Archive for iunie, 2007

iunie 30, 2007

Cum a mancat rahat ministrul Justitiei in fata Comisiei Europene cerand schimbari in raportul privind Romania


p. 14, para 1, 3rd bullet

“More problematic may be the fact that the NIA would not meet the independence criteria requested. In particular, incompatibility between the quality of parliamentarian and that of lawyer was not reintroduced in the project, as it was in the initial project. Moreover, appointments and possible revocations of the NIA’s President and Vice Presidents depend on the Senate, albeit on proposal of the National Integrity Council.”



The author confuses the regime of incompatibilities and the institutional provisions regarding NIA. There is no logical or legal connection between the compatibility of parliamentarian and lawyer and NIA independence criteria, these are two separate legal issues, one substantive and one institutional, mixing them together is utterly incorrect.

Background information:

ü The initial draft law of 2006 had a section aiming to modify the legal regime of incompatibilities, introducing the incompatibility between the position of MP and the profession of lawyer. This section has been dropped, as being harshly criticized by civil society as unclear and against ECHR jurisprudence. Thus, Law 144/2007 has not modified the regime in force, as provided by Law 161/2003, which is fully consistent with European standards. The Romanian system is similar to the French one: the two positions are compatible, but legal practice is permitted only subject to strict limitations.

ü In accordance with art. 82^1of Law 161/2003, lawyers holding the position of MP are not allowed to represent or provide assistance in criminal cases on corruption, drug traffic, traffic of persons, money laundering, crimes against state security, crimes against justice, crimes against peace and humanity. They are not allowed to represent or assist in civil or commercial litigations against the state, any public authority or institution or company with public participation. They are not allowed to plead before international courts in cases involving Romania (Law 161/2003 as subsequently amended, Book I, Title IV, Chapter 3, Section 2, art. 82^1).

The interpretation that the nomination and revocation of NIA’s president and vice-president depend on the Senate and are problematic with respect to NIA’s independence is not in conformity with the legal provisions.

ü As pointed out on 23 May to the Commission in the comments of the Romanian authorities to BM 2 and in the subsequent progress reports sent to the Commission’s Representation in Bucharest on 11 June and 20 June as well as on the occasion of bilateral meetings[1], the Senate has little room both in the appointment and the revocation procedure and plays a formal role.

ü To better illustrate this system, we make a parallel with the appointment in office of judges. The fact that, under art. 125 of the Romanian constitution, the President of the republic appoints in office the judges selected and proposed for appointment by the Superior Council of the Magistracy does not mean that the judges are subordinated to the president or that he/she has any margin of appreciation in their appointment. His/her role is formal.

ü The same principle applies in the case of NIA, where the candidates are selected following an open competition and proposed for appointment by the National Integrity Council. Revocation grounds are narrowly limited and are based either on violation of the law or an external independent audit. The Senate does not have any discretionary powers in this regard.

· P. 15 para 1

In addition, a series of recent events could have negative impacts on the fight against corruption. These include the decriminalization of bank fraud, of bank fraud, the intention of parliament to shorten the maximum duration for penal investigations and the request for dismissal of a senior member of DNA.

WE PROPOSE TO DELETE “the request for dismissal of a senior member of DNA”.

ARGUMENTS: The Commission’s position falls outside the scope of this benchmark. The Commission’s position suggests that whatever the circumstances and the behavior, prosecutors cannot be revoked.

ü The Romanian authorities do not understand the position taken by the Commission. The BM requires that the current procedures for the nomination/revocation of top prosecutors be maintained in force, not that these procedures cannot be used.

· p. 15 para 5

The timeframes in which DNA conducts and concludes its investigations continues to illustrate a high level of professionalism in the Department’s multi disciplinary investigating teams.



The sentence is redundant, it repeats the idea presented in the previous paragraph


ü The Romanian authorities have concerns over the qualification as highly professional of the timeframe of DNA investigations. Referring to the information provided by the Romanian officials[2] in connection with the request of revocation of the chief of the NAD 2nd section we reiterate the fact that, from the 428 cases registered in Section 2 of NAD during the last year, only 99 were solved. Among these, only 18 were sent to trial, and the rest of them did not receive criminal pursuit solutions.

ü The Romanian authorities would like to draw the attention that, while welcoming the swift resolution of criminal investigations, the time frame alone is not an indicator of high level of professionalism. How does the Commission know that all DNA investigations have been conducted in a correct and professional manner, providing strong evidence before the courts?

· p. 15. para 6

However, the efforts and results of the DNA in the prosecution of high level corruption are not upheld by a similar output of the court system. There are several elements in the practice of the courts that indicate either insufficient awareness of the corruption phenomenon or lack of training/knowledge.

