Ion Cristoiu: one of the themes of your records constituted the involvement of the parallel system especially in the liquidation of media. In the second tape (29.12.2016) you make a reference. I quote: "I have heard about the case of Dan Voiculescu from former President Basescu. He clearly told me he that he has records of how it was planned and organized the arrest of Dan Voiculescu". Are there other records than the famous one? So you confirm with subject and predicate that he has the records? Others than that?
Sebastian Ghiță: Yes. This is what the former President Traian Basescu told me. He told the same to Elena Udrea and Dan Andronic, and said it more than once, in front of everybody, in turn and together. And his explanation is that no matter how hard we fight between us, out of respect for Romania, for the Presidential institution, in relation to the other institutions from Romania, makes him, as former President, to endure the problems with his family, with the arrests, with the one who denounced his daughter's ex-husband, with all sorts of things in some areas forced, and not to use those records. What could he possibly use them for? Retire Coldea? He is retired. To present Kovesi's countless visits in his Office? He said it hundreds of times, and we all know that it happened.
- I'm sure that you know some stuff and I want to ask you, do you know? It was an operation ordered to all institutions of force or was it an initiative of an institution of force, the case of Voiculescu?
- I cannot tell you today with certainty that Florian Coldea and Codruța Kovesiserve other interests than Romanian ones. But I suggested it many times and I've often asked myself. Today I don't know if Traian Basescu ordered the execution of Voiculescu and Antena 3 or others from embassies, who you've seen how disturbed are by the independent press from Romania. And, therefore, Traian Basescu says: "I just haven't opposed, because Kovesi and Coldea came and told me it's over, we're eating him alive, we change the judges". And he even asked, "Mr. Ghita what was I supposed to do? To say No, stop, it's not OK, you are ruining the press". There was also a personal matter against the Trust. He told me that he thought that maybe such media power can be toxic in society, it also bothered those from embassies, and then Traian Basescu says that went with the tide and that has not objected, even if he should have passed over any personal matter. As President of Romania you can't let prosecutors take journalists from offices, to shut their mouth, leave them without money, to arrest them; that's when you're no longer President and that's no country.
- In a percentage from 1 to 100, in the case of Dan Voiculescu, how much, in per cent, of the investigation was illegal?
- As procedure, I am afraid that very much. I don't know if 70 or 90%. But even 1% if they changed a judge, if they forced a witness or if they tampered with evidence, if they have swollen a prejudice to a degree, so Voiculescu can't pay… They've put 60 million as damage so Voiculescu cannot escape from prison 10 years.
- That's why the prejudice is set so high?
- Yes. Because the law is forced and says "pay first the prejudice and then you get out of jail". And then these people have no mind, they no longer make sense and have no more measure. The DNA specialist comes and says that the land was worth 60 million. I heard a recording from DNA Ploiesti in which Prosecutor Onea said, "Eh, I put about 10% of the whole amount". Didn't they set unlimited foreclosure for me? I'm the only man in the world with unlimited foreclosure. And then haven't they set a 20 million bail? With this amount I think that I'm in the top 3 in the world.
“It’s a lie. She’s lying to us all.”
- You just made an extraordinary disclosure. We've always wondered-if you have noticed, not long ago, Ms. Kovesi did a press conference and has boasted that she has to recover one billion.
- It’s a lie. She’s lying to us all.
