About the Corruption in Romania, which Destroys Businesses and Lives
09.10.2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I – Personal considerations on the management of state institutions by the intelligence officers and politicians.
- Bribing or influencing the prosecutors, judges and public servants by the officials of Farmec through “INCENTIVES” has been protected by the prosecutors of the National Anticorruption Directorate
- The individuals who violate the Law and my right to Property have the promise to be protected.
- The interventions of politicians, embassy officials and of some intelligence service officers were or are likely to ensure:
- The pressure of ANAF and the blackmail of the Competition Council that would determine me to quit
- The protocols between the Romanian Intelligence Service and institutions exceed the law.
- Cases of corruption that harm the national security and damage the interests of Romanians.
- The involvement of politicians in action or inaction, politicians preponderantly from the Social Democratic Party, on favouring the fraud and protection of individuals who violate the law
1) Ionut Misa, 2) Tudorel Toader, 4) Rovana Plumb, 5) Claudiu Manda, 6) Georgian Pop, 7) Ioan Balan, 8) Victorel Lupu, 9) Adrian Nastase, 10) Cristian Diaconescu, 11) Virgil Ardelean, 12) Elena Udrea. - PROMOTION OF PUBLIC SERVANTS.
1) Laura Codruta Kovesi, 2) Daniel Morar, 3) Magdalena Diana Bulancea, 4) Marius Bulancea; 5) Alexandra Carmen Lancranjan, 6) Cristian Ban, 7) Tatiana Toader, 8) Georgiana Hosu, 9) Nicolae Andrei Solomon, 10) Ionut Misa, 11) Adrian Bordea, 12) Judecatorul Aurica Voinescu; 13) Judecatorul Mona Pivniceru; 14) Judecatorul Razvan Rares Costea, 15) Aurel Dobre - Blackmail of prosecutors and judges by officers along with DNA prosecutors
- Disclosure of the names of judges, prosecutors and public servants who collaborate with the Romanian Intelligence Service
- Concerted and directed measures that led to muting the press and televisions
CHAPTER II – SUMMARY of the Noncompliance with the Property Rights in Romania.
- The theft at Farmec in Cluj exceeds 300,000,000 lei and is protected by the Romanian institutions.
- The National Agency for Fiscal Administration has been and is guided by groups of interests.
1) Ionut Misa, 3) Dragos Doros, 4) Gelu Diaconu, 5) Laurentiu Pusderca, 6) Marian Stefanescu, 7) Daniel Diaconescu, 8) the General Directorate for the Administration of Large Taxpayers, 9) the Legal Directorate, 10) the General Directorate for Integrity. - The appointment of B. M. Chiritoiu as president of the Competition Council, in conditions of incompatibility in relation to the provisions of the law, a means of damaging the Romanian consumers and the state with billions of Euros
- The inefficiency of the activity of the Court of Accounts, which annually observes the violation of the law and huge damages to the state budget, but without notifying the prosecutor’s office and without recovering the damages
- The National Anticorruption Directorate has been and still is guided by groups of interests.
- The property is not institutionally protected, the right to a fair trial is not ensured.
- Officers from the Romanian Intelligence Service and politicians have directed the institutions to get certain results in the causes of interest.
- THE JUSTICE IS CONTROLLED and DIRECTED, in the cases of interest.
CHAPTER III – WHO ARE THE INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED?
- WHO IS NICOLAE CRISTINEL OLANEANU.
- WHAT IS FARMEC SA AND WHAT DOES IT REPRESENT?
- WHO ARE THOSE WHO SPOLIATE FARMEC SA? WHO ARE TURDEAN AND PANTEA.
- WHO ARE THE COMPANIES GALIC AND PRESTIGE.
- WHAT ARE THE TRADING COMPANIES PROTECTED BY THE COMPETITION COUNCIL.
