Subject: the Ministry of Justice's delay in processing a file for re-acquiring Romanian citizenship

In my capacity as representative of the Romanian Diaspora in Parliament, I would like to bring to your attention the following: Mr. Victor TODORIUC, born on 12.05.1974 in Ocniţa, Rep. of Moldova, submitted in 2004 his file for re-acquiring the Romanian citizenship at the Romanian Embassy in Washington.

The file was transmitted for processing to the Ministry of Justice, on 16.11.2004, with the index nr. C-3674/16.11.2004. From said date, the Romanian Embassy in Washington was not informed of any reason or limitation regarding the lack of follow-up in Mr. Todoriuc's file - which has not been resolved to this date. 

I would like to mention that I have personnally contacted the Ministry of Justice at the e-mail address cetatenie@just.ro, on January 13th of this year, and have yet to receive an answer.

Hon. Minister, please advise on the following: is Mr. Todoriuc's file still at the Department for Citizenship Issues (sic), under the aegis of the Ministry of Justice? Assuming that there are no legal or administrative impediments, when should Mr. Todoriuc expect his file to be successfully processed?

I would appreciate a written and an oral answer.
February 16, 2009                                                                                                   
Senator
Raymond LUCA 

NB - Following this question, the Ministry of Justice requested two additinnal documents in order to complete the file for Romanian citizenship and gavea a new processing deadline on 15.04.2009.

2. QUERY - Romanian Parliament - Senate   

To: Madam President Anca OPRE

National Authority for the Restitution of Property (sic)

From: Senator Raymond LUCA, electoral district nr. 43, college 2

Subject: effect of Law 10/2001 and of its addendums

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted on April 24, 1997 Decision nr. 1123 in which it "encourages Romania to regulate the problem of restituting the immovables which were confiscated or expropriated." The Assembly has "requested strongly that the Romanian authorities modify the legislation regarding the restitution of confiscated or expropriated immovables, specifically Law nr. 18/1991 and Law nr. 112/1995, in order to provide for the full restitution or for an equitable compensation."

On December 3rd, 1998, the European Parliament adopted Decision nr. A4-0428 in which Romania is required to amend Law nr. 18/1991 and Law nr. 112/1995 and "to find a final and correct solution for the full restitution of the properties or, in case of impossibility, the payment of an appropriate compensation..." In the same vein, the United States House of Representatives adopted, on October 1st, 1998, Decision nr. 562 regarding the property expropriated in an abusive manner by the ex-totalitarian regimes. Accordingly, the House requested that "the states should provide restitution to the true owners of the expropriated properties and, where such restitution is no longer possible, the owners should be immediately and properly compensated."

Following these legislative actions, the Romanian Parliament adopted Law nr. 10/2001 regarding the legal status of some buildings which were abusively expropriated in the period of March 6th, 1945- December 22nd, 1989. This law regulates the restitution for the true owners- by specific performance or by equitable compensation- of the buildings expropriated by the State in the period March 6th, 1945- December 22nd, 1989 and in the year 1940, based on Law nr. 139. Law 10/2001 does not apply to buildings belonging to religious organizations and to national minorities, specifying that these situations will be regulated by "special legislative acts" which will follow (art. 8 par. 2). Law 10/2001 restates the issue of the residential buildings which was originally dealt with by Law 112/1995, and regulates, for the first time after 1990, the situation of the goods nationalized through Law nr. 119/1948 (industrial, banking, insurance, mining, transport) and those that were nationalized without valid title. 

In view of the application of Law 10/2001, a series of decisions and decrees were issued. These include methods of up-dating the eventual compensation to be distributed to the rightful owners or their successors. For example, the Government's Emergency Ordinance (sic) nr. 184/2002 or the National Bank's decree nr. 4/24555, issued on August 5, 2003, regarding the official exchange rate US dollar-leu for the period 1945-1989. 

Madam President, please advise on the following:

1. What were the effects of Ordinance 184/2002?

2. How many demands of restitution were filed pursuant to this Ordinance?

3. How many demands of restitution were solved?

February 23, 2009

Senator

Raymond LUCA

3. Official Correspondence - March 4, 2009

In an official correspondence, addressed in his capacity as president of the Parliamentary Commission for the Revolutionaries of December 1989 (sic), the liberal senator Raymond Luca informed the presidents of the Senate and of the House of Representatives that the PDL Representative Mihail Bodea, vice-president of the same commission, is in a clear conflict of interest situation given his status in the Commission and his position as a lawyer of a leader of the Association of Revolutionaries (sic). Furthermore, the correspondence shows that Mr. Boldea is also in a conflict with his position as a Representative!

Senator Luca argues that, as part of the Commission's functions, it must receive and solve contested claims and must counsel any legislative act regarding the Revolution of December 1989 and the revolutionaries. Mr. Boldea is in a position of expressing his opinion, through his vote, regarding the claim brought by a revolutionary who has also chosen him as his lawyer. Mr. Boldea himself confirmed before the members of the Commission that he represents, as a lawyer, Mr. Dorin Lazar, Major and Association leader.

Moreover, the conflict of interest extends to the situation where a lawyer who defends the rights of revolutionaries is able, in his capacity as VP of the Commission, to advise on legislative acts regarding said revolutionaries. In such a situation, it is obvious that, at least theoretically, Mr. Boldea may promote legislation favoring only his clients' interests.

Mr. Boldea's removal as a member of the Parliamentary Commission of the Revolutionaries of December 1989 is self-evident, concludes Senator Luca.

Senator Raymond Luca demands that the Romanian Parliament apply the laws correctly, given that Mr. Boldea is not only in a conflict of interest, but that he did not even give notice of this situation as provided by law. Mr. Boldea is also in a conflict with his status as a Representative and the only acceptable remedy in this situation is his removal from the office of Representative.

It bears mentioning that Mihail Boldea is under criminal investigation for the receipt of false documents in order to win a court order for a plot of land of 640 meters squared, in downtown Galati, a plot which belonged to the City Hall and contained a hotel, designated as an historical monument, as reported by the newspaper "Curentul" (sic) on March 3rd, 2009.