- It would have been better if we would have registered Mrs. Kovesi to the communists, as she is breaking the record at…
- I ask you once again. I at least, was surprised, it was a prejudice done also people who…
- They over-value these damages to keep people in prison. They asked me for an amount, even if I sold the entire Ploiesti, I couldn’t raise the money, not how much money DNA has calculated… It's one of the reasons. The other is to brag at balances. You've heard Portocala say "Hey, we'll take his money, burn him as a rat, we'll investigate his family, and we’ll block the accounts". And then they multiply by however. If they find a false invoice or bribes or anything, they no longer say "Ion gave Vasile 10.000 euros". They say "by the 1 million bills, so we foreclose 1 million, since that's money laundering". Then comes Codruța and says "I have seized one billion". The hell she did. She's lying. She is laying the way she breathes. It's time to use serious words. What they did with me, by forging evidence, it's a crime. All they could do more was to shoot me. It's a crime to forge evidence to a man, in order to outwit the judge and arrest that man. It's a crime. Consider how the Serbian Ministry of Justice, prosecutors and judges looked when I showed them evidence that in my country were falsified evidence. Think how they remembered the fury of Aida Popa, which they've seen display and shake. It was a video conference. I have participated in the proceedings, and she was in one of my files. And pleaded very hard in front of the Serbs to keep arrested based on this false evidence. And she explained to the Serbians how we should create a safety and security space in Europe; she thanked the Serbs for chasing me on here. And now the Serbian judge has called me, he looked over this evidence; he made his cross and asked me "that agitated lady – what does she say now when she sees that she asked for your arrest based on fake evidence?”
- But was she yelling at them?
- She was a little bit aggressive. Serbs have not understood this style. I still don't understand today, and that's why I think the judges need more balance and patience and care, realizing that many times they are served false evidence. And they incidentally also said it. Mrs. Tarcea said it.
"Sarbu was the last one of us not terrorized by the media"
The war with the media trusts is detailed in the next part of the discussion between Sebastian Ghiță and Ion Cristoiu. From the conviction of Dan Voiculescu is reached to the execution of Adrian Sârbu. In the games for power and influence pops up a new structure, The Anti-fraud from ANAF. Its media coverage would draw the envy of DNA Chief Prosecutor.
Ion Cristoiu: we get to the disclosures about Dan Voiculescu. There were many suspicions.
Sebastian Ghiță: They have burned him like a rat, how Portocala says.
- I give you a quotation from your records about Adrian Sârbu, which surprised me. I quote: "the same, I have the data and information about how this repressive system had executed Adrian Sârbu. All the files with media patrons were loaded/re-arranged". In a recording from January 3rd you return and say that you know about the manner in which it was arranged the Sarbu dossier on the secret address of Florian Coldea. I really am left puzzled: what did they have with Sarbu? I understand with Voiculescu, he criticized Basescu. But with Sarbu? What can you say about this operation?
- You know that at some point the blood thirst of this machinery has gotten so large that it made us all files. It looked to the left,to the right: Voiculescu, dead, Ghita, dead, Patriciu, dead, Adamescu, dead. Who's left? Sârbu. Let finish him too. He was simply the last of us not terrorized by the media.
- What did Florian Coldea's secret address have, I don't understand.
- Perhaps information about businesses, firms, financial circuits of Adrian Sârbu, received from different institutions, on short hand, as Portocala also said. (…)You heard him calling a head of the Finances, a covered-snitch-mobster gentleman, a guy called him Meiroșu (?) that I know, and telling him: "give it to me quickly on short hand, send me some papers about firms, Ghita, accounts, whatever, to put them in the files". Or, these issues must be done under the supervision of a judge, with a mandate. You do not have permission to enter and to check me, my family, friends, and my mother's accounts without having a warrant from a judge. By law.
- In Sarbu’s case there’s a problem. He was arrested on February 2nd. 2015.
- Sarbu accused me many times that I have had some influence. It's not about the Attorney's Office. For Adrian Sârbu, the controls the action started late. Already those from Fraud became an institution for tax purposes, in competition with the DNA, which is why Mrs. Kovesi's envy resulted in a fake file for the Head of Fraud. The envy was that Anti-Fraud was being more present in newspapers than DNA. You remember Romeo Nicolae. That escaped, was acquitted. But they forged a dossier. There was an informer, and they made him a dossier. And that's why Sârbu's file never arrived at DNA, but went from Anti-Fraud to Prosecutions, because those from Anti-Fraud were not well seen by DNA. Because the Mrs. was envious. Yes, for many, to me, Maior and others, all we thought that as time has passed, whenever a Head of a force institution appeared in the media better than "Nefertiti," the Mrs. became envious.
- Is she so obsessed with her public image?
