in the process of deliberation, and deliberation, as we know, is a secret matter.
I’d very much like to think it’s the former, because the latter is super dangerous.
Rep: It also raises some questions about these unofficial sources that the Minister of Justice is talking about. He says, it’s not the ministry’s apparatus, it’s unofficial sources. So the Minister pays heed to unofficial sources?
G.I.: Unofficial sources can be anyone. At the moment, the only official source is the court that gives a verdict. Apart from the court pronouncing a minute, any kind of source is an unofficial source, because no one can have access to the thinking, the thought process, the deliberation of a magistrate.
And then, surely unofficial can be a childhood friend of mine. It can be absolutely any kind of person. Yes, it’s super unfortunate that such a statement was made in the public space.
Now who this person is I can’t say, I have no way of knowing. But it is serious when suspicions arise that may be, how shall I say, unfounded. This is the positive side regarding the deliberation process of some judges, some magistrates.
Rep: How does it affect the endeavour of making justice? Let’s not forget, the court is due to rule in February?
G.I: No one is allowed to interfere in the judicial process, especially not a high-ranking official.
In a normal country where judges have attended a university, have a certain life experience and practical experience, no matter what one minister or another says, they give their verdict based on the evidence.
If we were to believe otherwise, it is a disaster.
I cannot live without the conviction that the verdict will be given on the basis of evidence, in this case or any other one.
Rep: Is this the kind of statement that can lead to dismissal?
G.I: If a Minister of the Interior who, without any doubt, is known to have plagiarised is not leaving, why would we believe, without evidence, that Minister Predoiu should resign or be dismissed?
I mean there are two situations: in one situation we have proof, in the other we have a presumption, of good faith or bad faith, now it depends on how we apply it. But it is not a proof in itself, it is a presumption. It is extremely difficult to say.
Rep: That’s because we’re having this discussion in a country that is, as you say, at the edge of democracy. But what if we were having the discussion in a democratic country, where things would be very clear?
G.I: In a democratic country, such judgements would not be made. Or if they had, there would have been consequences.
And I don’t know why it seems to me that as a society we get used to accepting everything. You see a very strong silence in society, in an area of government where more and more serious things are happening.
And I gave the example of plagiarism.
The other day, Minister Deca, now suddenly jumping to another subject, completely and utterly classifies the draft of the education law that affects thousands and thousands of children and the future of this country.
I mean, no good things are happening, on the contrary, I would say, and yet it is like this, a silence somehow encouraged, if I may say so, by the generously party-sponsored television channels.
Listen here:
Georgiana Iorgulescu, CRJ: Într-o țară normală, declarațiile ministrului Predoiu ar fi avut consecințe
Source: www.rfi.ro/politica-152362-georgiana-iorgulescu-crj-intr-o-tara-normala-declaratiile-ministrului-predoiu-ar-fi
Author: Andreea Orosz
