The president of Romania, Nicusor Dan, appointed on April 8 seven head prosecutors and deputy head prosecutors and rejected only one of the eight nominees sent on the day before by the Social Democrat (PSD) Justice Minister Radu Marinescu. This happened despite negative opinions issued by the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM) for three of them and no opinion for two of them.
The appointments were broadly seen as a concession made to Social Democrats and a gesture that would put an end to hopes for more active investigations into high-level corruption cases. The concession would be part of a broader agenda, including the heads of the intelligence services (still to be appointed) and the stability of the ruling coalition, with or without prime minister Ilie Bolojan and with or without the prime ministership transfer in April 2027.
Among the seven appointments, very few, such as the future head of the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism, Codrin-Horaţiu Miron, were not subject to public criticism.
CSM member Claudiu Sandu criticized the appointments as politically based and claimed that the competition was far from open, as long as this has been the general sentiment among magistrates, and president Dan made no gesture to signal a change in the system’s modus operandi.
President Dan argued that his decision was based on a thorough evaluation and expressed expectations for better activity of the prosecutors’ offices.
“I have gathered all the information to have the most appropriate solution. I hope that this moment will boost the activity of the prosecutors’ offices. Beyond that, it is a political choice,” he said.
President Dan defended the seven candidates in front of the reformist party USR (junior ruling partner) and civic organizations, rejecting the idea that they would be linked in any way to the Social Democrats, other than by being nominated by the SocDem Justice Minister Radu Marinescu. Unconvincingly, he argued that the nominees previously criticized were appointed to deputy positions, where their lack of determination would not hinder the overall activity, and claimed that CSM’s negative opinion on future head prosecutor Cristina Chiriac reflects rather CSM’s wrong orientation. Overall, he explained that nothing is how it seems to be, repeating that “he is better informed” and he is the one supposed to be responsible for his choices.
Viorel Cerbu, formerly deputy head of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA), was promoted as head of the anticorruption prosecution body, to replace Marius Voineag, whom he owes his advancement within the DNA. Cerbu received a positive review from CSM and was recommended for his extended experience.
Cerbu’s predecessor, Marius Voineag, was nominated for the deputy head prosecutor seat, despite CSM failing to issue an opinion on his name. Voineag, besides outgoing head prosecutor Alex Florenta (appointed as deputy head of the Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism -DIICOT), was particularly criticized by president Nicusor Dan during last year’s presidential campaign, for his lack of results. The lack of results, visible in no high-profile corruption case being investigated recently, was broadly seen as encouraged by the two head prosecutors, Voineag and Florenta, responding to political command.
Asked about the unexplainable revaluation of the two, Dan argued that “if we have to be more nuanced, they are people who have somehow structured the activity of the prosecutor’s offices […], and who possess the experience to handle many tasks at the same time and can be efficient, without being in decision-making positions.” This potential hidden in the two former head prosecutors is seriously questioned by representatives of the reformist party USR and civic organiszations.
Stelian Ion, the former USR Minister of Justice, criticized the appointments, warning, in the case of Cristina Chiriac, appointed to head the Prosecutor General’s Office, that her proximity to the intelligence services (SRI) “is too great”.
The former justice minister also wrote about Cristina Chiriac, concluding that Voineag will maintain certain control over the DNA activity, as being more skilfull, experienced, and “with a greater scope”.
Chiriac, with a negative opinion from CSM and publicly criticized for mishandling pieces of evidence, was defended by president Nicusor Dan, who highlighted the performance of the regional DNA office organized by Chiriac.
(Photo: Cateyeperspective/ Dreamstime)
iulian@romania-insider.com
Leave a Reply