The GABT confirms that the police officer who accused of pressure was called for an explanation after university employees reported that he had an argument with him, who presented him with an official ID card, but the conversation “was aimed at clarifying the situation “.

DGA headquarters in Bucharest Photo: AGERPRES

According to the DGA, no disciplinary action has been taken against the officer and that he is not under any disciplinary inquiry

A deputy inspector of the Anti-Corruption Directorate General (DGA), Ault County Anti-Corruption Service, said on Facebook that DGA bosses threatened him after he got into an argument during a licensing exam with judge Alin Sorin Nicolescu, one of those who acquitted dissident Ursu’s tormentors .

The policeman accuses the chief quaestor Liviu Vasilescu, the chairman of the DGA, and his deputy, the chief quaestor Manuela Popescu, that they made him go and apologize to the magistrate of the High Court, and they accused him of being a laughing stock, and if it is not so, make him leave the police

What the DGA says:

  • Regarding the questions presented in the public space by the DGA officer in the context of taking the bachelor’s exam at the faculty of the “Nicolae Titulescu” University in Bucharest, we make the following clarifications:
  • Employees of the university informed the management of the institution that during the examination, the student with whom he had a dispute, resigned from the position of GUBAP employee, presenting an official certificate.
  • Taking into account these aspects, the management of the institution turned to the relevant officer for clarification on the situation described, after which he held a conversation with him.
  • In the context of the said discussion, the officer confirmed the fact that he had a contentious exchange of words with the academician and, at the same time, confirmed the fact that he informed him of his quality as a DGA officer.
  • The discussion that took place at the beginning of July this year with the relevant officer was aimed at clarifying the situation presented to the DGA leadership as inconsistent with the profile and attitude of a police officer of the General Anti-Corruption Directorate.
  • We note the fact that the DGA officer has worked for about 1 year in the Anti-corruption Service of Ault County, having recently completed his work as an anti-corruption officer.
  • At the same time, we clarify the fact that no disciplinary penalty was imposed on the officer and no disciplinary investigation is being conducted against him.

READ ALSO:

“A bullet went through your ear…” An employee of the anti-corruption police claims that DGA leaders threatened and humiliated him under the influence of one of the judges who acquitted Gheorghe Ursa’s executioners