The High Stakes in the Bivolaru Case at the Court of Justice in Paris – part 2
It is important to understand that amongst all the dignitaries with decision-making power in Romania, Adrian Nastase had a determining role in this unjust hunt for Gregorian Bivolaru. Nastase was Prime Minister during the violent raid of the prosecutors and special forces on March 18th and April 1st 2004, which means that, considering the magnitude of the events, he is directly responsible for what happened.
Adrian Nastase stated: “Guilty or not guilty, Bivolaru must end up behind bars.” He had a direct intervention when they planned the arrest of Gregorian Bivolaru during a meeting of the permanent delegation of PSD (t.n.-social-democrat party) on March 27th 2004. The stenographic records of that meeting were revealed later on:
“Ioan Rus:… And the other Bivolaru (Gregorian n.n) is heading towards a condemnation…
Adrian Nastase: I understand that sex is instead of bread. Some play games, like Basescu does, other give sex to the people, while others give…
Mr…: The police are trying to get him out now.”
This discussion referred to Gregorian Bivolaru and border officer, Zsolt Farkas, and it was put into action the next day! Consequently, on March 28th 2004, the two were held in custody by the (attention!) police, accused of trying to leave the country illegally by passing the border through a forbidden area. Hence, the meaning of the statement “get him out now” is revealed, and the police not only tried, but succeeded: the eyewitness declarations in the case file state that Gregorian Bivolaru and Zsolt Farkas were forcibly taken out and dragged onto the incoming side of the road (!?), where they were photographed as ‘evidence’ of their supposed illegal attempt to cross the border.
On another occasion, in 2009, in a television interview made by famous Romanian journalist, Ion Cristoiu, ex-Prime Minister Adrian Nastase publicly admitted his involvement in this abusive action of the Romanian authorities against Gregorian Bivolaru and MISA, and expressed his regret about what happened:
“Ion Cristoiu: I remind you that you lost the elections because, among other things, the same police – which are actually run by your Minister of Internal Affairs – and the same prosecutors, ordered a brutal house search, with masked police officers, of MISA’s headquarters, and it was broadcast on television. I remind you… in case I am wrong, yes?…
Adrian Nastase: No. It is correct.
Ion Cristoiu: And then you were credited for it. […]
Adrian Nastase: Mr. Cristoiu, I agree with what you say […] And regarding MISA and the masked police, you are perfectly right. […] And I believe it was a completely stupid matter, the way it was constructed. […] It was indeed something that did not have to.. it should not have happened… […] ”
I make a parenthesis here to show that eventually God’s immanent justice prevailed in the case of Adrian Nastase and it was proven that he was a corrupt politician because he was sentenced twice by the Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice for corruption, to two years in prison in the file “Quality Trophy” and four years in prison in the file “Zambaccian”.
Given the conditions of this fierce hunt for him, in 2005 Gregorian Bivolaru filed for political asylum in Sweden and was arrested on the request of the Romanian authorities for him to be extradited.
The Supreme Swedish Court had the lucidity to analyse the case carefully and to even invite Madalina Dumitru, the so-called victim of Gregorian Bivolaru, for questioning. Together with her, other witnesses were heard, including experts on sects and spiritual movements. Therefore, the Swedish authorities did the job the Romanian authorities did not do (and you can imagine why it was so). After carefully listening to the testimony of the alleged victim, the Swedish judges freed Gregorian Bivolaru a few days later and granted him political asylum, concluding that in his own country he would not have a fair trial and would be at risk of severe persecution by the Romanian authorities. Can it be that the five Swedish judges from the Supreme Court were much more naïve than their fellows from the shores of the Dambovita river? No, this is impossible. Considering that in Romania the testimony of the presumed victim was done by force and her later declarations were ignored… it is obvious who did the job professionally and who served other interests that are not in line with the act of justice.
It is worth noting that in the presence of a lawyer, the so-called victim, Madalina Dumitru, filed a complaint at the Prosecutor’s Office the very next morning after the day she was heard and was forced to sign a false declaration against Gregorian Bivolaru. The complaint was against all the abuse the investigators had committed against her on the date of the abusive search. She also withdrew the declarations she made under coercion. Complaint no.455/19.03.2004 was registered by the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court of Appeal in Bucharest, but the investigators never included it in the criminal investigation file or in the court file. However, without being heard or without further research, the General Prosecutor from the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Court of Appeal in Bucharest personally rejected her complaint as invalid and in the court file he only included the rejection resolution, without enclosing the complaint made by the so-called victim! Starting from that day and until the verdict was announced in 2013, the so-called victim made dozens of complaints/memoirs/reclamations, denying the declaration she was forced to make under threat and she constantly complained about the extremely abusive and violent treatment she received from the Romanian authorities and the illegal actions she was subjected to. She filed her memoirs to all competent authorities: the police, Prosecutor’s Office, the Romanian General Prosecutor, the Superior Council of Magistracy, the Minister of Justice, the Romanian President, and so on. Nevertheless, most of them went unanswered and a few of them were rejected without any legal reason and without any authority hearing the petitioner at least once!
