The SNOOOOOop investigative site has published today an article showing what, in reality, SNSPA in the cases of Bulai, Pieleanu and Stanciugelu, three teachers accused of victims of sexual abuse: In court, the faculty claimed that “the press makes can-can”
July 8, 2024. The SNOOOOOP journalist, Ioana Moldoveanu, sends several questions to SNSPA, in the process of documenting the Alfred Bulai case. Does not receive an answer.
August 5-6, 2024. Nine days after the publication of the investigation about Alfred Bulai, Snoop, but also other editors and journalists, withdrawn the same questions to SNSPA. The university continues to shut up.
September 17, 2024. Eight of the 25 journalists sue SNSPA. I ask the court to oblige the University to convey the information of public interest.
February 24, 2025. SNSPA asks the court to reject the trial. According to the welcome, he claims that journalists do not have a legitimate interest; They want the information “to create a sensational journalistic material” and “can-can”, not of public interest.
The faculty claims that the journalists, who are in the “media frenzy” triggered by the Snoop investigation about Alfred Bulai, asked for information that could not be disclosed, because the Prosecutor's Office and the Ethics Commission were already conducting an investigation.
But most of the questions had been transmitted for the first time by Snoop 20 days before “frenzy”.
Other arguments invoked by SNSPA in order not to provide information:
- Journalists are not part of the SNSPA academic community;
- It is not indicated why I ask for documents and information about SNSPA activity;
- Require the personal data of the teachers and students;
- The requested information is not intended for the public;
What continues to keep SNSPA secret
- The total number of complaints for harassment or bullying registered in the last 20 years against employees, teachers or associated teachers, and the measures taken after them.
- The reasons for eliminating in 2015 of the course “methods of qualitative image research”, supported by Alfred Bulai.
- The measures taken in the case of harassment in 2017, which targeted Professor Stefan Stanciugelu, including the lack of an official document attesting these measures.
The case of StanciuGelu
The case of Professor Stanciugelu, arrived at the Ethics Commission in 2017, after sending pictures of his sexual organ to a student. During the same period, another SNSPA student posted on Facebook how the teacher forcibly kissed her, after proposing to sleep with him. Another girl, who made meditations with Stanciugelu for admission to SNSPA when she was 17, tells for Snoop, how the teacher has repeatedly kissed her, both at him and in his car.
StanciuGelu was removed from the chair, but not from SNSPA. He would have received a research position, paid better, say former students and students. SNSPA did not answer the SNOOOP questions about the current position of the former professor in the faculty, considering that journalists have requested information that is not of public interest.
In his case, SNSPA refuses to communicate:
- The current relationship between SNSPA and Ștefan Stanciugelu: If he holds any position or collaborates with the University, and the lack of an official document that will clarify this aspect.
- The existence of notifications regarding the behavior of Professor Marius Pieleanu towards the students and, if so, the measures taken by the university, as well as the absence of an official document to confirm them.
- The current relationship between SNSPA and Marius Pieleanu: If it has any function or collaborates on research projects, and the lack of an official document that will clarify the situation.
The university still claims that it has zero tolerance for any form of harassment, discrimination or abuse and promotes a safe academic environment, including, focused on mutual respect.
SNSPA ignores and students
The Ethics Commission started research on Professor Marius Pieleanu's behavior last year, following three notifications. During the same period, testimonies had appeared in publications such as investigator and Rise Project.
The decision of the Ethics Commission became partially public, on Wednesday, July 30, one day after the SNOOOOop investigation is published about the failure of the SNSPA.
The Commission admits in an addendum, which you omits to make public, that precisely the absence of evidence is one of the systemic problems in cases of harassment, intimidation or discrimination, because the facts often occur in an isolated environment.
The decision can be challenged only now, almost six months after its voting on February 10th. Meanwhile, Professor Pieleanu taught the whole semester at the license and at the master. The students at the license physically boycotted his courses. What happens in SNSPA and, in general, how the National Education Administration is related to these abuses, you can read on the snoop.
