Former Romanian President Traian Basescu is being heard on Monday at the Prosecutor’s Office upon the High Court of Cassation and Justice. Judicial sources said that Basescu is heard as witness in a file related to the illegal house retrocessions during his Bucharest mayor mandate.
“There is no illegal document signed by me,” said Basescu when entering the Prosecutor’s Office building.
“I defended Mr. President in all files against him. There is no emotion in any of these files, for there is only one truth: he has never broken the law!,” said Basescu’s lawyer, Dan Apostol.
The District 5 Court re-opened the criminal record for abuse of office in 2015 in this case, which has been initially opened following Ioana Preda’s complaint.
Preda filed a complaint against former Bucharest mayor Traian Basescu in 2008-2009, accusing him of illegally retroceding some buildings to Nicholas Jordan in 2003.
Preda argued that based on this retrocession, she was evicted from one of these buildings where she was living.
The case refers to 67 houses in the Capital’s old center retroceded to Nicholas Jordan. Prosecutors accuse Jordan that he has pretended that he was the son of a former senator in the interwar period, who would have owned all these buildings subsequently donated to the Romanian state.
Investigators claim that Traian Basescu, as Bucharest mayor, would have signed the retrocession documents without having the proof that Nicholas Jordan was indeed the son of that senator.
Basescu could not be investigated at that moment for he had immunity as Romania’s President.
Nicholas Jordan sent a reply to this article. “The houses were never donated to the Romanian State. At my grandfather’s death in 1940 two buildings (out of several) were donated to the Chamber of Commerce, but for the donation to be fulfilled, the Chamber of Commerce, although informed, never made the required move of accepting them. Anyway, those two buildings and all the other properties were nationalized from my predecessors, my father (the senator’s son) and my grandmother (the widow). I couldn’t pretend I’m the senator’s son, as I was born in 1946. The procedure to return my inheritance was started under mayor Lis, when I got a decision from the Supreme Court in the year 2000 for the building in which I was born, thus clarifying already for the commission working under mayor Basescu regarding the other buildings, who I was. Ms Preda made her complaint in 2007, she was evicted I think in 2012 or 2013 by the new building owners. Most likely her complaint was studied and found in error as her 1-apartment house was never the object of even a proposed donation,” he stated.
Dear Ms Grigoras Butu, your article contains a number of errors. As the article refers to me, Nicholas Jordan, I’d like to be given the right to reply. The houses were never donated to the Romanian State. At my grandfather’s death in 1940 two buildings (out of several) were donated to the Chamber of Commerce, but for the donation to be fulfilled, the Chamber of Commerce, although informed, never made the required move of accepting them. Anyway, those two buildings and all the other properties were nationalized from my predecessors, my father (the senator’s son) and my grandmother (the widow). I couldn’t pretend I’m the senator’s son, as I was born in 1946. The procedure to return my inheritance was started under mayor Lis, when I got a decision from the Supreme Court in the year 2000 for the building in which I was born, thus clarifying already for the commission working under mayor Basescu regarding the other buildings, who I was. Ms Preda made her complaint in 2007, she was evicted I think in 2012 or 2013 by the new building owners. Most likely her complaint was studied and found in error as her 1-apartment house was never the object of even a proposed donation. Of course the situation is a lot more complex, and there are many other details, but I’m sure the magistrates in charge will clarify all the details. The fact remains though that all you wrote above does not originate from them, the magistrates, and it is more or less hearsay. Would you be so kind to indicate the verified sources of your information?
Mr. Jordan, I only reported what the prosecutors claim “Prosecutors accuse Jordan”, “Investigators claim”. Their charges are public.
I will include your reply in the article, that’s fair.
Ms. Grigoras Butu. Thanks for the right to reply. You have other things to do, and not only debate with me the intricacies of my case, so I’ll be brief. No, the prosecutors never claimed they were 67 houses in discussion, or that I ever said I’m the senator’s son. “Their charges are public,” you state. Are they? Are you so kind to indicate if there’s an official public accusation, and not only press reports? Where could I find online or in printed form those “public charges?” Sincerely, I’m not aware they were published. Never ever did the prosecutors use the syntagm “66 houses in one day” or even “66 houses”, because they know it isn’t true. They only let you assume it is so and spread the news further. I would greatly appreciate any answer you’d provide. Nicholas Jordan