Even after Gregorian Bivolaru was granted political asylum in 2005, Romania still asked Sweden to extradite him twice. However, each time Sweden firmly, clearly and unequivocally refused any discussion about this case, even in the conditions in which the Swedish are very sensitive and suspicious when it comes to accusation of sexual abuse of minors or children. Why would Sweden defend Gregorian Bivolaru so firmly, if the reality was different? Once more, it is obvious that Sweden took a fair, intransigent position, beyond any political interest, defending human values and stopping a severe injustice from taking place!
And yet, despite Sweden’s clear refusal, and despite the granting of political asylum, Romania continued the trial against Gregorian Bivolaru. First, he was acquitted by the court of first instance and then by the court of appeal, which proved and confirmed his innocence twice. However, the Romanian prosecutors requested it be taken to the High Court of Cassation and Justice.
Being greatly dissatisfied with solving this case in the spirit of justice, the Romanian prosecutors made a legal recourse to the High Court of Cassation and Justice. Apparently, through some behind-the-scenes manoeuvres, they secretly ordered Judge Ionut Matei to cancel the two acquittals of the two lower courts and to rejudge the file “from scratch”. This aspect is against many of the decisions of the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights). It is illegal to convict a person for the first time at the appellate level without hearing the person, and after he was acquitted both at the first and second instance levels.
Judge Ionut Matei, who was the president of the commission who unjustly convicted Gregorian Bivolaru, was the main pawn of the mafia “octopus” that worked for the conditioned release of the infamous Nutu Camataru, long before his term ended. Ionut Matei made a real judicial hoax: after being introduced through a deceitful arrangement, (as the brothers Camataru were talking about it in a legally intercepted phone conversation – in the sense that he was put in that judicial panel through a behind-the-scenes intervention), the “honorable” Ionut Matei reduced the sentence of this notoriousman to exactly the amount of time he had already spent under arrest. However, clearly this dirty “stunt” of Ionut Matei did not go unnoticed as IONUT MATEI, TOGETHER WITH OTHER MAGISTRATES, WERE INVESTIGATED BY DNA (NAD – National Anticorruption Directorate) PROSECUTORS FOR TWO SEVERE CRIMES: BRIBERY AND FAVORING THE CAMATARU CLAN! Apparently, because of possible blackmail – in order to not end this criminal file against him – Judge Ionut Matei was willing to carry out the order of sentencing Gregorian Bivolaru himself, despite his innocence.
It is important to note that right before the final court session, the president of the judge committee, Ionut Matei, held a press conference to which he invited all relevant media in order to give them a “threat letter” he claimed he had received. Even the president of the Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice attended this press conference.
It is important to specify that the members of a judge committee are not allowed to organize or participate in press conferences – a press release is ensured by the president of the court and its spokesman. However, it is forbidden for a judge to make comments regarding the case he is involved in. And yet, the purpose of this conference was actually so the judge could say he was threatened but he will not be intimidated, and this will not make him reduce the harshness of the sentence and he will file a complaint against perpetrators.
It is also relevant that, although the lawyers for criminal file nr 405/85/2005, in which the plaintiff was going to be judged, were present in the court room, they were evacuated and the press conference took place behind closed doors, with only the presence of the journalist approved by Judge Ionut Matei.
After all these events, instead of postponing the file and refraining from judging it, proposing another judge instead, who did not have any emotional involvement that would affect his impartiality, Mr Ionut Matei judged the case immediately after the press conference.
Less than 2 hours after the court session ended, at around 10pm in the evening, the judge committee pronounced the profoundly unjust six-year prison sentence.
The entire “set up”: writing and sending the “threat letters” right before the first court of instance, informing all journalists and implicitly the civil society about the so-called threat letters, excluding the plaintiff’s legal representatives and the MISA association from the press conference, the broadcasting on all TV stations and publishing in all newspapers of the “hot” information, the sending of the same information by the Romanian government to the ECHR files of Gregorian Bivolaru, the defamation of the plaintiff and the members of the organization, “blaming” them, given that there was no proof of any connection between the alleged threat letter and the judged ones, all unequivocally outlines the lack of impartiality in the attitude of the courts of instance and the Romanian authorities in the judging of the criminal case in which Gregorian Bivolaru was convicted.
The overall behaviour of magistrate Ionut Matei was profoundly un-deontological and incompatible with the imperative request of impartiality and neutrality that is required from a magistrate, representing a clear prejudgement of the conviction sentence.
Continue reading here….
The abuses and illegalities perpetrated by the judges in Gregorian Bivolaru's case were reported to the Superior Council of the Magistracy (CSM). During the trial, several disciplinary complaints were filed at the Judiciary Inspection against the members of the judge...