Former Justice Minister Tudor Chiuariu stated on Wednesday, before the parliamentary committee of inquiry into the archive of the Service for Anticorruption Intelligence and Protection (SIPA), the Justice Ministry’s former secret service, that at the level of the Supreme Magistracy Council (CSM) there was fear that SIPA may have collected intelligence on the private life of judges and prosecutors.
“At the level of the CSM there was even a preoccupation and fear in this sense (that SIPA may have collected intelligence on the private life of judges and prosecutors – editor’s note), that is why I believe the decision I took to establish this commission (the commission tasked with inventorying the SIPA archive – editor’s note) was correct,” Chiuariu pointed out.
The former Justice Minister (2007) added that he regrets the fact that the documents were not destroyed.
“I’m sorry that the same path was not followed, the path of eventually reaching the point of removing these materials, of destroying them considering the way they were obtained and, on the other hand, if there is a legal accountability on the part of the persons who drafted these documents,” Tudor Chiuariu underscored.
Likewise, the former Justice Minister confirmed that these documents came, to a certain extent, from the Penitentiary Administration area.
“I can confirm that maybe they were, to a certain extent, stemming from that area of the Penitentiary Administration. But they had as objective, for most part, the magistrates and sometimes even their private life,” Chiuariu said.
At the same time, Tudor Chiuariu said that, based on the talks he had with the members of the commission tasked with inventorying the SIPA archive, he found out that the archive contained evidence on flagrant human rights violations.
“I know from the talks I had with the members of the commission that there was, on one hand, evidence on flagrant violations of human rights, of fundamental rights, and, on the other hand, that the way these documents were stored before this commission was set up could have allowed their contents to be pilfered or made available for other persons,” Chiuariu explained.
Asked whether someone told him something about potential unauthorised access to the archive, he said such information was brought to his knowledge. “I believe I was informed of such… I can’t recall exactly, but I believe there was information in this regard. If there was, it was definitely included in the commission’s final report,” the ex-minister added.
Chiuariu pointed out there was no handover-takeover meeting between himself and his successor Monica Macovei, but the affidavit was signed. “We didn’t have a meeting in this sense. She was very upset for leaving the position. There was no meeting. The documents were signed, an affidavit,” Chiuariu said.
Parliament approved on September 27 the setting up of the committee of inquiry tasked with clarifying the aspects related to the dissolution of the General Directorate for Protection and Anticorruption.
The objectives of the committee include: “establishing the relevant ministry’s active role in adopting Government Decision no.127/2006 as well as what acts were drafted during the 3-month interval stipulated by Government Decision no.127/2006, why the dissolution procedures stipulated under Articles 3 and 4 were not finalised, and why a new Decision extending the deadline was not issued,” identifying and hearing the persons who had access to the archive without observing legal conditions, establishing at whose request they entered the archive, verifying the authenticity of the information included in report no.096/17.04.2008 and the circumstances in which the raising of the document classification level was ordered on 18 August 2016.
Another objective is to identify the persons who in January 2005 stole the SIPA archive’s visitor log as well as classified and strictly classified documents consisting of names, brief contents, sources and beneficiaries of the information.