The Initiative for a Clean Justice System, the Pro Democratia Association, the Center for Independent Journalism and the Press Monitoring Agency express their concern over having several ongoing investigations compromised and over the manner in which the Supreme Magistrates’ Council handled the Anti-Corruption Department inspection.
1. The Initiative for a Clean Justice System, the Pro Democratia Association, the Center for Independent Journalism and the Press Monitoring Agency oppose making the information in the SMC inspection report public. According to statements made by ACD and SMC representatives, the report is not yet final and it solely reflects the perspective of the SMC inspection. Under these circumstances, making the information public is an attempt to publicly impose a certain viewpoint, without access to the other opinions on the matter, and, obviously, to cause a loss of reputation. Such actions corrode the credibility of an institution that should stand as warrant for the independence of the legal system. Consequently, we ask all state institutions that have had access via representatives to the SMC inspection viewpoint to initiative effective administrative investigations which would lead to disciplinary sanctions.
2. The Initiative for a Clean Justice System, the Pro Democratia Association, the Center for Independent Journalism and the Press Monitoring Agency express their concern over the possibility of having several ongoing investigations compromised. According to the September 17, 2007, DNA press release, the inspection report contains “confidential information, namely data on having telephone conversations intercepted in an actual case in which the criminal investigation has not been finalized, and the individuals intercepted have not been informed on the matter, according to article 913, lines 4, 5 in the Criminal Procedure Code. This matter complicates the criminal investigation and raises questions over finalizing it.” Since the report directly refers to a file that contains data on intercepting certain phone calls while the criminal investigation hasn’t been completed and the individuals intercepted haven’t been informed on the matter, this may fall under the incidence of criminal law, article 264 of the Criminal Code – favoring the criminal.
3. The Initiative for a Clean Justice System, the Pro Democratia Association, the Center for Independent Journalism and the Press Monitoring Agency have analyzed fragments of the SMC’s report and believe that the inspectors who undertook the check broke the law by placing themselves above it. Such checks cannot target aspects regarding the well-founded nature of documents drafted by judges and prosecutors. The documents presented by the press indicate that the Judicial Inspection took it upon itself to become an organ of control on the solutions adopted by the ACD, both in terms of lawfulness and in terms of their content. According to the Criminal Procedure Code (article 278 and onward), solutions can only be verified by a higher ranking prosecutor and the court members, upon the claim made by one of the parties. The SMC is only a public authority, it is neither a hierarchic prosecutor to other prosecutors, nor a court of law.
The members of the Initiative for a Cleaner Justice System: SoJust, the Romanian Academic Society – SAR, the Timişoara Society, the Advocacy Academy, Freedom House România, the Group for Social Dialog.
The ProDemocraţia Association
The Press Monitoring Agency
The Center for Independent Journalism
18.09.2007