CHAPTER IV – THE DEFRAUDING MECHANISM AND THE VALUE OF THE PREJUDICES
A.1. Defrauding and violating the undersigned’s property right, actions resulted from the illegal issuance of 5,294,256 shares and from the use in voting in the meetings of shareholders of some shares that were not subscribed and paid by the shareholders, but by the company
A.2. THE SYSTEM OF DEFRAUDING THE STATE AND THE FARMEC PATRIMONY
A.3. PREJUDICES CAUSED TO THE STATE, TO FARMEC AND TO THE UNDERSIGNED.
A.4. THE PREJUDICE CAUSED TO THE PRESTIGE AND GALIC COMPANIES.
CHAPTER V – THE NOTIFIED INSTITUTIONS THAT FAILED TO FULFIL THEIR LEGAL DUTIES
1. THE COURT OF ACCOUNTS.
2. THE NATIONAL AGENCY FOR FISCAL ADMINISTRATION (ANAF)
2.1. THE GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF FINANCES
THE DIRECTORATE FOR MONITORING THE EXCISE DUTIES AND CUSTOMS OPERATIONS
2.2. THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF LARGE TAXPAYERS IN ANAF (DGAMC)
2.3. THE FISCAL ANTIFRAUD DIRECTORATE GENERAL
2.4. THE ANTIFRAUD DIRECTORATE DIVISION 7 OF SIBIU
2.5. GENERAL DIRECTORATE FOR INTEGRITY
2.6. THE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL AGENCY FOR FISCAL ADMINISTRATION
2.7. LEGAL DIRECTORATE OF ANAF
2.8. INFLUENCING ANAF THROUGH THE PRESIDENT OF THE ALFA UNION
3. MINISTER OF PUBLIC FINANCE.
4. THE ROMANIAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICE (SRI)
5. THE PARLIAMENTARY CONTROL WAS NOT EXERCISED
1) The Permanent Commission of the Chamber of Deputies for exercising the control over the activity of the Romanian Intelligence Service
2) The Commissions for the Investigation of Abuses, Corruption and Petitions from the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate
6. THE NATIONAL OFFICE FOR PREVENTING AND FIGHTING AGAINST MONEY LAUNDERING
7. THE COMPETITION COUNCIL
8. PROSECUTOR’S OFFICES
8.1. THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ATTACHED TO THE HIGH COURT OF CASSATION AND JUSTICE (PICCJ)
8.1.A. The inaction of prosecutors from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice regarding the request to take over criminal file 3164/P/2012 from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Tribunal of Bucharest
8.1.B. The inaction of the PICCJ in relation to the criminal deeds of the officials within the Competition Council, criminal case 9016/P/2005
8.2. THE DIRECTORATE FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF ORGANISED CRIME AND TERRORISM
8.3. THE NATIONAL ANTICORRUPTION DIRECTORATE (DNA)
A. The inaction of the DNA regarding the fraudulent criminal actions committed by officials of Farmec SA and some customs officials, protected by the officials of ANAF, prosecutors and judges
B. The inaction of the National Anticorruption Directorate on the corruption deeds of the Competition Council officials and of the officials of those institutions that ignored the abuses of the Competition Council.
8.4. THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ATTACHED TO THE COURT HOUSE OF SECTOR 2 IN BUCHAREST (PJS2)
8.5. THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ATTACHED TO THE TRIBUNAL OF BUCHAREST (PTB)
1. Criminal case 14382/P/2010
2. Criminal case 3164/P/2012
8.6. THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ATTACHED TO THE TRIBUNAL OF CLUJ (PT CLUJ) – case 297/P/2016
8.7. THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ATTACHED TO THE COURT HOUSE OF PITESTI – Criminal case 3680/P/2017
8.8. The Prosecutor’s Office Attached to the Court House Of Pitesti – Criminal Case 4354/p/2009
8.9. THE JUDICIAL INSPECTION IN THE SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRACY
9. MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
10. THE COURTS OF LAW
10.1. THE HIGH COURT OF CASSATION AND JUSTICE
10.2. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BUCHAREST
A. The violation of the law at the Court of Appeal of Bucharest in cases concerning deeds of defrauding the Farmec company and the undersigned – Criminal Case 2485/300/2011 – Criminal Division
B. The violation of the law by the Court of Appeal of Bucharest regarding the protection of anticompetitive practices and the failure to comply with a final and irrevocable court decision by the Competition Council and the Court of Appeal Bucharest so far – case 27411/2/2005.