WE PROPOSE TO DELETE “There are several elements in the practice of the courts that indicate either insufficient awareness of the corruption phenomenon or lack of training/knowledge”.


The sentence is redundant, it repeats the idea presented in the following paragraph.

Furthermore: The Romanian authorities consider this argument which evades the question of the quality of the evidence provided by the prosecutors. The Commission should also take into consideration the point of view of the judges.

p. 16, para 3

“With regards to the nomination and revocation procedures, the early departure or replacement of officials holding key positions to the reform process can be damaging to the continuity of the reform process. As to the nomination and revocation procedure of the General Prosecutor and the Chief Prosecutor of the DNA, the decision of the Senate’s Legal Committee to activate and older proposal pending in the Senate since 2006 was reversed by the Plenum in late March 2007. It remains to be seen whether the intent to modify the nomination procedure is abandoned irreversibly. The number of personnel changes in the past months is not reassuring in that respect. Examples are the departures of the figures of the GAD and the nomination for dismissal of leaders of DNA and NIM. In addition, several high officials of the Ministry of Justice have resigned.”

WE PROPOSE TO DELETE “The number of personnel changes in the past months is not reassuring in that respect. Examples are the departures of the figures of the GAD and the nomination for dismissal of leaders of DNA and NIM. In addition, several high officials of the Ministry of Justice have resigned.”

ARGUMENTS: the number and type of personnel changes refers to 3 persons, which does not justify such a statement, as the persons referred to are not part of the judiciary and their activity has nothing to do with criminal investigations.

ü The fact that 2 personal advisors of the former Justice Minister and 1 State Secretary have resigned is irrelevant for the purpose of the present benchmark. The activity of personal advisors has nothing to do with the conduct of criminal investigations.
ü Equally irrelevant is the comment on the request for dismissal of the head of the National Institute of Magistrates. The activity of NIM has nothing to do with the conduct of criminal investigations.

The considerations put forward by the Commission fall outside the scope of BM3. In accordance with the Commission’s explanatory notes, this BM refers to the nomination and revocation procedure of top prosecutor positions: „maintaining the current nomination and revocation procedure for the General Prosecutor of Romania, the Chief Prosecutor of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate and other leading positions in the general prosecutor’s office”.

With respect to the circumstances justifying the request of revocation of the head of the 2nd section of NAD we refer to the information provided by the Romanian officials[3] in this respect:

The proposal was based on the analysis of the statistical data of this Section. They showed unsatisfactory results in the fight against corruption. The proposal envisaged neither the person of the chief prosecutor, nor the investigations he was conducting, but the way he managed the activity of the section. The proposal reflects the intention of the minister of making the structure more efficient. The mismanagement consisted upon the lack of transparent criteria in selecting the investigated cases, as there were a lot of opened, old cases, and abandoned. Thus, from the 428 cases registered in Section 2 during the last year, only 99 were solved. Among these, only 18 were sent to trial, and the rest of them did not receive criminal pursuit solutions. Compared to similar data in the judicial system, there is a clear mismanagement problem.


p. 7, footnote 6, para 2

For its part, the General Prosecutor’s Office attached to the HCCJ concluded a restructuring strategy, endorsed by the SCM and adopted by the Ministry of Justice in February 2007.


ARGUMENT: The Srategy was approved by the Ministry in April 2007.

p. 10 , para 4

“The situation is very different for the two new procedure codes. The process is under way and well advanced for the Civil Procedure Code but only starting for the other one, where the composition of the Commission itself is still not finalized”.

WE PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING TEXT: “The situation is very different for the two new procedure codes. The process is under way and well advanced for the Civil Procedure Code but only starting for the other one although progress has been made. The composition of the commission for drafting the new Criminal Procedure Code was finalised and approved by Order of the Minister of Justice no. 1251/C of May 17th, 2007”.

ARGUMENT: As Romania has informed the European Commission on 23 May in the comments it submitted in relation to the peer-review report on BM1 drafted by expert Maurizio Salustro, the composition of the commission for drafting the new Criminal Procedure Code was finalised and approved by Order of the Minister of Justice no. 1251/C of May 17th, 2007.

p. 13, para 7

”The integrity inspector shall notify the court if, on the available evidence, there is a notable difference between the possessed wealth and the declared one, which cannot be reasonably justified.”

WE PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING TEXT: ”The integrity inspector shall notify the court if, on the available evidence, there is an obvious difference between the acquired wealth and the revenues gained, which cannot be reasonably justified.”

