Anti-corruption ‘success’ masks human rights failures in #Romania

Romania, as a member of the European Union, United Nations and European Council, looks well-covered in terms of signing up to international regulations on the rule of law and prison conditions.  These international regulations, combined with the provisions in the country’s own 1991 Constitution (updated through 2003), mean that there is, at least on paper, a strong framework for those accused of crimes or imprisoned in the country.  But the gap between the official rights and the reality in practice should be of international concern.

The anti-corruption context

Romania has been praised by the international community, especially the USA, for its anti-corruptions crackdown.  Few would question that the country had been in need of an anti-corruption drive.  It would appear, though, that praise is being lavished on the sheer number of prosecutions, with little scrutiny of the quality of the systems and institutions in involved in the justice system.   More attention should be paid as to whether those conducting investigations, prosecutions and court procedures, and those managing imprisonment, are actually meeting even minimal standards.

The role of the DNA and the SRI

The National Anti-Corruption Directorate (DNA) is headed by Laura Codruta Kovesi since 2013 and she gained a second mandate in 2016.  Her organisation has been praised in the past five years for its 50% increase in indictments and for achieving more asset freezes, arrests and convictions than any other equivalent agency in the European Union.

However, there is serious cause for concern regarding the role that the DNA, along with the Romanian intelligence service (SRI), plays in Romanian justice.  The SRI has, by its own admission, interfered to the point of undermining the independence of the judiciary.  General Dumitru Dumbrava, the head of the SRI’s legal department, said in April 2015 that the SRI “would not withdraw from the tactical field once the indictment was presented to the court” and that the SRI maintained its “interest until the final resolution of every case is reached”.  Given that the SRI is forbidden by law from interfering in the court and prosecution process, General Dumbrava’s remarks raise serious concerns about whether we can really consider the judiciary to be independent and free from SRI pressure.

In addition to General Dumbrava’s own words, the National Union of Judges (UNJR) has flagged concerns that there has been SRI pressure on, and infiltration of, the Romanian judiciary, and has asked for clarification from state institutions about what exactly the SRI interference in the judiciary.  Questions were raised by Romanian publication Romania Libera about why magistrates had received doctoral degrees from the SRI Academy and why 1000 magistrates received ‘training’ in 2015 at the SRI academy.  The Paris-based magistrates group MEDEL (Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés) raised their concerns over SRI interference in the judiciary in their 2016 report Is Europe Under Siege?

A report by Human Rights Without Frontiers explains that several former Romanian officials have come forward to voice their concerns about the practices of the DNA and SRI.  Daniel Dragomir, a former intelligence officer at the SRI, told a parliamentary commission that DNA indictments are in fact drafted by the SRI.  A the same parliamentary commission, Ovidiu Putura spoke about his own trial, explaining that during a recess, the judge in his case met with a senior figure from the SRI.

Earlier this year, Romanian television broadcast tapes that showed DNA prosecuors faking evidence and document, planting evidence and altering witness declarations and official documents and blackmailing witnesses.  In February 2018, Tudorel Toader, Romania’s Minister for Justice, presented a report that criticised the conduct of the head of the DNA, Laura Codruta Kovesi and he began the process to remove her from her position.  This process is ongoing but the decision rests with President Klaus Iohannis.

A major concern about DNA tactics is that they open investigations against judges who acquit defendants, which surely must create a climate of fear among judges who will be nervous about acquitting anyone against DNA wishes, lest they themselves become on the receiving end of charges. Another concern is that the DNA opens cases against a suspect’s relatives to put pressure on the original suspect.  Examples include the husband of Alina Bica suddenly facing tax charges to put pressure on his wife.  Yet another tactic is the leaking of information to the media, as well as an unusually high use of pre-trial detention.

These abuses also raise the question that there could be thousands of people in Romanian prisons who might be innocent of the crimes they have been accused of.

Prison conditions far below internationally accepted standards

The recent HRWF report also highlighted that that Romania’s prison and pre-trial detention facilities are well below internationally accepted standards, considering them poor enough to constitute cruel or inhuman treatment.  Areas of particular concern include the treatment of prisoners, access to hygiene and recreations facilities, overcrowding and unacceptably long pre-trial detention periods.  Insufficient medical care, lack of psychiatric personnel, inadequate nutrition, insect infestations and mould.

The United Nations has raised concerns in a recent report about torture and mistreatment of prisoners, noting that “The Committee Against Torture was concerned at alleged reports of violence by law enforcement officials, including against minors, at the time of arrest, detention and interrogation, which had amounted to ill-treatment and torture and which had been aimed at, among other things, eliciting confessions, some of which had allegedly resulted in death.”

When the international community welcomes ‘success’ in Romania in terms of high levels of convictions, surely a much deeper analysis must be made of the human rights abuses that delivered these convictions rates, not least as a Romanian presidency of the European Union looms.

Share this article: