In recent weeks in Romania, apart from the disappearance of MH370 and the problems in the Ukraine and Crimea, the media has been full of the “Football” cases. A number of well known officials and personalities, among which Romanian football player icon Gica Popescu and club owner Giovanni Becali, were sent to jail and had confiscation orders made against them. These cases showed the split personality of Romania and its politics.
The people sent to jail were identified in some cases as some of the richest people in Romania and had businesses stretching from hotels and real estate developments to academies and leisure industries. After their conviction, for which there is no appeal, it was found that their assets had passed into the hands of their families, infant children and friends to be administered. This was seen as a way of avoiding the fines and penalties imposed by the courts.
Although Romania does have in place legislation which is supposed to combat this type of manoeuvre the recent decision of the EU to pass the Directive on the Confiscation of Assets of persons convicted of offenses and also allowing the confiscation from third parties of assets will go some way to preventing this obvious abuse by people who feel they are above the law of the land.
No longer will it be possible for those persons who have committed crimes to escape with the proceeds of those crimes with impunity. The fines and confiscation orders which can be given under the Directive will go some way to redressing the balance between those who have been guilty of crimes and those who should be indemnified.
The directive contains the relevant safeguards for third parties who acquire assets in good faith at a “real” price. It also allows the courts to administer assets so their value is not lost.
This directive has to be implemented into local legislation within thirty months of its passing (5th March 2014). Will Romania implement it? There is no reason why not. The recent spate of corruption cases in Romania against well-known figures other than those referred to above and the sizable confiscation orders presupposes that the courts believe that the guilty party not only carried out the crimes but also benefited.
It will be for the National legislator to decide how the directive is to be implemented but it will be another brick in the wall against organized and systematic stealing from the state by individuals who have no regard for the rule of law and society at large.
Even the clamor by certain sections of the public who for a variety of reasons have wanted some of the “football case” defendants such as Gica Popescu pardoned are beginning to look out of place. The common feeling in Romania is that if you have committed a crime you should be punished.
Why should a pardon should be handed down because someone is well-known? This is a sad reflection of some elements of Romanian society and shows in what contempt they hold the majority of people in Romania. The President has so far resisted all such pressure and long may it continue.