ARGUMENT: The obvious difference is between the assets acquired and the revenues gained, not between the assets declared and those possessed.

p. 16, para 5

“Moreover, another concern relating to the fight against corruption is the potential amendments of the Procedural Code, currently being discussed within the Parliament. This might have a substantial negative impact on the fight against corruption, particularly with reference to the following three issues: (1) Not withstanding concerns expressed, the abolition of the possibility for the Public Prosecutor to authorize suitably motivated provisional interception for urgent cases even though authorization of the judge is required – in any case – within the next 48 hours (2) the limitation of the investigation to a maximum period of six months (3) the limitation of running wire tapping to a maximum of 120 days. These amendments would seriously limit the potential of the investigators in collecting evidence, particularly when tackling well established criminal groups or powerful governmental representatives deeply involved with corruption”.


ARGUMENT: as officially communicated to the Commission on 23 May in the comments made to the report on BM4 drafted by expert Maurizio Varanese, any parliamentary discussion over amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code is frozen. We refer to the information already communicated:

Following a request of the Minister of Justice, the Legal Commission within the Chamber of Deputies suspended the debates on possible amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code (discussions on the approval of Emergency Government Ordinance no. 60/2006). Any discussion is stopped until a new Code of Criminal Procedure is presented.. The request was submitted within the context of the work on a new Code, which shall be submitted to public debate by the Ministry of Justice in the course of the adoption procedure.

p. 16, para 6

Finally, a new law was passed in late March 2007, decriminalizing certain aspects of bank fraud previously under the jurisdiction of the DNA challenges the legal stability of the anti-corruption framework. If the law is being applied retroactively, which appears to be the case, decriminalization would apply to bank officers that received kick-backs for granting questionable and illegitimate loans. This would have the result the dismissal of numerous pending cases by the DNA (text of footnote no 23: currently 52 cases are potentially concerned, involving hundreds of persons that would be going acquitted, and around an equal number of cases in the DNA that will be taken off criminal investigations).



ü As already pointed out by the Ministry in the progress report forwarded to the Commission representation in Bucharest on 20 June and on 8 June in bilateral meetings[4], by Transparency International and by the Romanian Bank Association, it was a case of excessive regulation.

ü There is no legal foundation for concluding that this decriminalization means the acquittal of hundreds of persons.

Explanatory note: Under the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code the judge is obliged to change the legal qualification of a crime, if a decriminalisation occurs during the trial, but the initial act has the elements of an offence which is still incriminated (334 Penal Procedure Code – PPC).

The judge has to submit the change of the legal qualification to the debate of the parties involved and to give the defendant the possibility of preparing his defence. It is also the prosecutor’s obligation to ask the judge to proceed as described above.

Breach of this obligation is ground for appeal (art 379 and 385 PPC). It is the prosecutor’s duty to file the appeal in such situations. In appeal the initial decision is annulled and the trial is resumed from the very beginning.

In the case of art 10 let b and c, the judge can re-qualify the crime into abuse of power, trading in influence or taking a bribe. There is no possibility a defendant charged on art 10 let b and c gets acquitted, unless the corruption charges prove to be unfounded. In relation to the NAD acquittals on art 10 let b and c, the Romanian authorities think that there must have been a problem with the evidence supporting the corruption charges.

For a more detailed account of the arguments presented above, we refer to the relevant section of the Transparency International National Corruption Report 2007[5].

p. 18, para 4

As far as the fraud of EU funds is concerned, the Department for Fight Against Fraud (DLAF) reported 13 new cases begun in January 2007, raising the total number of cases currently under investigation by DLAF to 41. Seven of them were completed by the end of January, three of them being referred to DNA for formal criminal investigations on corruption charges.


„As far as the fraud of EU funds is concerned, the Department for Fight Against Fraud (DLAF) reported 13 new cases begun in January 2007. The total number of cases under investigation by DLAF between 1 September 2006 and 15 March 2007 is 84, 63 cases being opened in the reference period. 22 files were forwarded to NAD on the basis of the cooperation agreement between the two institutions, and 17 were forwarded to the regular Prosecutor’s Offices.”


ü The Romanian authorities do not understand the source of the information on the figures and can confirm only the fact that 13 cases have been opened in January 2007.

ü The rest of the information cannot be confirmed by the Romanian authorities, which refer to the figures communicated on the 31 March progress report: “Between September 1st, 2006 and March 15th, 2007, the Fight against Fraud Department (FFD) had under investigation 84 cases[6] regarding the obtainment, handling or use of funds from European Union assistance programmes, 63 cases being opened in the reference period. Out of these, 52 cases were finalized and 32 cases are in progress.”

ü Furthermore, the time span is not clear: “the total number of cases currently under investigation by DLAF is 41”. Currently means September 2006 – June 2007?

