High Court’s Decision Justifying Acquittal of Former Securitate Agents Accused of Killing Dissident Gheorghe Ursu. The Prosecutor’s Claim of Systematic Repression by the Secret Police Dismissed / Ursu Was Not an Opponent of the Communist Regime
The High Court of Cassation and Justice, led by Corina Corbu, published on Thursday evening the reasoning behind the decision in which a panel of three judges acquitted former Securitate agents Marin Pârvulescu and Vasile Hodiş, who were accused by prosecutors of the killing of dissident Gheorghe Ursu.
In their reasoning, the judges argue that the dissident Gheorghe Ursu was not an „opponent” of the communist regime.
Excerpts from the reasoning:
„Unlike the years 1948-1964, during which those atrocities against the Romanian people occurred and were recorded in the previous judgments, in 1985 it can no longer be considered that there was a clear intention of systematic extermination of any opponent by the state authorities, through acts that could be classified as the analyzed crime, and which would allow the classification of any illegal behavior towards people in detention into this type of crime.”
Recomandări Video:
Articolul continuă mai jos...
„The circumstance mentioned by the prosecutor that the repression organized by the secret police would have a systematic character and would be exercised through the informative control of the ‘entire active population’ (and thus prove the required premise of the incriminating text) due to the number of Romanian citizens supervised or monitored by the secret police in the years 1974-1989 cannot be retained by the High Court.”
„The High Court concludes that, through the evidence presented in the case, including in the appeal, it has been proven that there were interactions between state authorities (even the security organs) and several determined individuals, but it has not been proven that, during the period in which the defendants are accused of committing the crime, there was a conflict (hostilities) between the authorities and the population or a part of it, in which the authorities would have had a systematic concern for the physical or psychological extermination of the population or a part of it for various reasons (as it happened during the years 1948-1965, circumstances retained in the criminal judgments referred to above).”
„A conflict limited to a few specific individuals cannot be considered as a premise of the crime of inhumane treatment. Therefore, it is exactly this premise of systematic extermination intention by the authorities that makes the difference between crimes against peace and humanity and individual crimes with the same material element included in other titles of the Criminal Code (murder, subjecting to inhumane treatment, torture, etc.). Consequently, the High Court, in agreement with the first instance, concludes that, in this case, the premise situation, a component part of the structure (the legal content) of the crime of inhumane treatment, is not met, and thus the constituent elements of this crime are not fulfilled. However, the actions of the persons who contributed to the killing of the victim can be investigated individually (separately) as common law crimes.”
Furthermore, the High Court concludes, in agreement with the first instance, that the victim Gheorghe Ursu was not an opponent of the communist regime and was not in adversarial relations with the state security organs since his opinions and dissent towards the state policy and leadership were not made public, did not reach the general public through any other means, and did not have any consequences in the external reality (they were not capable of propagating hostile ideas or inciting actions against the socialist order). Thus, the victim did not publicly express his dissent towards the state policy and leadership, so as to become a dangerous person for the state security, due to the possibility of influencing public opinion and inciting the population against the state and party leadership.
In conclusion, the High Court’s decision to acquit the former Securitate agents accused of killing Gheorghe Ursu has been based on the argument that the dissident was not considered an opponent of the communist regime, and that the evidence presented did not prove the existence of a systematic extermination intention by the authorities during the relevant period.
Context
Military prosecutors argued that the two defendants exercised repressive and systematic actions (surveillance, informational monitoring, searches, systematic interrogations, acts of physical and psychological violence) against Gheorghe Ursu, actions that „resulted in severe physical or psychological suffering and seriously infringed upon fundamental rights and freedoms, primarily the right to life.”
On the other hand, the two accused maintained their innocence before the judges. Hodiş declared, „I carried out orders received. I did not act beyond the given orders.”
The trial also involved two more defendants, former interior ministers George Homoştean and Tudor Postelnicu, who were accused of complicity. However, they have since passed away.
Gheorghe Ursu, an engineer, was one of the most well-known fighters against the communist regime.
In the early 1980s, he sent letters to Radio Free Europe, displayed manifestos against Ceaușescu, and attempted to create intellectual resistance together with his friends, Dan Deșliu, Nina Cassian, Geo Bogza, and Radu Cosașu.
In an attempt to avoid a politically unfavorable case on the international stage for Ceaușescu’s regime, the Secret Police fabricated a common law case against Gheorghe Ursu (for the possession of 17 dollars), leading to his arrest on September 21, 1985.
He was imprisoned in a cell with two common law detainees, Marian Clită and Gheorghe Radu, who were ordered by the secret police to commit acts of violence against him.
Gheorghe Ursu died on November 17, 1985, at the Jilava Penitentiary Hospital.
Andrei Ursu, the son of the murdered dissident, stated a month ago, „This is the stakes; these former torturers are not just Pîrvulescu (Marin – n.r.) and Hodiş (Vasile – n.r.). There are hundreds. Because in Braşov, we know and have on the list – we found the list of Securitate officers who took the people of Braşov for interrogation, from CNSAS. We know them, with their names and surnames, how they tortured them for nights, for hours, and witnesses, victims, tell how they were brutally beaten in a Stalinist or medieval way. Medieval tortures in 1987. These people are among us, the torturers. If these two are convicted, it means there was a premise situation. It means that there truly was a criminal regime even after 1965. And, in the end, that’s why we Romanians accepted a regime that was ruining the country and humiliating us with the personality cult of Ceauşescu – not because we feared Ceauşescu, but because of the fear of the Securitate, the 500,000 informants. That’s the stake.”
Donează lunar pentru susținerea proiectului G4Media
Donează suma dorită pentru susținerea proiectului G4Media
CONT LEI: RO89RZBR0000060019874867
Deschis la Raiffeisen Bank