Chief prosecutor of the National Anti-corruption Directorate (DNA) Laura Codruta Kovesi said in an interview to AGERPRES that the modifications brought to the justice laws are not meant to make the justice system more efficient, but to make the prosecutors depend on something, “on the Justice Minister or on the political area.”
She criticized the fact that the project does not rely on any impact study or substantiation note showing why such amendments were needed.
“Let’s return to the most serious matter here, for this is not the actual content of the law. For, in our opinion, the most serious matter is not what we find in the law, but what we do not find. According to the in force legislation, right now, the prosecutors enjoy their stability and independence. But the new law eliminates this word: independence. Apparently, if you read the article 3, it seems like a text with no problems. But what is hidden in fact behind this text? The lack of the word independence. And what does this mean? This means that the prosecutors, from the moment this law comes into force, won’t be independent in their activity anymore. They will be subordinated to the Minister of Justice, which is usually a politician. So, what do the people behind this law intend to do? They do not what to make the justice system more efficient, but what they want is to have the prosecutors depend on something, we shall see if on the Minister of Justice or on the political, and they also want to eliminate such jobs prosecutors can take on while they are independent,” said the DNA head.
Kovesi spoke about the lack of independence of the prosecutors until 2004, when, she claimed, there were no such high level corruption investigations.
She drew attention that “there is a lot of concern” with respect to this law, for one of the basic conditions in obtaining results in the fight against criminality, and especially against high level corruption, is prosecutors to have their independence.
“Parallel interests are of those who robbed the budget and were caught”
National Anti-corruption Directorate (DNA) Laura Codruta Kovesi said in the interview to AGERPRES regarding the parallel state she supposedly is a part of that, if such “parallel interests” exist, they belong to those who “are robbing the state budget”, were “caught” and now want to block the act of justice.
When asked about the accusation referring to the existence of a parallel state, which would influence or hamper certain political decisions, including through the actions of some prosecutors, she included, Kovesi underscored that “such parallel interests do exist.”
“There is the parallel interest of those who committed crimes and robbed the state budget. Therefore, if we are going to talk about parallel interests, these belong to those who have robbed the state,” the DNA head pointed out.
Kovesi specified that the DNA prosecutors observe the law and are verified for it.
“We, who work at the DNA, we are always observing the law. Our activity is always controlled. Our files are ruled upon by judges who verify the manner in which we instrumented the evidence and who are judging our cases. When a final sentence is pronounced, in 90 per cent of the cases we have answers to all these charges. The fact that the persons who are being investigated by the DNA make all kinds of accusations doesn’t mean that these accusations are also true and; for, if there are such parallel interests, these are of those who have been robbing the state budget, were caught and now seek to block the act of justice,” she said.
Regarding the possible abuses of prosecutors, Kovesi replied that these accusations are generally made by persons involved in the case files.
“We are being controlled all the time, we are being verified by the Judicial Inspectorate, the measures that we take in the case files are verified during the court rulings. How can we answer to such accusations of abuses when nothing is clearly said? These attacks claiming there are abuses, all kinds of illegalities allegedly committed by the prosecutors and judges, are generally made by persons involved in the case files, persons who, some of them, were even sentenced by the first court or have final sentences,” concluded Kovesi.