We emphasize that in the last progress report submitted to the Commission representation on 20 June for the period 16 May – 15 June DLAF had under investigation 51 cases1 regarding the obtainment, handling or use of funds from European Union assistance programmes, 13 cases being opened in the reference period.

ü The reference to referring cases to DNA for criminal investigation on corruption charges is mistaken. It is for charges of committing offences against EU’s financial interests.

[1] 8 June 2007 meeting between Romanian officials with representatives of JLS, Commission Secretariat as well as responsible persons from the Cabinet of Vice-President Frattini
[2] Idem 1
[3] 8 June2007 meeting between Romanian officials with representatives of JLS, Commission Secretariat as well as responsible persons from the Cabinet of Vice-President Frattini
[4] 8 June2007 meeting between Romanian officials with representatives of JLS, Commission Secretariat as well as responsible persons from the Cabinet of Vice-President Frattini

[5] Section 1.3. The modification of Law no. 78/2000, through the decriminalization of illegally according credit as an act of corruption
At the beginning of April 2007, Law no. 69/2007 entered force, which modifies Law no. 78/2000 concerning the combating of corruption and infractions assimilated or in connection to corruption. Through the new regulation, according illegal credit is decriminalized as a corruption offence, while the modified text keeps, however, according illegal subsidies, misdirecting subsidies and using subsidies in another scope besides that for which they were accorded. All those remain criminal corruption offences.
From a technical, legislative perspective, criminalizing the obtaining of non-performing credit was impertinent. This effectively transformed commercial banking risk into a penal risk, which constituted an overregulation in the name of fighting corruption. The rationale of this modification resided in the fact that granting credit is done on the basis of a civil or commercial contract between the bank and the client, but violating this must not be considered an act of corruption. Criminally punishing acts connected to non-performing or fraudulent credit is possible in so far as an infraction in service can be constituted on the part of the employee or a manager at the bank. In this context, the beneficiary of the credit may be pursed on penal grounds as accessories to the infraction, applying the provisions on the plurality of perpetrators.
The hypothesis that the scope of this modification was to eliminate criminal liability for certain important persons, by decriminalizing the offences with which they have been charged by anticorruption prosecutors, lacks a legal foundation. In those particular situations in which the decriminalization profits the accused, but the social danger presented by the acts committed is incontestable, then the penal legal technique will be to reform and re-qualify these offences in so far as they form the constitutive elements of other infractions.
Where there are acts of corruption, but the relationship with the active agent (the corruptor) can no longer established, then criminal charges can be pursued according to the acts foreseen by article 132 of Law no. 521/2004. This states that the infractions of “abuse in service against public interest,” “abuse in service against the interest of other persons” and “abuse in service through limiting rights” are corruption offences if the civil servant obtained an advantage for themselves or another person through the respective action. The regulations mentioned must be interpreted and applied in light of article 147 of the Penal Code in force, which establishes the understanding and extent of the term of functionary as being any person who permanently or temporary exercises, with any title, indifferent as to how this was invested, a duty of any nature, remunerated or not, in the service of a unit which concerns public authority, public institutions, institutions or other legal persons of public interest, administration, use or exploitation of public goods or property, services of public interest, as well as goods of any kind which are of public interest, as well as any employee which exercises a duty in the service of any other legal person besides those foreseen above.
Therefore, a legislative act should not be repudiated because of particular and isolated effects which it may produce for certain persons, but should be understood through the prism of current social rationales in a functional market economy, of which Romania was certified as fulfilling the qualifications in 2004.
[6] PHARE – 49 cases; ISPA – 4 cases; SAPARD – 18 cases; Leonardo da Vinci – 12 cases, Youth – 1 case.
1 PHARE – 27 cases; ISPA – 2 cases; SAPARD – 14 cases; Leonardo da Vinci – 8 cases.

iunie 28, 2007

Mult iubitul nostru presedinte

iunie 25, 2007

Cele mai frumoase femei din lume dupa

1. Leisha Hailey – actrita 2. Angelina Jolie – actrita 3. Kate Winslet – actrita 4. Lena Headey – actrita 5. Sarah Shahi – actrita 6. Jennifer Beals – actrita 7. Tina Fey – actrita 8. Jordana Brewster – actrita 9. Salma Hayek – actrita si producatoare 10. Natalie Portman – actrita.
V-am prezentat primele cinci clasate.
iunie 25, 2007

Cine-si mai aminteste de Adrian Nastase?