10.3. THE TRIBUNAL OF BUCHAREST
A. The violation of the law at the Tribunal of Bucharest, with the consequence of protecting the frauds of Farmec SA – Criminal case 30272/3/2007; Criminal case 12283/3/2016.
B. The violation of the law at the Tribunal of Bucharest in the case 23011/299/2007.
10.4. THE COURT HOUSE OF SECTOR 1 IN BUCHAREST
1. Criminal case 17522/299/2005
2. The criminal case no. 23011/299/2007
10.5. THE SPECIALISED TRIBUNAL OF CLUJ
1. The case 1129/1285/2016 – judge Flavius Iancu Motu (Wedding GODFATHER of one of the Managers of Farmec)
2. Case 1021/1285/2016 – judge Rares Razvan Costea
3. Case 1121/1285/2016 – judge Ivanescu Simona
4. Case 3414/1285/2011 – judge Oros Voichita
5. Case 442/1285/2017 – judge Ancuta Pavelescu
6. Case 1110/1285/2016 – judge Ancuta Pavelescu
10.6. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CLUJ
10.7. THE TRIBUNAL OF CONSTANTA
1. Case 5494/1285/20096 – judge Luminita Dan
2. Case 1514/1285/2012 – judge Adrian Oprea
3. Case 1514 /1285/2012 – judge Aida Iolanda Slate – rejection closure 26.06.2018
10.8. THE SPECIALISED TRIBUNAL OF ARGEȘ
10.9. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF PITEȘTI
10.10. THE TRIBUNAL OF BRAŞOV
10.11. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BRAȘOV
10.13. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CRAIOVA
1. Case 7386/1285/2010
2. Case 1613/54/2014
10.12 THE TRIBUNAL OF SATU MARE
11. THE NATIONAL AGENCY FOR INTEGRITY
12. THE GENERAL DIRECTORATE FOR INTERNAL PROTECTION WITHIN THE MINISTRY OF INTERIOR
13. BODY OF EXPERT AND LICENSED ACCOUNTANTS OF ROMANIA (CECCAR)
CHAPTER VI – INDIVIDUALS FROM INSTITUTIONS AND AUTHORITIES INVOLVED IN ILLEGAL ACTIONS
- Ionut MISA – president of ANAF
- Gelu Stefan Diaconu – president of ANAF
- Dragos Doros – president of ANAF
- Ioan Zadic, Ioan Gligor, Ioan Rus are ANAF officials in the fiscal control department
- Alin Ghiurca – deputy manager within the General Directorate for Fiscal Administration
- Ciuban Doru, Nicolae Campan, Laurentiu Suciu, Mihaela Ignea, Sabo Delia, Samboan Maria, Muresan Margareta, Andrei Ioan Haas, Vasilica Sandu, Carmen Augusta Patru, Claudia Emilia Gheorghe, Adrian Vlasceanu, Daniela Nita
- Cuc Mariana, Minuta Angela, Ratiu Rodica and Nicolae Ioan Horea – fiscal control
- Andrei Haas – fiscal control
- Laurentiu Dan Pusderca – deputy manager of antifraud in Sibiu
- Raluca Dragan – manager of the legal department in ANAF
- Maria Stefanescu – manager of the ANAF directorate for integrity
- Gerogeta Craciun – inspector for integrity
- Mirela Fitarau – head of the service in the department for integrity ANAF
- Daniel Diaconescu – deputy manager at the Directorate for Integrity within ANAF
- Adrian Dinu – SRI officers – delegated to the Directorate for Integrity
2. LAWYERS
- Lawyer Claudiu Brehar
- Civil law firm Biris Goran
- Civil law firm Musat&Asociatii
- Civil law firm Tuca, Zbarcea si Asociatii
3. PROSECUTORS
- Augustin Lazăr – prosecutor general P.ICCJ
- Laura Codruta Kovesi – former prosecutor of division at the DNA
- Daniel Morar – former chief prosecutor at the DNA
- Gheorghe Popovici – chief prosecutor at the division of the DNA
- Marius Bulancea – division chief prosecutor at the DNA
- Codruta Trandafir – prosecutor at the Human Resources Division within the DIICOT
- Cornel Ioana – Inspector Prosecutor within the CSM Judicial Inspection
