The decision of the RCC regarding the declarations of wealth “destroys a lot of transparency”. “The fact that you no longer see relatives, wife, children practically offer a valve to transfer a large part of income there.”
Constitutional Court, photo: CCR.ro
The decision of the Constitutional Court on declarations of wealth and interests annuls the public control mechanism on assets, Septimius Pârvu, a researcher on Expert Forum, told Hotnews.
“Today's decisions kill the mechanism from two points of view: even if they publish them, the fact that you do not see relatives, wife, children, practically offers a valve to transfer a large part of the income there. Of course, the revenues will exist, they will probably declare to ANAF, other parts, but the idea was to be a public control mechanism,” the expert points out.
Asked what it means to have been declared unconstitutional the article that stipulates that wealth statements should be published on the website ANI within 30 days, Septimius Pârvu says that the reasoning of the decision will clarify this aspect.
“Now, there are other regulations, including through the National Anticorruption Strategy, which also determine that they must be published on the institution's website. We must first see the motivation of the decision. It is difficult to say at this time if other institutions will publish on their own site,” said Septimius Pârvu for Hotnews.
As for the statements published so far, Septimius Pârvu says that it is not clear whether they will disappear or not.
“The statements are kept on the website ANI for the entire duration of the term or the exercise of the function and three years after their termination. After that, we must see the content of the respective decisions, if it is applied from now, if it means that they have to disappear and those that are so far,” explains Septimius Pârvu.
He continues by saying that there is the possibility that the statements may be deleted, eliminating transparency.
“I would dare to say that the past ones may be given down. We have to wait for the motivation. But I think it is a decision that, unfortunately, destroys a lot of transparency,” concludes Pârvu.