iunie 25, 2007

Exista o asociatie a politistilor crestini

Atunci când Dumnezeu iniţiază o lucrare, El caută un om căruia să-i încredinţeze o viziune. După revoluţia anticomunistă din decembrie 1989, în România s-au produs unele schimbări, lumina lui Dumnezeu croindu-şi drum şi spre inimile acelora care odinioară erau vrăjmaşi ai Evangheliei… Lumina Lui a ajuns şi la mine – un poliţist fără Hristos. În anul 1992 am ajuns să-L cunosc într-un mod personal pe Iisus Hristos şi m-am dedicat în întregime slujirii Lui. Eram singur în 1992 însă, la începutul anului 1994, am ajuns să fim doi poliţişti în judeţul Bihor care şi-au predat în totalitate viaţa Domnului. Bohuş Petru şi Coraş Simion Isaia.
Am aflat că mai sunt şi alţi poliţişti în România a căror viaţă a fost transformată de puterea Cuvântului lui Dumnezeu, astfel că, treptat, am reuşit să-i cunosc personal pe unii dintre ei. În anul 1998, Dumnezeu mi-a pus pe inimă să-i motivez şi să-i încurajez şi pe alţi poliţişti creştini să se alăture acestei viziuni de a înfiinţa şi în România o organizaţie a poliţiştilor creştini. În acea perioadă, în Oradea se formase un mic grup de poliţişti dornici să studieze împreună Sfânta Scriptură şi să mărturisească cu îndrăzneală despre harul iertării păcatelor prin credinţa în Domnul Iisus Hristos. Ne adunam în mod organizat la rugăciune, timp în care i-am cerut lui Dumnezeu lucruri mari, printre care şi înfiinţarea în România a Asociaţiei Poliţiştilor Creştini.
În luna martie 1999, ne-am adunat, la Beiuş, judeţul Bihor, un număr de 10 poliţişti creştini din 6 judeţe, şi acesta a fost doar începutul întrunirilor de acest fel, pentru că în anul următor au fost organizate alte conferinţe şi tot mai mulţi poliţişti creştini au fost prezenţi, îmbrăţişând şi ei viziunea înfiinţării APC în România. Cu prilejul acelor conferinţe i-am întâlnit pe Gheorghe Ştefan Şeuleanu din Cluj-Napoca şi pe Vasile Oniga din Bucureşti care, ulterior, mi s-au alăturat ca şi membrii fondatori ai APC România.
Am auzit despre faptul că în multe ţări democratice ale lumii există asociaţii ale poliţiştilor creştini. Cu ajutorul lui Dumnezeu şi cu sprijinul unor oameni deosebiţi din ţară şi de peste hotare, am reuşit să punem bazele înfiinţării APC în România. Amintesc aici pe unii dintre oamenii folosiţi de Dumnezeu în realizarea proiectului nostru: domnul Chestor şef – Prof. univ. dr. Pavel Abraham – secretar de stat în Ministerul de Interne; Dr. Petru Lucaciu din Chicago, USA – director executiv al Misiunii Medicale Evanghelistice Române; Walter Boesch – director executiv, Licht im Osten Elveţia; Don Axcell – director executiv APC Marea Britanie; Ken şi Florence Holmes din Anglia; Minder Henry – preşedinte APC Elveţia şi alţii. Un rol important la avut Gheorghe Ştefan Şeuleanu care a acceptat cu bucurie să ne reprezinte înaintea autorităţilor pentru înregistrarea legală a Asociaţiei.
Alături de alţi membrii APC, am participat la conferinţele organizate de către Federaţia Internaţională a Poliţiştilor Creştini (FCPF) în Germania şi Marea Britanie, prilej cu care am întâlnit poliţişti din peste 40 de ţări diferite ale lumii.
Domnul Dumnezeu m-a asigurat că această mişcare spirituală începută în vieţile poliţiştilor va lua o tot mai mare amploare în toată lumea şi sunt încredinţat că nimeni şi nimic nu va fi în stare să împiedice dezvoltarea ei, pentru că principalul iniţiator al APC nu este un om, ci Însuşi Domnul nostru Iisus Hristos.
Dacă în 1994 eram doar doi poliţişti la începutul umblării cu Domnul, în momentul de faţă ne cunoaştem şi ne întâlnim ocazional peste 150 de poliţişti creştini „născuţi din nou”, în România. Visul de ieri a devenit azi realitate!

