The National Anti-corruption Directorate (DNA) has announced that it had dropped charges against former ministers Ecaterina Andronescu, Mihai Tănăsescu, Dan Nica, Adriana Ţicău, Daniel Funeriu, Alexandru Athanasiu and Şerban Mihăilescu in the high-sounding Microsoft file, as the statute of limitations on their deeds expired.
The general state of limitations on abuse of office is ten years. The date of committig the last deed in the file is October 21, 2004.
As for Daniel Funeriu, former Education minister, prosecutors have found out that he hadn’t committed any criminal deed after all.
Anti-corruption head Laura Codruta Kovesi had a first retort on Friday after prosecutors announced they had dropped out charges against several former ministers in the Microsoft file.
Kovesi told an interview to ziare.com that the DNA had asked for the go-ahead to prosecute the former ministers in this case for the case prosecutor had considered that the state of limitations is calculated from the date when the last payments (for the Microsoft licenses) had been paid and the deadline was not met. Kovesi also argues the judiciary practice was contradictory, as a new criminal code came up in 2014 and the debate on the criminal law became more favorable.
“If we hadn’t asked for the criminal prosecution go-aheads against the six ministers, we couldn’t have made the investigations or administered the evidence. The go-ahead is a preliminary condition to investigate,” Kovesi explained, adding that asking for the go-aheads was not the element that had interrupted the state of limitations.
She said about the former case prosecutor in this file, Mihaela Iorga, that she had started criminal prosecution against several persons few days after the state of limitations had expired, although she had obtained the go-ahead for prosecution before the prescription. “That’s why we notified the Judicial Inspection in her case,” Kovesi argued.
Later on, the anti-corruption head told a private broadcaster that she has no reasons to resign, explaining how the DNA got to this situation.
“The files were registered in 2013. They have been a priority ever since and investigation in this extremely complex case started, with prosecutors having to prove deeds committed ten years ago. There were four indictments in four years. Two ex-ministers were sent to court, with one being given a final sentence. In some former ministers’ case the statute of limitations cut in, a deadline that cannot be reproached to a prosecutor, as we have been notified only in 2013. But the way the statute of limitations was calculated was due to the amendment of the judiciary practice following the enforcement of the new criminal codes. Therefore, the case prosecutor who initially investigated the case has calculated the statute of limitations based on the date when the payments were done. We had payments in 2005, in 2006, based on a contract clinched in 2004. Subsequently, when another prosecutor took over the file, the preventive measures ordered by him were on trial at the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2017 that, when we have a crime extending over crime, as in our case, the statute of limitations is established from the date when the contract was signed, meaning in 2004. So, this cannot be imputed to the case prosecutor,” Kovesi said.
Mihaela Iorga, first case prosecutor in the file
The Microsoft files have been instrumented by Mihaela Iorga, one of the prosecutors recalled from DNA last summer after the scandal of the DNA meeting recordings’ featuring DNA chief prosecutor Kovesi ordering prosecutors how to investigate some cases. Immediately after her recall, DNA announced that serious irregularities had been found in the files conducted by Mihaela Iorga, with the DNA chief prosecutor asking the Judicial Inspection to check if Iorga had observed the criminal procedure norms in this case.
Now, the prosecutor who had taken over the investigation in the Microsoft case after Iorga had been dismissed, argues he found out that the suspects had been prosecuted after the statute of limitations on the case had expired.
Mihaela Iorga opened the Microsoft file following a complaint of the PM’s controla body at that time.
In September 2014, DNA asked for the Parliament or the Presidency’s go-aheads to start criminal prosecution against seven former ministers and obtained them on the same month. Only that prosecutot Mihaela Iorga was slow in prosecuting the seven and the statute of limitations on this case expired at the end of 2014. She eventually prosecuted the former ministers in early 2015, but it seems it was too late, as the charges were ten-year old.
If she had started the criminal prosecution against the former seven ministers in September 2014, when the DNA had got the go-aheads, the prosecutor would have won seven years when the investigation could have been concluded.
In retort, Mihaela Iorga claims she has nothing to reproach to her work in this case, saying she did her job.
“You have to know to calculate the statute of limitations on a case and you have to correctly establish the moment when the crime was consumed, when it expired. I have done my job until the moment when I gave in the file. I don’t know what happened after that and I don’t have anything to comment. But it would be sad to close down the case only upon the wish to harm somebody,” Iorga told Mediafax.
In its turn, the General Prosecutor’s Office stated on Friday that it had notified the Judicial Inspection within the Superior Council of Magistracy over the delay of the Microsoft file since September last year.
As for the Justice minister, Tudorel Toader told Mediafax news agency that the fact that charges had been dropped against the seven ministers in the Microsoft case represents “a serious management negligence on solving the cases in a reasonable time”.
A high-sounding case involving a huge prejudice
The charges against the ex-ministers in what seems to be one of the largest fraud cases in Romania’s history involving state funds, were abuse of office, money laundering, influence peddling and bribe taking related to assigning the contracts for the Microsoft licenses. In 2014 it was the first time that appeared the information that EUR 20 M would have been asked as bribe out in those EUR 54 M paid by the Government within the Microsoft licenses contracts in schools.
The prosecutors say that Serban MihAilescu, Minister Coordinator of SGG during December 2000 – October 2003 would have convinced another minister to sign two Government bills and a Microsoft licensing agreement, under the terms he had negotiated in the period in which he was activating in the abovementioned position, namely accepting the technical and financial offer submitted by the company Fujitsu Siemens Computers, without informing them on the existence of certain legal impediments.
During April-November 2004, Mihailescu would have requested and received a part of the amount of about USD 20 million paid by Fujitsu Siemens Computers in various offshore companies’ accounts under the title of consultancy and technical assistance afferent to the agreement closed with the Government in order to guarantee the closing of the contract under the terms proposed by Fujitsu Siemens Computers.
In the same case, the former Minister of Education Ecaterina Andronescu, minister during 2000-2003 and 2008-2012), is accused she would have proceeded to approve the budget for the development of the “Educational Computerized System” Program and for the project aiming the Microsoft licensing. Andronescu would also have initiated and approved Government draft bills aimed at favoring Compaq and Siveco companies or their collaborators and would have been established, through a Memorandum, the companies which to participate in completing the project, by falsely stating that they are part of a consortium.
Also, during 2001 -2009, Andronescu would have requested and received from Siveco and its collaborating companies undue advantages consisting of money or computers, in exchange of guaranteeing the development of certain projects with the Ministry.
Dan Nica, former minister of Communications during 2000-2004 is charged with abuse of office if the public servant obtained an undue benefit for himself or for others. Adriana Ticau, facing the same charge, was secretary of state in the Ministry of Communications during 2003-June 2004 and former minister of Communications during July-December 2004. Alexandru Athanasiu was former minister of Education.
DNA accuses Dan Nica that, as minister of Communications, initiated and endorsed several draft decisions that Okayed the commercial contract on the Microsoft licenses clinched between Romania’s Gov’t and Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH.
The anti-corruption prosecutors argue that Fujitsu Siemens Computers was falsely declared the only distributor of these products in Romania so that the company should be favored to avoid a public sale. Thus, through his activity, Nica would have prejudiced the state with USD 47,594,843.
The same goes for Adriana Ticau, with prosecutors saying she caused a prejudice of almost USD 67 M to the state budget.
As for Athanasiu, he is charged of breaking the public procurement provisions by initiating and endorsing a Gov’t decision in October 2004 Okaying the extension of the commercial contract with Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH. He would have caused a prejudice of about USD 19 M to the state budget.