August 8th marks a year since Dan Voiculescu was sentenced to jail in the ICA case file. Mugur Ciuvica, in his latest book, "Ten bad years " makes a radiography of the trial. DNA prosecutor, Emilian Eva, who wrote the indictment, is currently detained by the National Anticorruption Department for 30 days, on charges of bribery and money laundering, conducting financial transactions incompatible with the office held and false statements.
The indictment of the National Anticorruption Directorate in the ICA case file is full of abuses and stupid mistakes that would have been remarked even by a less endowed fifth grade student. Completely disinterested in the correctness of the file, DNA case prosecutor Emilian Eva argues that a law in the future was violated, he mistakes the semester with the quarter, he confuses the publications dates of some editions of the Official Gazette, he confuses people who have the same surname, he does not know the difference between a privatization ad and a list of companies to be privatized.
Prosecutor Eva demonstrates his bad faith by the fact that he decides to start the criminal prosecution only in the ICA privatization case, while for all the other privatizations made by ADS after the exact same procedure, prosecutors decide not to prosecute.
Emilian Eva argues that a law in the future has been violated. According to the indictment, DNA is accusing the Government of Romania that by adopting the Government Decision no. 451/2002 regarding the conversion into a joint stock company of ICA, they have violated Law 290/2002 on the organization and the operation of research and development of agricultural, forestry and food industry units and of the Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences "Gheorghe Ionescu-Şişeşti".
In reality, the Government Decision no. 451/2002 entered into force on May 23, 2002, while Law 290/2002 entered into force on May 29, 2002, the date on which it was published in the Official Gazette. Therefore, DNA argues that a government decision violated a law that did not exist.
DNA says that fourth quarter of 2003 comes after the second semester of 2003. Some of the DNA "judgments” appear to be made by illiterate people. For example, one of the arguments that DNA specialist, Aurelia Nicolae, who drafted the "technical-scientific report" brings forth is that the reason that the ICA privatization was illegal was the following: "The deadline for triggering the privatization procedure was the second half of 2003.
Or, privatization announcement release date is the fourth quarter of 2003. "The DNA specialist, if he graduated primary school, should know that the fourth quarter is part of the semester II, that one year cannot have more than two semesters, so the privatization announcement was published according to law.
DNA’s prosecution is based on a nonexistent edition of the Official Gazette. DNA asked from the Autonomous Official Gazette a notice of privatization which would have been published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part IV no. 344 of 23 May 2002.
The response of the Gazette stated 6 June 2007 reads , "in our database, the Official Gazette Part IV no. 344 is dated 22 February 2003 and its content does not have any public tender advertisement for the sale of the stake held by ADS at ICA ".