Nicușor Dan, the first statements about the case of Deputy Prime Minister Anastasiu: “It's a big problem”

After refusing to comment on the case on Friday that he was not informed, Nicușor Dan had on Saturday the first statement regarding the press disclosures about a company of the current Deputy Prime Minister Dragoș Anastasiu, who bribed an ANAF official for 8 years. Asked by the case by the journalists present in Salzburg where the president makes an official visit, Nicușor Dan had a short statement, according to Agerpres.

“It's a big problem, it's a big problem. So much,” was the only statement made by the president. Asked if he discussed with Prime Minister Bolojan, Nicușor Dan said “No”.

The day before, during a press conference, Nicușor Dan said that he has no information about the disclosures about the file in which Dragoș Anastasiu said in front of the prosecutors that his company gave a bribe to an ANAF employee.

“I do not have this information. Let me inform myself, that I hear from you for the first time,” said Nicușor Dan on Friday.

The file in which Anastasiu was involved

For 8 years, between 2009-2017, the companies of Deputy Prime Minister Dragoș Anastasiu bribed an ANAF inspector in order not to have problems with controls, according to a DNA investigation, completed two years ago with a definitive sentence of the officer who took a bribe. Anastasiu acknowledged the bribe of ANAF employee both in front of DNA and judges.

On Friday night, DNA reported for G4Media that Anastasiu was a “whistlewiter” in the bribe file at ANAF, “which is why the prosecutors ordered” to him.

The representatives of the Romanian Government claim that the “circumstances of the case” in which Deputy Prime Minister Dragoș Anastasiu acknowledged in court that his company has bribed an ANAF inspector “have nothing to do with the quality of deputy prime minister and to the duties of Mr. Dragoș Anastasiu”.

In a first reaction, Dragoș Anastasiu says that 15-17 years ago “some officials of the Romanian state press and even blackmail the companies”. He argues that as soon as he learned about the situation in his company he acted “correctly in the spirit of the law:” Being an entrepreneur, you manage several companies that, in their turn, are run by managers, it is impossible to have up -to -date information and detail about all the operations in progress. ”