ACUZ - Lucian Cornescu

JUSTITIA

Of! Ce justitie “stricata” avem!

Acum doua zile, la Targu Mures se judeca un caz al unui revolutionar din Brasov, ma refer la dl Maior si la sotia acestuia. Proces cu usile inchise si care a inceput inainte de ora zece. Terminandu-se dupa ora 20.
Dupa spusele celor prezenti, avem acolo o judecatoare inraita, hotarata sa “pedepseasca” chiar si in pofida legii. Mai avem, tot acolo, si o procuroare. Pe la orele 18 din aceeasi zi, asa-zisa procuroare primeste un telefon. Se albeste la fata, ii tremura mainile si... si brutal infiereaza cu o manie proletara cuplul in chestiune. Scabros? Atata vreme cat nu va fi in mod clar si eficient definita prin lege responsabilitatea directa, penala daca trebuie, a unor astfel de judecatoare, a unor astfel de procuroare, evident “la ordin”, atata vreme cat atunci cand un avocat cere in mod inutil schimbarea unei judecatoare, care, hai sa o spunem, nu s-a sfiit in a spune, antipronuntandu-se, intr o discutie avuta la Piatra Neamt, discutie publica, ca ii va executa pe cei doi Maior, tot atata vreme justitia nu va fi credibila!

Evident, acest caz este departe de a fi unic. Gasim acelasi lucru si la Judecatoria sectorului doi, acolo unde o judecatoare, de curand, in decembrie, dupa ce a amanat de 6 ori pronuntarea intr un dosar, brusc “luminata” a saptea oara... a judecat pe dos. Acolo solutia era evidenta: o simulatie de vanzare a unui apartament intre doi soti, el, trecand bunul, “sfatuit“ de sotia sa,… pe cabinetul de avocatura al acesteia, el platind notarul, etc. Dupa trei saptamani, sotia, avocata, cea care avea si are un cabinet de avocatura, indestulata, paraseste domiciliul conjugal si divorteaza. Judecatoarei i s-a cerut un lucru extrem de simplu: sa ceara dovada platii. Dosarul fiind unul in care se cerea rezolutiunea contractului de vanzare pentru neplata.

Sau cazul unui procuror de la DIICOT Bucuresti care da un NUP la o plangere penala, avand pe de o parte un maldar de dovezi si pe de alta parte un raspuns de genul: ”nu am realizat ce greseala faceam”.
NUP dat celei care era avocata si care... nu realizase. Evident, aici lantul slabiciunilor continua: plangere impotriva prostiei procurorului facuta la nivelul superior si... lipsa unui raspuns in termenii legali.
Scabros? Normal!

Si doreste cineva sa fie acceptata ca presedinte al CSM o procuroare? Evident, cel putin... un inginer!


                                                                          ***


THE PRANKS OF THE M.E.P. MONICA MACOVEI’s “CHILDREN”

Two days ago, in Targu Mures, there has been a trial of a family who participated to the Romanian Revolution in 1989. The Maiors (this is their name) live in Brasov. The trial took place between closed doors; it began before 10 o’clock in the morning and ended after 8 o’clock in the evening.

According to the allegations of the people who attended the trial, we have there a wicked judge, determined to “punish” even against the law. We also have there a district attorney. During the same day, around 6 o’clock in the evening, the district attorney received a phone call. Her face turned white, her hands started to tremble and suddenly she started to point the finger at the judged family. Outrageous!? As long as the direct responsibility of this kind of judges or district attorneys is not clearly defined by the law, as long as a lawyer asks in vain for a judge to be changed, the justice system will definitely not be credible. Not as long as the above mentioned judge states during a public conversation that took place at Piatra Neamt before the end of the trial, that she will convict the Maiors.

Of course, this case is far from being singular. We can find similar situations at the 2 nd District Courthouse in Bucharest, where recently, in December, after postponing 6 times the verdict, suddenly enlightened, the judge ruled against the obvious truth. This trial was about a sale simulation of an appartment between a husband and his wife. “Adviced” by his lawyer wife, the husband “sold” the appartment to his wife’s Law Firm, the husband being the one who paid even the notary taxes and who has never received any money from his wife or her Law Firm. After three weeks, the wife divorces him. Since in this trial the husband asked for the annulment of the “sale” contract for lack of payment, the judge was asked a very simple thing: to request the proof of payment to the involved Law Firm. Well…

We can also mention the case of a DIICOT (the organization for investigating oraganized crime and terrorism) Bucharest district attorney who ruled against a prosecution, although he had a lot of proofs against this person. The prosecuted person was also a lawyer, who found the excuse: “I did not realize my mistake”. In consequence, there has been a complaint against the district attorney’s ruling and lack of response in due time. All these took place after a previous warning to Codrut Olaru, DIICOT’s chief district attorney.

Ourageous? Of course! In these conditions, does someone want for a district attorney to be accepted as a CSM (Magistracy Superior Court)’s president? Only an engineer who apparently got her on that chair!