The Supreme Court of Cassation and Justice has decided to postpone the appeal in the trial in which the rector of the Polytechnic University of Bucharest, Mihnea Costa, was sentenced to 3 years of suspended imprisonment for abuse of office in “Cutezătorii”. file to analyze whether the decision of the Constitutional Court on the statute of limitations has been applied.

On May 26, the Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional an article of the Criminal Code that allowed prosecutors to interrupt the statute of limitations by providing new evidence. The CRS established that in the period 2018 – May 2022, there were no cases of interruption of the statute of limitations of criminal proceedings. Later, on October 25, the panel on solving certain legal issues of the Supreme Court of Cassation and Justice decided that the decision of the Constitutional Court on the statute of limitations is applied retroactively according to the principle of a more favorable criminal law.

The decision will affect thousands of cases pending in the courts or under investigation by prosecutors, and defendants will avoid convictions or charges as a result of the statute of limitations.

This is also the case in the case of Mihna Costa, former State Secretary of the Ministry of Education, now rector of the Polytechnic University of Bucharest, who was sentenced at first instance to 3 years of suspended imprisonment for abuse of office in a case with a loss of 10 million euros, related to the rental of a sports hall “Cutezatorii” base to former tennis player Dean Pescariu.

High Court magistrates ordered the case back on the list to consider whether the CCR and ÎCCJ judgments on statute of limitations applied.

“Considering that on November 28, 2022, in the Official Gazette No. 1141, decision No. 67 of October 25, 2022, issued by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, by the Commission for the resolution of certain legal issues in criminal cases, was published in the Official Gazette No. 1141, the Panel of 5 judges – Criminal 2 2022 considers it is necessary to reopen the case under No. 861/1/2022 and renew the review of the appeals filed by the Ministry of State – the Prosecutor’s Office at the High Court of Cassation and Justice – the National Anti-Corruption Directorate and the defendant Kosta Mihnea Kosmin against the criminal verdict No. 137 of March 31, 2022, issued by the ÎCCJ , Criminal Section, in case No. 808/1/2018 regarding the injured person-respondent Ministry of National Education. He will set a deadline of January 30, 2023,” the court’s decision reads, reports Agerpres.

The decision in the first instance is three years of probation and community service

On March 31, 2022, former Minister Mihnea Koštoi was sentenced by the Supreme Court to three years of conditional imprisonment and community service for abuse of office in the case regarding the Cutezatorii base, the decision is not final.

In addition, the Supreme Court decided to confiscate the sum of 267,577 euros (equivalent to 1,248,487.52 lei) from Kostya and upheld the measure of insurance attachment against several of his assets.

What accusations were made by Costa in the file regarding the Cutezatorii base

In March 2018, anti-corruption prosecutors sent Mihnea Kosta to court for abuse of office, in the same file a decision was made on secrecy in the case of Dean Pescariu due to lack of evidence. According to DNA, Mihnea Koshtoy, who was the state secretary in the Ministry of Education at the time of the events, was referred to the court for abuse of office, if a public official obtained an undue advantage for himself or another person.

“In the period from March to September 2009, Mihnea Kosmin Kostoi, while performing the specified position, in violation of the provisions of the legislation on state property, concluded with the “Dinu Pescariu” foundation an additional deed to the lease agreement previously concluded with the autonomous region. – State Protocol Heritage Administration (RA – APPS).

The additional act was concluded without the approval granted by the government’s decision, without the organization of public auctions in accordance with the law, as well as without the approval of the relevant structural divisions of the ministry,” DNA reported.

According to the same source, the document was concluded under the conditions in which the Ministry of National Education filed a lawsuit against the “Dina Pescariu” Foundation to terminate the contract, at that time the case was pending in court.

Prosecutors claim that the situation created by the signing of the additional act was intended to stop the process in which the Ministry of National Education demanded the termination of the lease agreement.

“Thanks to this method, the Ministry of National Education suffered a total loss of €10,796,662.8, representing the difference between the real market value of the rent of €11,741,662.8 (€111,825.36/month x 105 months in the period from July 2009 to March 2018) and the amount actually paid by the Dino Pescariu Foundation in the amount of EUR 945,000 (EUR 9,000/month x 105 months from July 2009 to March 2018)”. – DNA also reported.

DNA clarified that the classification decision was ordered in the case of Dean Pescario because there is no evidence. The same classification decision was ordered in the case of three other defendants (Mihai Paunich, Gabriel Liviu Ispas and Gabriel Leahu), as the forensic examination established that the signatures on the annex to the lease agreement did not belong to them.

Mihnea Kostoi: Ekaterina Andronescu knew everything in the Ministry of Education, I did not sign anything without her knowledge / I signed as a notary, practically

Mihnea Koštoi, the state secretary of the Ministry of Education when Ekaterina Andronescu headed the institution, told the Supreme Court during the trial that he never signed any document without his knowledge, adding that the former official “knew everything in the ministry.”

• “(…) In 2009, I was a state secretary in the Ministry of Education. I was appointed on the recommendation of Mrs. Ekaterina Andronescu.
• I insist that I was appointed at the request of Mrs. Andronescu based on the trust accumulated over 20 years of cooperation. It is important to say that I am authorized to sign for you in his absence.
• There were three ministerial orders that related to the duties you set. I have never signed any document without your knowledge. She knew everything in the ministry. I did not decide for the minister. I didn’t have anything to sign except for what you indicated,” Mihnea Kostoy said in court, reports Agerpres.

He told the judges that he had only signed an additional document to correct a material error at the request of the former minister.

• “My signature is not on the original contract. When signing this additional deed, I was given a deed with a significant error that needed to be corrected.
• I say very categorically: I did not perform the act. I signed the correction of a material error at the woman’s request. I practically signed the additional deed to the correction. In front of me was an additional act with a significant error.
• The major mistake was that it said “Dean Patricio Foundation” but it had all the Dean Pescario Foundation details to make a comparison. Signed as a notary public, mostly. I signed a document correcting the additional document signed by Ms. Andronescu. I did not interfere in the act of correcting the additional act,” Koshtoy said.

According to him, Ekaterina Andronescu allegedly told him “directly” to redo the additional document to correct Patricio’s name to Pescariu.

• “I did not conduct negotiations, did not check, did not take any actions. I never took part in any negotiations. The document signed by the minister contains these signatures and the conclusions of the heads of relevant departments.
• Before correcting the mistake, I called the minister because I didn’t know what to do. She clearly said to repeat the act in the sense of correcting the name Patricio to the name Pescariu in the base. I did so and signed up as a representative of the ministry.
• I have not had any negotiations with anyone from the Dino Pescariu Foundation or anyone else regarding this additional act. I did not bother to obtain the signatures of the heads of departments in the ministry on the document I signed. The documents remained there, in the Ministry of Education,” Koshtoy said.