Petru Bohuşdirector executiv APC România
iunie 22, 2007


iunie 22, 2007


iunie 22, 2007

O prietenie iesita din comun

iunie 21, 2007

Clubul Roman de Presa se pune intre Adevarul si Ringier

Intrunit in sedinta in data de 19 iunie 2007, Consiliul de Onoare al CRP a adoptat urmatoarele decizii: 1. A sanctionat Ringier Romania cu avertisment Consiliul de Onoare al CRP a fost sesizat de grupul Adevarul in privinta unor accesari neautorizate ale serverelor editoriale ale grupului de la calculatoare identificate ca apartinand trustului Ringier Romania. Grupul Ringier Romania a avut la dispozitie un interval de 10 zile pentru a raspunde acestor acuzatii. La finalul respectivei perioade grupul Ringier Romania a decis sa nu raspunda acuzatiei privind violarea serverelor editoriale apartinand grupului Adevarul, motivand acest lucru prin posibila utilizare a acestui raspuns intr-un proces ce i-ar putea fi intentat de grupul Adevarul. Avand in vedere situatia creata prin acest refuz, Consiliul de Onoare al Clubului Roman de Presa sanctioneaza cu avertisment public societatea Ringier Romania, cu precizarea ca aceasta decizie nu poate fi folosita in Justitie.
2. S-a delimitat de practica invocarii unor declaratii neoficiale, neasumate de persoanele care se presupune a le fi facut Consiliul de Onoare al CRP a analizat sesizarea depusa de dl. Dan Tapalaga fata de un material aparut in ziarul Ziua. Cu referinta la o fraza („Dan Tapalaga, fost consilier al ministrului Justitiei, s-a confesat unor amici ca o avertiza pe Macovei sa nu mai spuna ca arhiva SIPA se copiaza la greu, intrucat telefoanele ii erau ascultate”), semnata L.I., Consiliul a constatat ca, in ciuda afirmatiei dlui Tapalaga conform careia informatia din text nu este adevarata, conducerea ziarului Ziua isi asuma textul si considera ca il poate proba. In aceste conditii, diferendul in cauza se poate rezolva in Justitie. Consiliul de Onoare considera insa ca invocarea unor declaratii neoficiale, neasumate de persoanele care se presupune a le fi facut, fara ca persoanele in cauza sa fi fost contactate inainte de publicarea respectivelor declaratii pentru a-si prezenta propria pozitie, reprezinta o practica ce nu se inscrie in normele deontologice si CRP se delimiteaza de aceasta. Consideram ca modul serios de a face presa nu trebuie sa faca uz de mijloacele publicatiilor pline de murdarii „aflate pe surse” iar utilizarea surselor nu trebuie sa fie in legatura cu „declaratii” culese la a doua sau a treia mana.
3. Solicita definitivarea urgenta a cercetarilor in cazul jurnalistilor Marian Garleanu si Sebastian Oancea Analizand situatia jurnalistilor Marian Garleanu si Sebastian Oancea, inca implicati in ancheta privind CD-ul cu informatii ale armatei, Consiliul de Onoare al CRP se declara nesatisfacut de pozitia oficiala a Parchetului de pe langa Inalta Curte de Casatie si Justitie care, prin procurorul general Laura Codruta Kövesi, considera ca „intarzierea in solutionarea dosarului nu este nejustificata” si ca, intinzandu-se cercetarile pe parcursul a peste 15 luni, „cauza nu a depasit termenul rezonabil”. Solicitam ca in aceasta cauza sa se gaseasca solutiile legale ca cercetarea in privinta persoanelor civile, fara atributii pentru pastrarea unor secrete de stat, sa fie incheiate. Consideram anormal ca oricaror persoane, implicate incidental intr-un caz penal de o asemenea gravitate, sa nu li se clarifice situatia intr-un termen cu adevarat rezonabil, iar perioada scursa din luna februarie a anului trecut este prea mare pentru a fi considerata rezonabila. Ziaristii in cauza au dreptul sa afle daca sunt pusi sub acuzare sau daca suspiciunile in ceea ce ii priveste sunt retrase.

Consiliul de Onoare al Clubului Roman de Presa

iunie 19, 2007

Cum Dumnezeu am supravieţuit copilăriei noastre?

Dacă ţi-ai trăit copilăria în anii ’60,’70 sau chiar la începutul anilor ’80 ……
Cum ai făcut să supravieţuieşti ?

