The Romanian Intelligence Service (SRI) has asked the Parliamentary Committee for the Oversight of the SRI for concrete elements following the hearing of ex-colonel Daniel Dragomir. According to a communique issued by the Intelligence Service, the elements will be used in an internal investigation.
“The communique refers to the public revelations concerning the statements made by Lieutenant Colonel (ret.) Dragomir Daniel. In this case, the SRI has asked the Oversight Committee to provide any concrete elements in its possession, in view of detailed investigations and verifications carried out by an internal audit commission previously ordered by SRI Director Eduard Hellvig. SRI remains firm in what concerns institutional transparency and the observance of internal audit and oversight procedures,” reads the SRI communique.
SRI Spokesman Ovidiu Marincea stated for the Mediafax press agency that the internal investigation started as soon as ex-colonel Daniel Dragomir made his first public appearance.
The former SRI employee first talked, on RomaniaTV private broadcaster, about SRI’s involvement in political life, the judiciary and the media. Dragomir stated that the Service has undercover agents both in the press – an assertion that the SRI has not denied – and in other domains too.
Dragomir also talked about the judiciary and media “gauntlets,” namely the SRI’s involvement in the drafting of indictments, the selection of panels of judges and then in ensuring the desired sentence is ruled. The SRI denied this allegation.
Daniel Dragomir has been heard by the SRI Oversight Committee three times so far, presenting a list of 65 persons who can confirm his statements.
Apart from this request, the Romanian Intelligence Service also lodged two other addresses with Parliament. One of them concerns the committee of inquiry into the 2009 elections.
“It concerns the request made by another parliamentary body, the Senate and Lower House’s special committee of inquiry into the aspects pertaining to the way the 2009 elections were organised and the result of the presidential elections. In this communique, the SRI argued the classified nature of the documents previously transmitted and brought additions consisting of unclassified elements that the SRI Oversight Committee can transmit to the special committee,” reads the SRI communique.
The communique comes against the backdrop in which the committee of inquiry into the 2009 elections had asked the SRI Oversight Committee to ask the Service about the presence of SRI leaders at Gabriel Oprea’s home on the evening of the presidential runoff in 2009.
“Regarding the address we requested from the SRI leadership, for them to tell us whether persons from the SRI leadership were in the living-room on that evening. We received an answer, but unfortunately it says it’s a classified document. We’ll resume discussions with the leadership of SRI and see what they can declassify from this document in order to be able to give an answer to the committee of inquiry into the 2009 elections. (…) It’s a one-page answer that makes mention of persons,” SRI Oversight Committee Chairman Claudiu Manda stated on October 13.
Claudiu Manda pointed out the members of the committee of inquiry into the presidential elections of 2009 sent him another address asking for his support. “The members of the inquiry committee have lodged with us a new address, asking for our support and intervention for the truth on what happened there to be uncovered, and for us to ask the SRI a series of questions, some of them pertinent, some that do not fall under the SRI’s prerogatives,” Manda said.
Another communique concerns SIPA, the archive of the Justice Ministry’s former intelligence service. “It concerns the public statements made about the management of the SIPA archive, and the SRI has sent to the Committee a full report on this topic,” the communique reads.
On Thursday, October 26, the members of the committee of inquiry will visit the archive of the Intelligence and Anticorruption Protection Service (SIPA), the committee chairman pointing out that the committee members will not have access to the information stored there but want to form an idea about the way in which the storage space was used.