On Wednesday, Parliament adopted – with 166 votes in favour, 54 against, and 4 abstentions – the SIPA Committee Report on the abolition of the General Directorate for Protection and Anticorruption (DGPA), which shows that the statements of the persons heard have led to the conclusion that in 2005, then-Justice Minister Monica Macovei and her aide, journalist Dan Tapalaga, entered the archive. Likewise, according to the report, Government Decision no.127/2006 on the abolition of the DGPA was “definitely initiated by the Justice Minister.”
According to the report, the Committee had 19 meetings and invited 57 persons to take part in its hearings, four of whom answered the invitation via letters and seven of whom did not respond in any way. Likewise, 71 addresses were sent to 21 state institutions, asking them to place documents at the disposal of the Committee.
The SRI, Justice Ministry, Defence Ministry and the Protection and Guard Service did not respond to the requests.
The same source points out that, based on the statements made by the persons heard by the Committee, the decision to abolish the DGPA was taken by then-Justice Minister Monica Macovei.
Likewise, the report shows that Government Decision no.127/2006 on the abolishment of the DGPA was “definitely initiated by the Justice Minister.”
Also based on the statements of the persons heard, the Committee established that “in January 2005, Ms Luisa Monica Macovei, accompanied by Mr Dan Nicolae Tapalaga, showed up at the administrative headquarters of the DGPA, where, under the pretext of carrying out an audit, (…) sealed one or two archive lockers from the second floor.”
Likewise, the report shows that Macovei and Tapalaga did not have ORNISS certificates at the time, which would have given them the clearance to access classified information.
Former justice ministers Catalin Predoiu and Mona Pivniceru also “showed preoccupation with the conservation of the DGPA archive, however their overtures had no finality,” the Committee points out in the report.
The separate report that the PNL sent to the Joint Standing Bureaus of Parliament shows that: “to accomplish the purpose for which the Committee was set up, we proceeded to request information from the institutions and public authorities listed in Annex II of the report, and to hear some persons. Based on the answers received, but also on the way the hearings of the persons invited before the Committee were led, no conclusion relevant for the attainment of the Committee’s purpose has been drawn.”
The final report will be sent to the Supreme Defence Council (CSAT), Romanian Intelligence Service (SRI), Justice Ministry and the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, for the disposition of measures regarding the competence of each institution.
Debates at the adoption of SIPA Cttee Report: Vosganian accuses USR of “vindicating enforcement structures,” Barna says that is “a mockery.” Turcescu calls the Cttee Report a “phut”
House lawmaker Varujan Vosganian (ALDE) stated on Wednesday, during the debates on the adoption of the SIPA Committee Report, that he regrets that the USR claims to be a party of the young generation but is “vindicating enforcement structures” and infringing upon human rights. He added that PNL has turned into a servile party. In response, USR President Dan Barna said that he appreciated Varujan Vosganian but labelled his statements about the USR “a mockery.” At the same time, House lawmaker Robert Turcescu (PMP) called the SIPA Committee a “phut” that wasted time and called its report “filth.”
“I express my regret that a party such as the USR, which claims to be the party of the young generation, is vindicating enforcement structures and the infringement of human rights. While all young post-war generations (…) up until my generation, preferred jeans and Deep Purple’s songs, this young generation politically represented by the USR falls in line behind the intelligence services in their perverse form, behind the prosecutor’s offices in their aggressive form, which turns into a vindication of the infringement of human rights. And PNL, in which many of us were active, has abandoned its tradition, has abandoned paying homage to the martyrs it gave in the 1950s, and has turned into a servile and fanaticised party that is not willing to make any concession to the criticising of what has happened in recent years within the secret services, within the prosecutor’s offices and within other enforcement institutions of the country. That is why ALDE is casting a favourable vote on the conclusions of this committee,” Vosganian said, according to news.ro.
In response, USR President Dan Barna claimed that he appreciated Varujan Vosganian, but for him to say that the USR is falling in line behind the infringement of human rights and behind enforcement institutions is “a mockery.”
“It’s a pity, a great pity for so much spirit to be wasted for disinformation and lie. Mr Vosganian, after I came to faculty in Bucharest, I was among those who listened to you on the radio with excitement, and I had hope at that moment. What I have been hearing for the past several days, and I admire your oratorical style, but to say that the USR, a party that comes from the street, is falling in line behind the infringement of human rights and behind enforcement agencies is a mockery of all that you and a few like you represented at one point for Romania,” Barna said.
The USR leader also told Vosganian that, for the sake of Liviu Dragnea, he told Romanians at the June 9 rally that they are all criminals and will be taken away by the DNA.
“On Saturday (at the PSD rally – editor’s note), you told the wretches that they are all criminals. For the sake of a man like Liviu Dragnea, you have ended up telling Romanians that they are all criminals and that they will be taken away by the DNA if they argue with their neighbour or work colleague? This is what it’s about: about the mockery in which you have dragged Romania and about the use of some abilities and of a literary talent to fool a nation. It’s a shame, it pains me to tell you this,” Barna added.
“I notice special enthusiasm when debating this report, just like it was during the Committee’s proceedings. In fact, the SIPA Committee, which I confess I joined not necessarily with enthusiasm, but with preoccupation, thinking it will be the first parliamentary committee of inquiry that could reach some interesting results, has been a fiasco. A phut! I see everyone today, including in the report, drafted in wooden language by the chairman, the Commission says there: Oh my, Tapalaga, Macovei and others entered the archives. Maybe it’s indeed grave. (…) But what lies hidden in this SIPA archive? Before asking ourselves how they got in, how, why, maybe we should have asked ourselves what are the dragons in this SIPA archive that everyone fears? I joined this Committee thinking that, in the end, the report drafted by the Committee will answer a fundamental question when we are talking about SIPA – did the SIPA personnel engage in political police or not? That is the question,” Robert Turcescu said.
He said that the report does not answer that question and that the committee members “play clueless,” announcing that the PMP will vote against.
“If you read the 50 pages (…) you will notice that this issue is not raised for one moment. Well, in these conditions, how do we know what we are voting? (…) They dodge, they play clueless. (…) We will vote against the adoption of this report, because we have wasted time within this committee, a filth of a report, and for us to discuss, to vote for such a filth of a report is a waste of time. It would have been better to keep a moment of silence in the memory of the victims of the 13-15 June 1990 miners’ riots, when people died on the streets,” Turcescu added.