Judge Camelia Bogdan acted in bad faith when she ordered all the institutions to look for Dan Voiculescu’s fortune and then to place it under attachment, lawyers experts in the matter argue. Even representatives of the Recovery Office from the Ministry of Justice warned the magistrate that the institution was in charge of property attachment and guided her to the authorities who do that.
Those who know the case also argue that Camelia Bogdan ordered the extended confiscation instead of the simple confiscation also acting in bad faith. Eventually, the Constitutional Court demonstrated the mistake the magistrate made by a resolution that reverses the judgment and withdraws from attachment the property confiscated abusively by the magistrate.
Since the first day she took over the Telepathy case file Judge Camelia Bogdan seemed to know the outcome of this case. She wanted to succeed at all costs in seizing the fortune of Dan Voiculescu and of others appearing in this case. She sent a request to the Recovery Office from the Ministry of Justice, without providing arguments as to why she requested it.
Those familiar with the case say that judge Camelia Bogdan’s errors seem to be made in bad faith. It is unlikely that a magistrate who was a renowned expert in seizures would not know who was supposed to enforce the order, which institution.
At the beginning of 2015, after the sentence in the Telepathy case, the Constitutional Court issued a decision on the extended confiscation that demonstrates Camelia Bogdan’s mistake. The judges declared unconstitutional the measure of confiscation because the goods had been acquired before 2012, when the law came into force.