- It turns out that yes. Rather what you wanted to search for at Coldea's birthdays you'll find in the character and behavior of "the goddess".
"There have not yet emerged any records with Negulescu and a certain Sabin Iancu"
- Let's go back to Prahova – Ploiești, where the "elite" functions. You were saying at one point, and I quote "in my case, it all started with the appointment of a new officer at SRI Prahova, Sabin Iancu. He has selected Prosecutor Negulescu to do the dirty work and helped him arrange folders and find false informers". Mr. Ghita, I have desperately tried to see when this gentleman Sabin Iancu was brought to Ploiesti.
- Around 2013.
- Where from?
- From Teleorman, from Alexandria.
- Is there any connection with Dragnea? Tell me about his career, I don’t know him.
- Dragnea had periods and periods. Sometimes he was better seen, sometimes he was badly seen. And then he found himself in situations with more gentle or more aggressive prosecutors and officers.
- I do not understand. They choose the counties according to the targets? This Mr. Iancu is a kind of… Why was he moved from Teleorman to Ploiești and not somewhere else? What's with this Ploiesti? Why didn't they choose Vaslui as target?
- I have narrated and I have already said that Director Maior with the Prime Minister Ponta and even me with my mouth and with my powers of persuasion, already entered in a kind of contretemps with Coldea and I was saying that signals kept coming that misfortunes happen, folders are falsified, that bad things are happening to people, that it's not all made for the society's sake. None of us have anything with this anti-corruption. Anti-corruption in a society must provide a real competition between foreign firms and those in Romania, between businessmen, between various media groups. This is what has to be done: to ensure proper competition. Or seeing that this match starts, probably…
- So on the chess board the first movement made by the head of SRI within an area…
- Perhaps it was considered that, if I'll get into a difficult situation, I'll denounce Ponta. And I refused.
- And they chose Iancu some sort of Draughts…
- That's private.
- Your say that it began with the appointment of a new officer at SRI. Until then there was nothing. You knew this gentleman Sabin Iancu?
- No. I told you that I don't know him.
- It changed him in May 2017. And you have evidence; you say that he recruited Negulescu? By the way, where's this Negulescu? Where did they find him?
- Recordings with Negulescu and this Sabin Iancu have not yet appeared. So, I don't know to tell you details of those records. I don't know what their relationship was, if they were friends, whether they were recruited, if they were working together.
- A question that arises, as I read on a site in Prahova, is that in fact this elite unit managed about eight institutions-SIPI, ILLEGAL OPERATIONS, Prosecutors' offices- they have fallen apart all these institutions. What did they have with all these institutions? What was their business with Ploiesti and not with Constanta, I ask?
- Perhaps they performed better; this is why they are called "elite". My feeling was that sometimes these messianic sergeants, other times the DNA Baron… you know that I went to the Parliament once and I talked about "the DNA Baron", one that names the Mayor, the President of the County Council, who is not interested on how people vote, the arrests him the next day. You have seen how they have falsified Volosevici's file, and Badescu's, and Savu's, how they made them files with false evidence, so this Negulescu with Onea to control, as a true political police the electoral game at the City Hall of Ploiești. They should have been arrested in a second. What greater evidence of political police to have than a Prosecutor that we hear on the tape, where we see evidence in the files, where we see that they falsify evidence to eliminate a competitor, Volosevici and after him Savu. Lucky that Savu has learned two or three things from some former colleagues and began to yell before "they will make me a file, they will not let me run for". These people wanted a county. To put their chiefs at Finances, ILLEGAL OPERATIONS, DIPI etc. They no longer accepted that people vote for political parties, that politicians get a position, and as to want a new mandate, they do their best for the city and citizens, and this is what we call a political game, democracy. They said "you no longer name the Mayor, Chief of Investment Direction; I name them, I Negulescu. You do not name the head to your local police, I'll arrest him myself, and I name the next one". And so they did. You have wondered what they did there. Why so many institutions? Basically they wanted to take over a county. And to no longer accept political control, political involvement in city affairs.