Prosecutors Mihail Moraru-Jorga and Remus-Julian Popa, who were proposed by the Minister of Justice Alina Gorgiou to head some of the most important units of the DNA and the General Prosecutor’s Office, will conduct new interviews for these positions on Wednesday after receiving negative conclusions from the Section for Prosecutors of the High Council of Magistrates (VSM).

The Minister of Justice, Alina Gorghiu, made eight proposals, but two prosecutors – Mihaila Moraru Iorga and Remus Julian Popa – received negative conclusions from the Section for Prosecutors of the High Council of Magistrates. The CSM’s opinion is advisory, and the Minister of Justice may withdraw his proposals or arrange for new interviews with these candidates and send the nomination proposal to the President.

Prosecutor Remus Julian Popa was proposed by the Minister of Justice for the post of head of the Criminal Investigations and Forensics Department of the General Prosecutor’s Office, and Michael Moraru-Jorga for the post of chief prosecutor of the DNA anti-corruption department.

Who is the prosecutor Remus-Julian Popa

Remus-Julian Popa is delegated from October 2023 to the position of chief prosecutor of the Department of Criminal Investigations of the General Prosecutor’s Office.

Prosecutor Popa worked at DIIKOT, where he headed the judicial service in 2016-2022. Then he moved to the judicial inspection, where he headed the Office of Prosecutors’ Inspection.

In an interview with Remus Julian, Popa was asked how many charges he laid and how many searches he was involved in and the answer was evasive, he said that the management skills and leadership qualities he has are relevant.

The prosecutor admitted that he never initiated cases of tax evasion, but only attended court hearings as a prosecutor, PressHub wrote.

He also reported that from the inspections he conducted as an inspector of the Judicial Inspection, last year he found 109,000 cases with an unknown author older than 5 years and 23,000 cases with a known author older than 5 years, which are inactive. General Prosecutor’s Office.

Remus Popa also stated that if he is appointed chief prosecutor, he will categorically apply the decision of the CRS on the limitation period and will not take into account the decision of the EU Court, which, from his point of view, only refers to files affecting the EU budget.

Who is the prosecutor Mikhail Moraru Iorga

On December 5, the Section for Prosecutors of the Supreme Council of Magistrates (CSM) negatively approved the proposal of the Minister of Justice, Alina Gorgiu, to appoint prosecutor Mihail Morara-Yorga to the post of chief prosecutor of the Anti-Corruption Department. DNA. The negative opinion of Moraru-Yorga was given by the CSM section for prosecutors by a majority – 1 vote “for”, 5 votes “against”.

The interview conducted by Mihaela Moraru-Yorga for the position of prosecutor-head of the DNA anti-corruption department:

What is the reason for the CSM’s negative conclusion for prosecutor Michaela Moraru-Yorga

Prosecutor Mihaila Moraru-Yorga’s management plan lacks measures to eliminate some problems in important areas of activity of the DNA anti-corruption department, and her analysis “lacks clarity and precision” and is “confusing.” strengths with opportunities and weaknesses with vulnerabilities, without making any distinction between them,” CSM prosecutors say in the motivation for the decision to negatively approve the proposal of Justice Minister Alina Gorgiou for the appointment. of the chief prosecutor of the anti-corruption department from the DNA of prosecutor Mihaila Moraru-Yorga.

The Department for Prosecutors of the Supreme Council of Magistracy (CSM) says in the motivation of the decision on the negative approval of the proposal of the Minister of Justice that the project of the management of the prosecutor Moraru-Jorg, structured in 4 sections, was developed in general conditions, without a specific presentation of the structure and activities of the DNA anti-corruption department, on the post of manager for which he is running.

According to the CSM prosecutors, the decisions proposed by Mihaela Moraru-Yorga will not be based on specific data regarding the available human resources in the Anti-Corruption Unit and the volume of activities recorded by the prosecutors of this unit, data that she did not provide. he could also appear in an interview answering questions.

The management plan “lacks clarity and precision” and lacks concrete solutions

• “Therefore, the prosecutor does not have a clear vision of the proposed management strategy, it was drawn up without taking into account the specifics of the Anti-corruption Department, therefore the management plan is of a superficial nature.
• Ms. Moraru-Lorga Michaela noted in the draft that the general goals of the chief prosecutor of the section should coincide with the goals of the state ministry and be of a nature to ensure the achievement of the results pursued by the management plan of the head of the prosecutor of the National Office for the Prevention of Corruption, however, without having a vision for interdepartmental and international NABU’s cooperation with European and international partners, one of the important points of the Chief Prosecutor’s management plan is a specialized structure.
• In addition, although she mentioned the need to achieve the goals set out in the strategic documents, an aspect that is also contained in the management plan of the chief prosecutor of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate, the prosecutor did not specify what those goals are, the presentation is particularly brief. Since the management plan drawn up by Mrs. Moraru-Lorga Michaela is not compatible with the management plan drawn up by Mr. Voineag Marius (head of the DNA – no), it is impossible to establish the connection and communication ability of Ms. Prosecutor”, – the message of the Prosecutor’s Office of the CSM reads.

CSM prosecutors also say that prosecutor Moraru-Jorg’s management plan lacks measures to address some of the deficiencies in important areas of DNA’s Anti-Corruption Unit and that her analysis “lacks clarity.” and precision” , it “conflates strengths with opportunities and weaknesses with vulnerabilities without distinguishing between them.”

