JUSTICE

Bute Gala File: Elena Udrea cites Emil Boc and Catalin Predoiu as witnesses

Ex-Minister Elena Udrea appeared on Wednesday at the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ), where a new hearing was scheduled for the “Bute Gala” File. She declared while leaving the hearing that she would cite as witnesses to the trial former PM Emil Boc and former Justice Minister Catalin Predoiu.
Elena Udrea announced on Wednesday that she would rely on ex-Prime Minister Emil Boc and former Justice Minister Catalin Predoiu as witnesses, because there has been a Government Ordinance issued, establishing the involvement of the Ministry of Tourism in the Bute Gala file.
“I will certainly cite them as witnesses, because there was a Government Ordinance determining the involvement of the Ministry in promoting Romania at the Bute Gala. I will ask for them as witnesses, as the description of the accusation referring to me says that I have determined the Government to accept the involvement of the Ministry. They have to be cited as witnesses, so that they would tell you how this decision was reached, how the Government Ordinance was issued and to see if there was anything illegal in this. If it was anything illegal, Mr. Predoiu signed for it. We have to see; if it was illegal for Elena Udrea, it has to be illegal for Mr. Predoiu, too. As a Prime Minister, you have general attributions and responsibility”, Elena Udrea declared.


Elena Udrea: If we have not cleared out the payment of the bribe, how do we know for sure that there has been a bribe?

Elena Udrea had declared that, together with her lawyers, she had demanded that the Bute Gala be returned to the General Prosecutors’ Office, as she does not understand the charges against her, as long as there is no proof incriminating her.
“I have questioned the fact that the person in this file has paid bribe – as prosecutors say – which ended up at Nastasia (former Secretary General in the Ministry of Regional Development and Tourism Gheoghe Nastasia – editor’s note) to me (he says no such thing; prosecutors say so), as it is not in the file. The case was disjointed as far as he is concerned, and the prosecutor claimed that he had to investigate some more, to see whether the bribe taking offence really happened. My question is: if we have not cleared out facts regarding the payment of the bribe, how do we know for sure there has been a bribe? And if prosecutors establish that the gentleman has not paid any bribe, why am I tried for bribe taking. Therefore, I asked that the cause would be returned to the prosecutor’s office, for completion or clearing of the inquiry.

At the time the indictment was sent to Court, one of the reasons for their hurry was that it was a case that involved arrests and, as they could not keep us longer under preventive arrest, they had rushed the indictment, which is understandable, yet it damaged the quality of the inquiry. By example, the accusation of abuse of office I allegedly committed does not say what is the exact crime I have committed. They do not say what Elena Udrea had done wrong concerning the involvement of the Ministry of Tourism in organizing the Bute Gala.

There are a few things we have demanded to be cleared by the Prosecutor’s Office, and one thing required to clear them is sending them back from Court”, the former Tourism Minister explained.

Related posts

JusMin Toader checks detention conditions at Codlea Penitentiary

Nine O' Clock

Tariceanu: Prosecutor General is capable of anything to save his skin. GD 231 was not about protocols. Augustin Lazar is trying to justify his actions as communist prosecutor

NINE O'CLOCK

Judicial Inspection wants press to have no access to documents during an investigation

Nine O' Clock