In a blog post, Dan Voiculescu dismantles all the allegations that have been made without any evidence to support them.
According to the journalists quoting from the DNA prosecutors indictment, Dan Voiculescu is accused that through the donations to his daughters, he has laundered the shares obtained from the fraudulent privatization of the Institute of Food Research (ICA).
Dan Voiculescu says that "for the offense to exist, they argue that at the time of donation I allegedly knew that the shares had come from a fraudulent privatization. But, when I donated the equity interests of SC ICA SA, the Prosecutor's Office attached to ICCJ had issued a resolution not to prosecute on June 10, 2005 as a result of the investigation which concluded that "no crimes were committed" in the privatization of ICA. Consequently, in June 2006 I had confirmation that ICA shares had been acquired legally. "
Voiculescu is accused that he has donated the ICA shares knowing that they come from illegal undertakings. The above mentioned proves that at the time of donation, June 6, 2006, on the contrary, he knew, that these shares were obtained observing the law, and the proof to support that is the resolution not to prosecute in the case of the ICA privatization case file dated 10 June 2005.
The daily writes that DNA and the judge showed that the ICA privatization was conducted fraudulently, the shares value amounting to over seven million euros while Voiculescu only paid 104,000 euros.
"The statement is not correct because the case file contains an expert’s valuation ordered by the ICCJ carried out by an authorized and independent judiciary evaluator found that the privatization method of ICA was correct and also that the price was established in accordance with law and the procedures in force in 2003. Besides, if it is considered that the method of privatization was not right, then they should order another valuation over the market assessment methodology which applied at that time, for many companies, " Dan Voiculescu said.
According to the indictment, the Institute’s takeover was carried out in four stages, by taking over the existent buildings and the construction of new buildings by the new company, by undervaluing the real estate property at a price 75 times lower, the acquisition of the land from under the new buildings and an arranged tender.
"The land and buildings were not taken over, but only a right to use them was constituted over then, which was done with all the necessary legal approvals from the public institutions involved. (...) The ICA buildings were old buildings, built in the 1930s, which was also demonstrated by the DNA expertise and the explanatory note of the decision by the Government to transform the ICA into a company. The DNA report shows that the buildings had a degree of wear in 2003 of 90%. (...) The stake was sold by public tender that any interested investor could have participated at, the privatization announcement of ICA having been made in compliance with all rules of advertising, " Dan Voiculescu writes.
Regarding the so-called influence the prosecutors talked about DNA, it was not reviewed by the Bucharest Court, the judicial reasoning of judge Constantin Gratiela did not refer to any such crimes when she passed her sentence , although Dan Voiculescu requested and his request to be tried was approved.