In addition, the prosecutor did not indicate specific ways to solve the problems she identified, limiting herself to the renewal of theoretical aspects regarding the solution of shortcomings in general, reports the Section for Prosecutors of the Ukrainian SCM.

• You can read the full argumentation of the decision of the Section for Prosecutors of the Supreme Court here

h3: “Did not draw up a single indictment and did not complete the cases for which criminal prosecution was initiated against magistrates since 2019”

Other arguments of the prosecutor’s section:

• “Regarding the activities of Ms. Moraru-Lorga Michaela within the Criminal Justice Investigation Section, the Section notes that the prosecutor has not drawn up any indictment and has not completed the files in which criminal prosecutions have been initiated against the magistrate personally since 2019.
• In addition, despite the available experience in the field of investigation of crimes committed by judges, the prosecutor did not identify the main problem of this specialized structure, that is, the lack of specific results in the number of indictments drawn up, considering that the lack of an appointed chief prosecutor represented the most important shortcoming of the structure.
• During the interview, Prosecutor Ms. Moraru-Yorga Michaela reflected on the controversy that exists in the public space about the usefulness or futility of the Criminal Investigation Department in the field of justice, which has led to the timidity of prosecutors in it, as well as to excessive caution in handling files.
• In the context of the prosecutor justifying the ineffectiveness of the specialized structure by public pressure, the department believes that she does not have the stress resistance necessary to lead one of the most important departments in the specialized structure.
• The dimension of the ability to analyze and synthesize, respectively foresight and strategy, is also outlined by the inconclusive and ambiguous response given by the prosecutor to the question of the decision required regarding the competence to investigate crimes committed by magistrates. Thus, although the prosecutor carried out her activities in this area both as part of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate, during the period when the competence to investigate crimes committed by judges belonged to this structure, and within the framework of the department for the investigation of crimes in the sphere of justice and the Prosecutor’s Office from the Higher the Court of Cassation and Justice, could not provide an appropriate presentation on this issue, the answer was indecisive and ambiguous, which also indicates a lack of responsibility. Thus, the aspects presented by the prosecutor do not indicate the ability to use the experience gained in structures specializing in the investigation of crimes committed by magistrates.”
• The general conclusion of the section for prosecutors after the question and answer session was that Ms. Moraru-Lorga Michaela, the prosecutor, does not have a general vision of the work of the anti-corruption unit, that she does not know the realities that exist at her level, as well as the fact that it lacks an integrative management vision, being unable to provide concrete, realistic and punctual solutions.
• The section for prosecutors notes that both the way of answers to the questions posed by the members of the section for prosecutors, often hints, ambiguity and indecision, and the way of presenting the decisions proposed by the prosecutor in the management plan, for the most part, of a general nature, means a lack of vision regarding the implementation concrete, viable, realistic, clear and adequate measures to prevent and eliminate identified deficiencies.”

​h2: Appointment of Iohannis to the position of head of several departments of the DNA, the General Prosecutor’s Office and DIICOT on the proposal of Alina Gorgiou

On January 4, President Klaus Iohannis signed decrees appointing the other six prosecutors proposed by Gorgiou to lead the DNA, General Prosecutor’s Office and DIICOT departments:

• Yonuts Ardelianu as the chief prosecutor of the Department for Combating Crimes Related to Corruption Crimes of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate for a period of 3 years.

Ionuts Ardelianu worked at DIICOT. In May 2023, he was delegated for 6 months to the position of chief prosecutor of the Economic and Financial Crime Service of the DIICOT Directorate for Combating Organized Crime. Ardelyan does not have a public resume, but in an interview for the position, he said that he began his career at the Prosecutor’s Office of the Galati Court, and also worked at the Prosecutor’s Office of District Court 2, then at the Prosecutor’s Office of the Bucharest Court.

The interview that Ionuts Ardelyanu gave for this position:

• Marinela Minke as the chief prosecutor of the criminal justice department of the National Anti-corruption Administration for a period of 3 years. She heads this department, delegated, since August.

Marinela Minke’s interview for this position:

• Adrian-Petre Todoran as the chief prosecutor of the Department for Combating Organized Crime of the Office for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism for a period of 3 years.

• Adrian-Cornel Nicolaou as the Chief Prosecutor of the Department of the Military Prosecutor’s Office as part of the Prosecutor’s Office at the High Court of Cassation and Justice for a period of 3 years. General Adrian Nikolaou is currently the interim head of the Military Prosecutor’s Office.

• Antonia-Eleonora Konstantin as the chief prosecutor of the judicial department of the prosecutor’s office at the High Court of Cassation and Justice for a period of 3 years.

• Kristina-Daniela Balkan as the chief prosecutor of the personnel and documentation department of the prosecutor’s office at the High Court of Cassation and Justice for a period of 3 years.

READ ALSO:

• Negative conclusion of the CSM regarding Mihaila Moraru Yorga, whom Gorgiu proposed to head the DNA section / The prosecutor sued Laura Kodruza Kovesi
• “Visionlessness”, a vague management plan. What motivates the CSM’s negative conclusion for the prosecutor Mihaila Moraru-Yorga, who was offered by Gorghiu to head the DNA section