Ordinance JAG-Iaşi 2014-03-14

ROMANIA                                                                    Personal data operator 2609

THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR                                     Iaşi, 2 Peneş Curcanul

THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL’S OFFICE    Iaşi County, Zip Code 700473

AT THE IAŞI MILITARY TRIBUNAL                      e-mail: pm_iasi@mpublic
259/P/2013                                                                      tel./fax no. 0232/242036, tel. no. 0232/235007

                                                                                                2014-03-14

To Mr.

Sava Paul- Iaşi, str. ---, no. ---, blk. ---, apt. ---, Iaşi county

            We present you the adjudication ordered in the case above-mentioned dated 2014-03-14, according to art. 316, the Code of Criminal Procedure.

            If you are dissatisfied with the adjudication, you can submit a complaint to the Judge Advocate General at the Judge Advocate General’s Office at the Military Court of Appeal within 20 days after the notification according to art. 339, the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judge Advocate General,

Maj. Magistrate Prelipcean Gheorghe

PG/PG/2copies

ROMANIA                                                                     Personal data operator 2609

THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR                                     Iaşi, 2 Peneş Curcanul

THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL’S OFFICE    Iaşi County, Zip Code 700473

AT THE IAŞI MILITARY TRIBUNAL                      e-mail: pm_iasi@mpublic.ro
259/P/2013                                                                      tel./fax no. 0232/242036, tel. no. 0232/235007

ORDINANCE

of dismissal

Year 2014 Month March Day 14

            Judge Advocate General, maj. magistrate Prelipcean Gheorghe within the Judge Advocate General’s Office at the Iaşi Military Tribunal,

            Considering the documents from the criminal proceedings from the above-mentioned case, concerning the criminal complaint filed by the said Sava Paul from Iaşi,

FIND

            The Ordinance dated 2014-02-07 ordered the initiation of the criminal proceedings for the crimes of «abuse while on duty against the interests of persons» provided in art. 246 from the Penal Code of 1968 and «abusive behavior» provided in art. 250, par. 1, 3 from the Penal Code of 1968, combined with the application of art. 33, let. a and art. 5 from the current Penal Code, deeds comprising the participation of the said Sava Paul in the December 7, 2013 protest organized in Pungeşti, Vaslui county, against water contamination through shale gas exploration and exploitation. After leaving the protest area intending to return home, he was prevented from doing so at two checkpoints handled by individuals wearing the insignia of the Romanian Riot Police, who asked for his Identity Card without providing legal grounds and at the second checkpoint a worker with the Riot Police spoke to him using an insulting language while verifying his identity and another worker filmed him unjustly.

            From the criminal proceedings we have found the following state of things:

          The aggrieved party Sava Paul works as ---, Iaşi. On the occasion of his hearing he states that he was informed about the protest while using the social network Facebook. The protest was directed against Chevron Corp. and was planned to take place on a private property. He decided to participate. Furthermore, he states that he left Iaşi in the morning of December 7, 2013, and arrived in Pungeşti at about 9:30 a.m. He joined the protest which was taking place on a private property located opposite the Chevron property. He noticed that most of the protesters were local people. At a certain moment, the Riot Police personnel appeared and blocked the road, tried to surround the protesters. Then, he and one of his friends --- withdrew on a hill, close to the forest limit. From that place, he saw the Riot Police personnel seizing the protesters and introducing them in the vehicles of the Riot Police. Afterwards, together with his friend he decided to go home. While walking on foot, on the verge of the road, they were stopped at a checkpoint by the Riot Police personnel and they were asked for their identity papers.

---Page 1---

After providing the identity paper, a Riot Police employee introduced the data into an electronic device, returned his Identity Card and was told that he could go. While walking on foot alone on the verge of the road, he was stopped at a second checkpoint where a Riot Police employee addressed him using an insulting language, for instance «come here, you crank», then asked for his Identity Card and after giving it, the Riot Police employee wrote down his data in a notebook and told him in an ironic tone that he would receive a fine.

            Finally, the aggrieved party shows that he did not receive a fine up to this moment, but demands legal measures to be taken against the Riot Police personnel who prevented his walk from Pungeşti to Vaslui on December 7, 2013, who filmed him with no legal reasons and filed a request for the hearing of ---.

            --- was heard as a witness. He states that he participated in the protest on December 7, 2013, as well as the protest on October 19, 2013. He arrived in Pungeşti at the meeting place of the protesters the Resistance Camp, on December 7, 2013, at about 10:30 a.m. and saw approximately 300 protesters. Initially, he saw a group of about 8 individuals followed by another 30 people wrecking the surrounding fences of the Chevron property. Then, the shielded Riot Police personnel came from Vaslui. They started seizing people from the Camp and took them to the Riot Police vehicles. During the events, he met the aggrieved party Sava Paul and decided to return home. After walking 15 meters on the road, they were stopped by the Riot Police personnel at a checkpoint. They were asked for their identity papers and observed the request. His identity was verified again without any notice of the legal reason and saw a Riot Police individual writing down his data in a notebook. The witness --- states that he did not see the moment when Sava Paul was stopped for identity check because there were many Riot Police employees there and all of them were tall, but he met him while leaving the village Pungeşti at the parking space next to the bus and did not notice Sava Paul to show any sign of violence.