- Alexandra Carmen Lancranjan – prosecutor at the PTB
- Mihaela Canela Beldie – DNA prosecutor
- Cristian Ban – prosecutor, vicepresident of the CSM
- Tatiana Toader – PRIME PROSECUTOR, Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court House of Sector 2, member of the CSM Plenum
- Alexandru Georgescu – prosecutor at the PTB and deputy prime prosecutor Solomon Nicolae
- Irina Lucia Sabo – prime prosecutor at the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Tribunal of Cluj
- Rica Leordean – prosecutor at the PT Cluj
- Isabela Nedelea – deputy prime prosecutor a tthe Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court House of Pitesti and Nicolae Argeseanu
- Lăcramioara Doina Popa – prosecutor at the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court House of Pitesti
- Adrian Petrescu – prosecutor at the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court House of Sector 2
- Tanase Joita – former General Prime Prosecutor of Romania
- Georgiana Hosu – deputy prosecutor within the DIICOT
- Alexandru Popescu and Catalin Ciongaru – police officers at the IGPR – DICE
- Aurel Dobre – Director IGPR-DICE
- Liviu Varga – police officer at DICE Cluj
- Cătălin Voicu – police officer at the Police Department of Pitesti
5. JUDGES
- Judecătorul Lucian Netejoru – chief inspector of the Judicial Inspection within the CSM
- Judge Flavius Moţu – judge at the Specialised Tribunal of Cluj
- Judge Răzvan Rareş Costea – judge and president of the Specialised Tribunal of Cluj
- Denisa Livia Baldean – judge and president of the Court of Appeal of Cluj
- Judge Simona Ivanescu – judge at the Specialised Tribunal of Cluj
- Judge ANCUȚA PAVELESCU – judge at the Specialised Tribunal of Cluj
- The magistrates Puscasu Danusia and Roxana Mihaela Veres – judges at the Court of Appeal of Cluj
- Judge Voichita Laura Oros (Grunea) – judge at the Specialised Tribunal of Cluj
- The magistrates Adina Fundatureanu, Denisa Vâlvoi and Dumitru Văduva – The Court of Appeal of Pitesti
- The magistrates Nuță Corina, Chiornita Gabriela and Ursula Sanda – the Court of Appeal of Pitesti
- Judge Luminita Dan – judge at the Tribunal of Constanta
- Judge Adrian Oprea – judge at the Tribunal of Constanta
- Judge Aida Iolanda Slate – Judge at the Tribunal of Constanta
- Judge Aurica Voinescu – judge at the Tribunal of Brasov
- The magistrates Marcela Comsa, Laura Feteanu, Simona Gavrila, judges at the Court of Appeal of Brasov
- Laura Feteanu, Codruta Voda, Carmen Bujan, judges at the Court of Appeal of Brasov
- Judge Magdalena Diana Bulancea – judge at the Court of Appeal of Bucharest
- Judge Georgiana Tudor – Judge at the Court House of Sector 1 in Bucharest
- Judge Mihai Valentin – judge at the Tribunal of Bucharest
- Judge Adrian Bordea – judge at the ICCJ
- Judge Ioan Turcu – former judge at the Court of Appeal of Cluj
- Dana Iarina Vartires, Camelia Bratu and Adriana Denes – judge at ICCJ
6. MINISTERS
- The deputies who form the Commission for Exercising the Control over the Activity of SRI: Claudiu Iulian Manda President of the Commission for Exercising the Control over the Activity of the Romanian Intelligence Service, Marian Gheorghe Cusca, Attila Verestoy, Radu Babus, Ioan Cristian Chirtes, Doina Elena Federovici, Gabriel Horia Nasra, Cezar Florin Preda, Lucian Stanciu Viziteu – have not solved the notification and petition of 30.10.2017