1.De mici mergeam în autobuze şi maşini care nu aveau centuri de siguranţă nici perne cu aer….
2.Când mergeam în remorca unui camion era o excursie foarte specială şi ne-o aminteam toată viaţa.
3.Leagănele noastre erau pictate în culori aprinse şi toată vopseaua era pe bază de plumb.
4.Nu aveam capace de siguranţă la cutiile de medicamente, dulapuri sau uşi.
5.Când mergeam pe bicicletă nu aveam cască.
6.Beam apa de la cişmeaua din grădină, nu dintr-o sticlă de apă minerală…
7.Pierdeam ore în şir construind cărucioare din fier vechi şi cei care aveau noroc să aibă străzi înclinate îşi dădeau drumul pe ele şi la jumătatea drumului ne aduceam aminte că nu aveau frâne. După câteva opriri, în copaci sau în garduri, am învăţat să rezolvăm problema.
8.Ieşeam la joacă cu singura condiţie să ne întoarcem înainte de a se lăsa întunericul.
9.Şcoala dura până la prânz şi veneam acasă să mâncăm. Nu aveam celular aşa că nimeni nu putea şti unde suntem. De necrezut ……
10.Ne tăiam, ne rupeam un os, ne pierdeam un dinte, dar niciodată nu căutam un vinovat. Era numai vina noastă.
11.Mâncam biscuiţi, pâine cu unt, beam sucuri cu zahar şi nu aveam exces de greutate, pentru că tot timpul eram afară la joacă.
12.Împărţem o sticlă de suc între patru prieteni … utilizând aceeaşi sticlă şi nimeni nu murea din asta.
13.Nu aveam Playstation, Nintendo, 64, X box, jocuri video, 99 de canale de televiziune prin cablu, dollby surround, celulare personale, calculatoare, chat pe Internet…. dar AVEAM PRIETENI.
14.Ieşeam, ne suiam pe bicicletă sau mergeam până la casa prietenului, sunam la uşă sau intram încet fără să sunăm şi ieşeam să ne jucăm.
15. Acolo, afară, în acea lume crudă, fară gardian. Cum Dumnezeu făceam ? Aveam tot felul de jocuri de echipă, fotbal, ţările, v-aţi ascunselea, şi nu toată lumea ajungea să fie aleasă, dar nu se supăra nimeni.
16.Nu eram toţi elevi strălucitori şi când unul rămânea repetent, pur şi simplu repeta anul. Nimeni nu mergea la psiholog, la psihopedagog, nu avea dislexie, nici probleme de atenţie, nici hiperactivitate, doar o repeta şi avea a doua şansă.
17.Aveam libertate, eşecuri, bucurii, responsabilităţi…şi am învăţat să ne descurcăm cu ele.
18. Marea întrebare este : Cum am reuşit să supravieţuim, şi mai ales să devenim persoanele adulte de azi ?

Faceţi parte din această generaţie ?
Dacă da, atunci trimiteţi acest mesaj tuturor cunoscuţilor din aceeaşi generaţie sau oamenilor mai tineri, ca să ştie şi ei cum eram înainte ca această „securitate” să devină cea mai importantă valoare.
Mai mult ca sigur vor spune că eram plictisitori …..

(Am primit acest text interesant prin e-mail. Nu-i cunosc autorul.)

iunie 14, 2007

# # #

pe insula din
mijlocul încăperii

pare scufundat…

creşte doar visul
în jurul tău

Alexandru PETRIA

iunie 14, 2007

O lume haioasa

Ceasul lui Bush, furat in Albania, a fost scos la licitatie pe eBay

Ceasul Rolex al presedintelui american, George W. Bush, care i-a disparut de la mana in timpul vizitei de acum cateva zile in Albania, a fost scos la licitatie, pentru cateva ore, pe site-ul de comert eBay. Pretul cerut a fost de 100 000 de dolari. Dupa cateva ore, obiectul a fost retras de la licitatie pentru ca politica site-ului interzice vanzarea obiectelor furate.

iunie 12, 2007

Iliescu, la puscarie!

iunie 5, 2007

A innebunit lupul?

Basescu vrea guvern PNL-PD-PLD

Schimbare neasteptata de situatie pe scena politica. Dupa mai multe zile in care partidele au discutat despre sustinerea motiunii de cenzura a PD, presedintele Traian Basescu, propune o echipa guvernamentala axata pe reprezentanti ai PNL-PD-PLD, se arata intr-un comunicat al Presedintiei. In acest sens, seful statului chema, vineri 8 iunie, partidele parlamentare la consultari .

iunie 2, 2007

De clătit ochii în pungă

iunie 2, 2007

după apusul soarelui

în gura deşertului

sânge pe sâni-
colţurile de nisip ale camerei

şi împăiate zâmbete

apoi se lasă cataracta peste bibliotecă

Alexandru PETRIA

iunie 1, 2007

Pericol de explozie nucleară?

Presa din intreaga lume a preluat un comunicat al organizatiei norvegiene Bellona, in care aceasta sustine ca o explozie este iminenta la depozitul de combustibil nuclear rus din Peninsula Kola. Citand un raport al Agentiei Atomice Ruse (Rosatom), ONG-ul norvegian sustine ca explozia ar putea fi produsa de corodarea tancurilor in care este depozitat combustibilul – corodare de care responsabila este apa sarata a marii. Tancurile sunt localizate in Golful Andreeva din Penisula Kola, la doar 45 de kilometri de granita cu Norvegia.