            Considering the content of Letter no. 2324613 from 2014-02-05 received from the Vaslui Riot Police County Inspectorate, there is enough proof that the Riot Police personnel fulfilled their duties on December 7, 2013, according to a Joint Action Plan for the prevention of disruptions of public order and safety, for the implementation of legal provisions, for the protection of public and private property by all legal means, for the protection of the genuine interests of the citizens and the community in Vaslui county starting from November 27, 2013, enforcible whenever protests or other meetings would degenerate into violence. Therefore, the duties were assigned to Riot Police personnel belonging to several structures. On December 7, 2013, the protest degenerated, the protesters wrecked the fences of the Chevron property and, afterwards, as people went away, master sergeant --- and master sergeant --- both from the Ploieşti Riot Police Intervention Team, along with other colleagues, verified the identities of a number of people including the aggrieved party. The identity control activity was filmed by capt. --- also from the Ploieşti Riot Police Intervention Team. During their hearing, the three Riot Police employees state that following the protest turning into violence and destruction, they received an order to identify the individuals who caused the damages by asking for people’s identity papers, by performing strategic filming activities having as a purpose the preservation of any evidence and the identification of people showing marks of scratches, damaged clothes in the fences.

            During this procedure, the aggrieved person was asked for identity papers and he submitted to the request, did not show resistance to the procedure and after being checked in the database he was allowed to leave without being fined. Considering the filming sequence comprising Sava Paul’s identity check, made available by the Ploieşti Riot Police Intervention Team through the Vaslui Riot Police County Inspectorate, no other aspects are revealed as relevant.

Considering the information shown in Letter no. 2325657 from the Vaslui Riot Police County Inspectorate dated 2014-03-10, it is understood that on December 7, 2013, the protest turned into violence as citizens performed unlawful deeds.

---Page 2---

            Therefore, two distinct criminal proceedings were ordered: one of the Prosecutor’s Office at the Vaslui Court, Case no. 5199/P/2013 concerning 37 people under investigation for the crime provided in art. 217, Penal Code and art. 321, Penal Code, the aggrieved party being Chevron, Case including the previous Case no. 5246/P/2013 regarding the crimes committed under the same circumstances.

            Considering the duties provided in the workplace specifications, the Joint Action Plan, Law no. 550/2004, other ordinances and internal provisions, it is understood that the Riot Police personnel are assigned the duty of intervening whenever criminal or civil offences occur, of identifying and seizing the perpetrators, of identifying the evidence, of performing criminal documentation using strategic filming and photographic activities related to the people who committed crimes or serious civil disruptions.

            Regarding these events, it is understood that the Case falls within the provisions of art. 16, par. 1, let. b, second part, Code of Criminal Procedure, meaning the deeds were not committed with the guilt provided in the law, that is the intent.

            Therefore, regarding that the protest degenerated, the protesters wrecked the surrounding fences of a private property, the Riot Police personnel were fulfilling their duties according to their training and orders, performed filming and photographic activities concerning the people leaving the protest area, including the aggrieved party Sava Paul, with the intent of identifying the perpetrators, of preserving the evidence, without any limitation applicable to the aggrieved party’s freedom of movement, without any use of an insulting language or verbal abuse.

            Considering the above aspects, based on the provisions of art. 315, par. 1, let. b, Code of Criminal Procedure, in conjunction with art. 314, par. 1, let. a, Code of Criminal Procedure, combined with art. 16, par. 1, let. b, second part, Code of Criminal Procedure,

I ORDER

            1. The dismissal of the case related to the crimes of «abuse while on duty against the interests of persons» provided in art. 246 from the 1968 Penal Code and «abusive behavior» provided in art. 250, par. 1, 3 from the 1968 Penal Code combined with the application of art. 33, let. a and art. 5 from the current Penal Code.

            2. Based on the provisions of art. 316, par. 1, Code of Criminal Procedure, the ordinance shall be shared with the aggrieved party Sava Paul and the Ploieşti Riot Police Intervention Team, to be brought to the attention of master sergeant ---, master sergeant --- and capt. ---, who can submit a complaint against the adjudication if they are dissatisfied with it, within 20 days after the notification according to art. 339, Code of Criminal Procedure, complaint to be filed to the Judge Advocate General at the Judge Advocate General’s Office at the Military Court of Appeal.

            3. Based on the provisions of art. 315, par. 2, let. f, in conjunction with art. 275, par. 1, pt. 4, Code of Criminal Procedure, the legal expenses are to be paid by the state.

Judge Advocate General,

Maj. Magistrate Prelipcean Gheorghe

PG/PG/4copies

---Page 3---