- The deputies who form the Commissions for the Investigation of Abuses, Corruption and Petitions from the Chamber of Deputies: Ion Balan – president, Valentin Boboc, Lavinia Cosma, Dumitru Lovin, Costel Dunava, Adrian Prisnel, Istvan Antal, Octavian Goga, George Ionescu, Marius Margarit, Elvira Sarapatin
- The Senators from the Commission for Petitions, investigation of Abuses and Fight Against Corruption from the Senate: Iancu Caracota – president, Victorel Lupu, Vergil Chitac, Ioan Denes, Catalin Fenechiu, Dan Lungu, Marius Nicoara, Doru Panescu, Nicoleta Pauliuc, Liliana Sbirnea, Ioan Stan
– have not solved the notification on the abuses specified in the document that was submitted on 17.10.2017 - The deputy Georgian Pop
8. INDIVIDUALS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE COURT OF ACCOUNTS
- Mihai Busuioc – President
- Cosmin Nicula – Vicepresident
- Dan Firtescu – Counsellor for Accounts Department II
- Alexandru Costache – Manager of Department II
9. INDIVIDUALS IN THE OFFICE FOR PREVENTING AND FIGHTING AGAINST MONEY LAUNDERING
- President Daniel Marius Staicu
- Radu Constantin Catalin, representative member of the MJ
- Marius Vorniceanu, representative member of the Court of Accounts
- General Nicolae Plaiasu
10. INDIVIDUALS IN THE NATIONAL AGENCY FOR INTEGRITY
11. INDIVIDUALS FROM THE COMPETITION COUNCIL
Bogdan Marius Chiritoiu – president
12. BODY OF EXPERT AND LICENSED ACCOUNTANTS OF ROMANIA
Professor Robert Aurelian Sova
13. OFFICIALS OF FARMEC and THEIR „COLLABORATORS”
14. INTELLIGENCE SERVICE OFFICERS
- Virgil Ardelean – general
- Dumbrava Dumitru, brigadier general, is the Director of the Legal Directorate of the Romanian Intelligence Service (3) colonel Simion CECCAN, Romanian Intelligence Service officer
- Simion CECCAN, colonel of the Romanian Intelligence Service
- Razvan Dociu – Lieutenant colonel (r) in the Romanian Intelligence Service
- Marian Stefanescu – officer of the Romanian Intelligence Service
- Daniel Diaconescu – officer of the Romanian Intelligence Service
- Adrian Dinu – officer of the Romanian Intelligence Service
- Dan Valentin Capsuna – general of the Romanian Intelligence Service
CHAPTER VII – PETITIONS UNSOLVED BY INSTITUTIONS OR FORMALLY SOLVED AND THE COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED FROM EACH INSTITUTION
- NATIONAL AGENCY FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION: Petition no. 915705/14.09.2017 to ANAF, Fiscal Inspection Bogdan Stan TEMATICA; Petition no. 856/14.09.2017 to ANAF, Antifraud Daniel Tudor TEMATICA; Petition to the DGI on 12.12.2017 – without response; The request no. 9249 to the DGI no. 9249/06.02.2018; request 138/03.07.2018 to the president of ANAF
- THE COURT OF ACCOUNTS: notification and request no. 120801/11.01.18; petition no. 136867/4.8.17, no. 141693/20.10.17, no. 141694/20.10.17, no. 120801/11.01.2018 (see Annex 16)
- MINISTRY OF PUBLIC FINANCE
– Petition no. 39091/03.07.2018;
– Request no. 39432/04.07.2018; 8125/09.02.2018; 8124/09.02.2018 the request of 17.06. 2016 - THE ROMANIAN INTELLIGENCE SERVICE
