Romania's anti-corruption frenzy

[Deleted]

Romania in top-level graft crackdown as paper tiger bares teeth

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7ef59d62-3...#axzz3h6dYxeoX

Romania — once considered one of the EU’s most corrupt countries — has become an anti-graft test bed. High-profile convictions have transformed public perceptions of its anti-corruption directorate, the DNA: once seen as a paper tiger established as a condition for EU membership, it is now hailed as a fearsome adversary of even the country’s most powerful politicians.

Victor Ponta, the centre-left prime minister, was indicted this month on a series of charges including forgery, tax evasion, money laundering and conflict of interest while he was working as a lawyer in 2007 and 2008. Mr Ponta’s assets have been frozen and several of his allies, including business associate Dan Sova and former finance minister Darius Valcov, also face graft charges. All three deny any wrongdoing.
Mr Ponta is the first sitting prime minister in Romania to be indicted. But the case that first demonstrated the DNA’s muscle was that of Adrian Nastase, former prime minister, who was convicted in 2012 of illegal fundraising and in 2014 for accepting a bribe.

Under Laura Kovesi, the 42-year old prosecutor and former national team basketball star who has led the DNA since 2013, the agency’s conviction tally is mounting rapidly, with more than 1,000 secured last year.
Its performance has begun to draw attention from countries similarly afflicted by corruption, such as Greece, Bulgaria and Croatia, where there is growing interest in how Romania’s anti-graft prosecutors have become so powerful.
Since it was set up in 2002, DNA has received strong international backing; from the European Commission, which made progress in fighting corruption a condition of EU membership, and also from the United States. Monica Macovei, a justice minister, relaunched the agency under new leadership in 2005.
But the turning point was a change to the criminal code in 2009-2010, which gave prosecutors sweeping powers of investigation and arrest. When the DNA went after Mr Nastase in 2012, it demonstrated it could use these new tools effectively — and, critically, pursue senior figures without fear of retribution.

The agency’s zeal has also drawn criticism, with opponents warning 90 per cent conviction rates belong in Pyongyang not Bucharest. “In Romania the 10 per cent acquittal rate in DNA cases is often criticized. In other countries the failure rates [are] much higher — around 25 per cent,” says Ms Stefan.
The crackdown has also had unintended consequences; fear of prosecution has paralyzed public administration, says one businessman, who warns anxious mid-level officials have stopped awarding public contracts to avoid scrutiny.
High quality global journalism requires investment.

However, Ms Kovesi’s operation enjoys a 65 per cent approval rating among an electorate long accustomed to seeing politicians enrich themselves despite modest salaries. When Mr Valcov’s home was raided earlier this year, prosecutors said they found gold bars and a Renoir painting in his safe.
Many see the crackdown as the long-overdue purge of a political class that maintained a Communist-era network of patronage and clientelism for nearly two decades after the execution of former dictator Nicolae Ceausescu.
“If you don’t clean your house for 20 years and then run your fingers over any surface,” says Mircea Popa, a young tech entrepreneur, “ you are going to pick up a lot of dust”.

So any thoughts on this?
Most Europeans think that anti-corruption movements are a good thing in Eastern Europe, considering Greece's situation, but is it too much?
If yes, then what course of action do you think countries in the region should take instead?

[Deleted]

I'm more interested in how this anti-corruption movement has picked up steam and why is it having success there and not in other countries like Greece.
What factors contributed to its success? It would be great if the conditions could be replicated in other countries.

[Deleted]

Most Europeans think that anti-corruption movements are a good thing in Eastern Europe, considering Greece's situation, but is it too much?

You sound like Shalcker when you say that. Please don't sound like Shalcker.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm more interested in how this anti-corruption movement has picked up steam and why is it having success there and not in other countries like Greece.
What factors contributed to its success? It would be great if the conditions could be replicated in other countries.

It was long overdue. The DNA hasn't picked up steam until now, because those things take time. You can't start an organisation from day 1 and expect it to pick up steam directly. That's my 2 leu.

[Deleted]

You sound like Shalcker when you say that. Please don't sound like Shalcker.

Don't worry, unlike Shalcker, I don't believe the region would be better of under Russia's sphere of influence. On the contrary, things have never been better since the Soviet Union collapsed.
There is next to no support for an eurasian union dominated by Russia in the region, Poland, the Baltic States and Romania being the most ardent anti-russian countries you'l find on this planet, maybe with the exception of the US.

[Kalis]

Even if corruption is still rife, the perception of Romanian corruption being dealt with is good for the country when it is seeking outside investment. The high conviction rate could be due to people being so complacent with bribery that they don't put in much effort to cover their tracks.

I don't see anything wrong with this.

[Ripster42]

So any thoughts on this?
Most Europeans think that anti-corruption movements are a good thing in Eastern Europe, considering Greece's situation, but is it too much?
If yes, then what course of action do you think countries in the region should take instead?

I don't understand. You can get rid of too much corruption? While a 90% conviction rate seems high, the attorney's office can't make the guys they're charging innocent.

[Deleted]

Even if corruption is still rife, the perception of Romanian corruption being dealt with is good for the country when it is seeking outside investment.

I think most people would laugh if you say Romania could turn as fair and healthy as Scandinavia one day. But you never know.. ridding Romania of its corruption doesn't seem like an impossibility. And that also sets a good example for Ukraine. Go Romania!