iunie 1, 2007

direcţionarea atenţiei

singurul disc
s-a uzat

îşi polizează spinarea

încet, uşor, cu tandreţe…

spui- cu vocea ei- :
„nu sunt corbi
ci tramvaiele tale”
Alexandru PETRIA

iunie 1, 2007

Omar Hayssam rupe tăcerea

Iata ce am gasit pe

Omar Hayssam – Prefer sa nu spun acum daca plecarea mea din tara s-a facut cu ajutorul serviciilor secrete

In primele declaratii date dupa plecarea din tara, in direct la Antena 3, Omar Hayssam a declarat ca a adunat documente care-l dezincrimineaza in cazul rapirii jurnalistilor romani, dar ca le va prezenta autoritatilor doar atunci cand va fi lasat sa se exprime liber. Sirianul sustine ca nu poate apela la autoritati atata vreme cat pe numele sau exista emis un mandat international de arestare.
Omar Hayssam sustine ca Munaf a fost liber timp de doua zile in Bagdad dupa ce a fost eliberat impreuna cu ziaristii romani.

Imagine: Antena 3

Intrebat daca vinovatii pentru rapirea celor trei jurnalisti romani se afla in Romania sau in Irak, Omar Hayssam a raspuns „si acolo si acolo”.

Fragmente din declaratiile lui Omar Hayssam

# Nu pot sa va spun acum daca plecarea mea din tara s-a facut cu ajutorul serviciilor secrete
# Munaf a fost trimis in judecata in baza unor acte intocmite ilegal
# Eu stau intr-un cartier din care ies foarte greu, nu am libertate sa circul. Cum sa ma prezint in fata autoritatilor cand am mandat international de arestare care ma asteapta la orice colt?
# Starea mea de sanatate este una destul de dificila. Am probleme la plamani si la ficat. Incerc sa ma tratez in continuare, trebuia sa fac o interventie chirurgicala si incercam sa o amanam cat putem.
# Lui Miscoci si Ohanesian le transmit sa creada in Dumnezeu. Nu-i cunosc si nu aveam nici un motiv sa le fac vreun rau. Si mai ales lui Marie-Jeanne n-aveam motiv sa-i fac rau, ca o cunosteam.
# In primul rand nu aveam cum sa vorbesc in Romania. In al doilea rand nu aveam de gand sa vorbesc pana nu aveam documente, iar acum am destul de multe documente autentice.
# Pleaca Omar Hayssam in delegatii oficiale, e verificat, si dintr-o data aflam ca e spion. Pai serviciile secrete n-au aflat in 25-26 de ani ca am facut spionaj? Ce fel de spionaj? Si in favoarea cui? Sta Omar Hayssam 26 de ani in Romania si brusc aflam ca e ofiter sirian.
# N-am facut niciun fel de afacere cu Irak-ul. Nici cu civili, nici cu militari, nici inainte, in regimul Saddam, nici dupa.
# Doctorul Yassim mi-a propus sa mergem la Basescu, el se cunostea de dinainte cu Basescu, nu e un secret
# Documentele le depun in justitie atunci cand justitia va fi dispusa sa ma asculte
# Sa fiu lasat sa ma exprim liber. Acest mandat de arestare imi ingradeste libertatea de a ama misca si vorbi In cazul in care voi fi gasit vinovat dupa aflarea adevarului, poate fi emis un mandat de executare al pedepsei, care e mult mai greu decat acesta de arestare.

Sa fiu lasat liber doua saptamani sa ma exprim, sunt dispus sa vin si in Romania la proces sa spun tot ce am de spus sau la un consulat de oriunde din lume sau la o comisie rogatorie.
# Ce am eu de spus arata ca lucrurile nu stau asa
# In perioda cand am fost arestat nu puteam vorbi, am fost sfatuit de avocati ca pot fi executat intr-un mod sau altul. Dupa ce am fost eliberat eram urmarit pas cu pas, daca vorbeam chiar eram arestat in secunda doi.
# Dupa ce am plecat nu am vrut sa intervin sa nu fiu interpretat ca fac jocuri. Am avut rabdare in speranta ca justitia face toate demersurile pentru aflarea adevarului.
# Vad ca se vrea terminarea cazului fara aflarea adevarului, fara audierea mea…
# As fi de acord sa fiu audiat la Beirut, normal
# Munaf a fost liber doua zile. A stat acasa. Dupa care s-a intamplat ceva. El de la ambasada a fost dus la un hotel, unde a fost interogat de FBI si de unii de la ambasada americana. Apoi a fost lasat sa plece si i s-a dat intalnire a doua zi tot la hotel.
# El le-a spus atunci ca acolo unde au fost tinuti era si un american si atunci au inceput sa-i pouna intrebari. Acel american a fost eliberat in august 2005 si atunci au fost capturati si adevaratii rapitori., B. Blagu,