– The notification sent via mail on 24.06.2014 to the SRI-Division of Cluj (see Annex 46); SRI communication no. 53175 of 20.08.2014 (see Annex 47); notification submitted to the SRI-Central structure on 15.10.2014 (see Annex 48); response communication no. 53499 of 11.11.2014 (see Annex 49), Notification to the SRI with additional information of 27.10.2017 registered under the no. 56130 (see Annex 50), response communication no. 38/04.05.2015 (see Annex 51), response communication no. 52227/20.11.2017. - THE NATIONAL OFFICE FOR PREVENTING AND FIGHTING AGAINST MONEY LAUNDERING
– Petition no. 11226/30.10.2017; the response no. 11226/29.11.2017 - THE NATIONAL ANTICORRUPTION DIRECTORATE
– The notification no. 3166/16.02.2016 ; Request for file number, sent via e-mail on 24.02.2016; Supplementation of complaint no. 3166/20.07.2016; Request for file number, sent via e-mail 22.02.2017; Response communication from the DNA 26.04.2017 ref classification of notifications and recommendation to us to make a denunciation; Petition ref communication unique number registered under the no. 3166/01.08.2017; Complaint and denunciation registered under the no. 3166/01.08.2017; Request e-mail 10.08.2017; Evidence and probative elements no. 16272/20.10.2017; Petition ref unique number registered under the no. 16274/20.10.2017; DNA response 13.11.2017 on the Communication sent to SICE Cluj; Communication to the DNA on 29.11.2017; Response of the DNA 11.12.2017; - THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE ATTACHED TO THE TRIBUNAL OF CLUJ NAPOCA
– The ordinance of the PT Cluj case 297 regarding the initiation of the criminal prosecution in the case regarding the tax evasion crimes, Art. 9 par. 1 letters b) and c) of Law 241/02005 and abuse of office Art. 297 par. 1 Criminal Code; Communication of PT Cluj of 29.06.2016; Request to the PT Cluj of 14.07.2016 ref the initiaiton of the criminal prosecution in REM; Olaneanu’s request to the PT Cluj request for copies file 297 of 28.07.2017; Communication of the PT Cluj to OIaneanu on 23.10.2017; Olaneanu’s request to the PT Cluj copies in the case, on 31.10.2017; Olaneanu’s request to the PT Cluj copies in the case, on 22.11.2017; Ordinance of the PT Cluj case 297/P/2016 on the approval to consult the file; Olaneanu’s request to the PT Cluj to communicate the I.U.P. ordinance of 28.11.2017; Response communication of PT Cluj of 29.11.2017; Olaneanu’s petition to the PT Cluj of 04.12.2017; Ordinance of the PT Cluj in the case 297/P/2016 of 07.12.2017 ref the extension of the criminal prosecution ref money laundering, embezzlement; Communication of the PT Cluj to Olaneanu of 08.12.2017; Communication of the PT Cluj to Olaneanu of 19.12.2017.
CHAPTER VIII – Complaint to the European Commission
on the right to property is not systemically protected by a fair trial, under the conditions where there is no random assignment of civil or criminal cases, because the legal provisions stipulated in Art. 11 and 139 of Law 304/2004 fail to meet the cases where there is a personal interest of some officers, politicians, embassy officials and of certain individuals operating businesses in violation of the law.
CHAPTER IX
The petition to 800 parliamentarians of the European Parliament in Brussels under the Art. 267 TFUE to request the European Commission to issue a MOTIVATED APPROVAL or a MOTIVATED DECISION in relation to the actual inexistence in ROMANIA of the Right to property, in the cases where there is a personal interest of certain officers, politicians embassy officials and individuals operating businesses in violation of the law.
