Premium
The Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) report is a warning that the negative pressure upon the anti-corruption fight could determine a reevaluation of the conclusions regarding one of the four benchmarks for the assessment of judiciary reform progress - the one referring to combating high level corruption, according to a release by the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) sent on Wednesday to AGERPRES.
According to the source, in the previous reports the fact that DNA continued to record positive results was mentioned as a sign of sustainability despite the fact that it was confronted with strong pressure. For this reason, the European Commission made one single recommendation within the corruption combat benchmark.
"The recommendation refers to rendering Parliament responsible for the decisions it takes as regards the requests from the criminal bodies to authorize preventive measures, such as searches or taking into custody, and to the requests to okay the parliamentarians' investigation, when they serve or have served as ministers (...). Actually, the report recommends the adoption of certain impartial criteria to making and motivating decisions to lift the MPs' immunity, to make sure that the immunity is not used for avoiding the corruption deeds' investigation and prosecution," the release says.
DNA reminds that this year it has submitted to the Parliament three requests for the approval of criminal proceedings for alleged corruption deeds in the case of incumbent and former minsters who are currently members of the Parliament, and yet they were all scrapped.
"In the previous report, issued in January 2017, the Commission clearly showed that the weakening or the diminishing of the definition field of corruption as criminal offence or the major challenges to the independence and efficiency of the criminal prosecution activity or referral of corruption crimes to court would be a setback," the release adds.
DNA also stresses that the CVM report finds in the general presentation that the progress and the good results of the judicial bodies in the fight against corruption were questioned by certain events, such as the OUG 13 or the proposals to amend the Justice laws package initiated in August, as well as the fact that the phenomenon of criticising the judiciary and the courts' decisions stays an important problem in the public debate.