CHAPTER X
The PETITION to 400 deputies and senators from the Parliament of Romania
CHAPTER XI
The communication to mass media companies, written press and televisions in the country and abroad
CHAPTER XII
Press articles that were subject to some press investigations before the interested individuals would bribe the press
- In relation to the noncompliance with the Competition Law and Protection of the Competition Council
- Bogdan Chirițoiu paid by us to be a VUVUZELA OF FOREIGN MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES Mediafax: “Bogdan Chiriţoiu: The state aids go towards the Romanian capital rather than the foreign one”, „Fluierul Report” publication of 19.01.2017;
- “Auchan escapes from the Competition fine of about 24 million lei, justified as prescription”, “Profit.ro” publication of 10.04.2017
- “The scandal of the involvement of Group company belonging to the daughter of a securitate officer in the process of rebranding the SRI reveals bizarre coincidences that could actually mean explosive disclosures that could mean #SRIGATE (shouts): money bags in the Băneasa forest at the SRI headquarter, rebranding the main Romanian intelligence service, the company of the daughter of a securitate officer and the greatest rebranding contract in the Romanian industry”, “Flux24” Publication of 06.08.2016
- “The Competition Council plays along with the lawyers in whose territory are the multinational corporations”, “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 04.01.2012, author Teodora Tugui;
- “Large law firms make the competition law in Romania”, the “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 13.07.2012, author Teodora Tugui
- “The Competition Council conducts investigations only against companies that haven’t paid their share”, “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 28.12.2011, author Teodora Tugui;
- “Six members of the Competition Council are incompatible”, the “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 30.12.2011, author Teodora Tugui;
- “Family businesses at the Competition Council”, the “Atac” publication of 05.2008, author Ramona Feraru;
- “The Competition Council, the main culprit regarding the robbery of Romania buyers in hypermarkets”, the “Interesul Public” publication of 14.11.2008, author Marius Butusina;
- “The Competition Council – SRL “the servant of multinational companies” in the Romanians’ pocket”, the “Interesul Public” publication of 20.05.2008, author Ramona Feraru, Dan Papij;
- “The Competition Council self-competes”, the “Ziarul” publication of 13.05.2008;
- “The wolf pack guarding the sheep in the Competition Council” “Interesul public” publication of 24.11.2008, author Marius Butusina;
- “Criminal case for the former management of the Competition Council”, the “Atac” publication of 26.10.2007;
- “The damage in the budget of 200 million Euros. At the Competition Council, it has become a normal practice to grant exemptions from the Competition Law to multinational companies”;
- “Corruption and incompetence at the General Prosecutor’s Office”, article of 2007;
- “The Competition Council initiates investigations by which it contradicts its own decisions”, “Bursa” publication of 05.03.2007, author Catalin Balan;
- “Several multinational companies in Romania trample on the Competition Law”, the “Adevarul” publication of 22.03.2005, author Dan Bucura;
- “By all types of commercial juggleries, Wrigley imposed itself before its competition”, “Atac” publication of 27.03.2005, author Cristian Sava;
- The correspondence I have received from Mr. Robert Veress, investigation journalist at the “GÂNDUL” newspaper, which emphasises the journalist’s question and the response of the US Embassy in Romania.
- In relation to the frauds at Farmec SA Cluj Napoca:
- Attention, DNA! The Turdean-Pantea binomial has committed an evasion of 15 million Euros at Farmec Puterea”, “Puterea” publication on 07.05.2015, author Mihai Palsu;
- The publication reveals the connection between the fraud of the company’s shares for Turdean and Pantea to illegally take over the control, Tax evasion with excisable alcohol and influence trafficking at ANAF, judges, prosecutors up to the Prime Minister of Romania
- “Rovana PLUMB is aware of the offshore account opened at Hellenic Bank: 140-01-449221-01”, „SecundaTv.ro” publication of 02.12.2015, author Mihai Palsu
- “Plăiașu “translated” Tobă and protected a financial a trickery of 1.2 million Euros”, “Secundatv.ro” publication of 04.12.2015, author Mihai Palsu
- “The managers of Farmec oscillate between conviction and acquittal”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 15.06.2015, author Razvan Robu;
- “A prosecutor accused to investigate Farmec with the handkerchief over his nose”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 12.01.2015, author Razvan Robu;
- “The fiscal inspectors “bestrode” each other in the Farmec trial”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 19.04.2015, author Razvan Robu
- “The king gave up on Farmec because it has the smell of crime”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 29.06.2015, author Razvan Robu;
- “The lawyer of Farmec placed to “guard” the ANAF”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 14.12.2015, author Razvan Robu
- “The managers of Farmec intercepted on how they want to “butter up” the justice”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 10.03.2014, author Razvan Robu;
- “Farmec sings in tears with the handkerchief on the cimbalom in the alcohol businesses”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 8.12.2014, author Razvan Robu;
- “The former head of Farmec judged until prescription”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication, author Razvan Robu;
- “The Farmec case: “a secret trial”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication, author Razvan Robu
- “The Farmec trial switched to secrecy”, “Gazeta de Cluj” publication of 15.6.2013, author Razvan Robu
- “Fomer managers of Farmec Cluj got themselves a criminal case and their children the factory”, “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 02.12.2012, author Dan Zavaleanu
- “The stocks in the patrimony of Farmec, an enigma of criminal feature for the administrators and managers”, “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 2.12.2012, author Dan Zavaleanu;
- ““Odd” random distributions at the Court of Appeal of Bucharest”, the “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 11.06.2012, author Dan Zavaleanu;
- “ANI is only notified for the people of the opposition. A PDL counsellor of Cluj lied in his wealth statement”, the “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 24.10.2011, author Dan Zavaleanu;
- “Boc’s man at the customs along with the Financial Guard of Cluj covers the tax evasion. Robbery at Farmec Cluj Napoca”, the “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 02.12.2011, author Dan Zavaleanu;
- “Businesses with some criminal flavour at Clujeana company. Faulty management at Farmec Cluj Napoca”, the “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 5.12.2011, author Dan Zavaleanu;
- “The Justice at Cluj makes a common front to defend the interests of the Farmec management”, “Cotidianul.ro” publication of 6.12.2011, author Dan Zavaleanu;
- “The Farmec Business” continues to ignore the law by…court decisions”, “Interesul Public” publication of 06.02.2009
- “Magistrates serving the SRI mafia”, the “Ziarul” publication of 15.02.2008, author Catalin Dumitrescu
- “CSM has given the charlatans in robes enough rope”, “Interesul Public” publication of 25.1.2008
- “The Magistrates of Cluj, the “employees” of a 75 year owner”, “Interesul public” publication of 8.12.2008, author Marius Butusina;
- “The octopus of companies – the tick that sucked the blood of Farmec SA”, “Interesul Public” publication of 12.12.2008
- “Puii Vulpii” – ZIUA was one of the few voices that constantly criticised the activity of Virgil Ardelean, the former Chief of the General Directorate of Information and Internal Protection of the MAI, discovering flagrant cases of abuses undertaken by his subordinates, Ziua publication of 29.06.2006
- PRESS ARTICLES on Hexi Pharma, the case of Codrut Marta, General Secretary of ANAF, the case Mihai Erbasu, the case Florin Anghelescu, the case of the prosecutor Cristian Panait, the case Dumitru Tinu, the case Catalin Chelu
* NEW *
August 2024 – MEMORANDUM preceding the Criminal Complaint 30.08.2024
June 2024 – CRIMINAL COMPLAINT and COMPLAINT to the General Prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice – 13.06.2024
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Cover Letter to the European Commission – 09.01.2020
Complaint and Petition to the European Commission – 09.01.2020
Cover Letter to the ANAF – 03.07.2019
Intimation to the Minister of Finance – 03.07.2019
Petition to Mirela Calugareanu – ANAF – 03.07.2019
Written Conclusions – criminal case no. 2485 Bucharest Court of Appeal – 05.03.2019