[ad_1]
She says she came to take over this case after being contacted by a former ECHR agent who represents Romania and who asked her if she would like to represent Laura Codruța Kovesi at the European Court.
The lawyer claims that she was the only one who told the former DNA chief that she would have a chance at the ECHR.
- “I was very surprised. (…) The next morning, I will remember my whole life, I was in front of the Bucharest Court (…) and my phone rang, then I received a message:
. (…) I can honestly tell you that I told you at the beginning that we have a small problem, if we go beyond the admissibility of the complaint before the ECHR, because there was a problem of exhaustion of domestic remedies, that is, the decree El President of Romania, who had not been challenged in the national courts. - (…) I had a certain restriction, because there is also an initial filter in the ECHR (…) I specified that this is the vulnerability of the file and that after that we will find enough arguments and I appreciate that it has possibilities. (…) I was quite surprised, because I was the first person to give it a try at the European Court. Everyone was saying “you won’t have a chance at the ECHR”. I am not referring to public positions (…) In general, I was, I would not say confused, but nobody thought that the ECHR could be addressed with real possibilities of success, “said the lawyer.
She also said that she had been attacked by some colleagues, who considered this complaint as false news.
Nicoleta Popescu also stated that Laura Codruța Kovesi was the first plaintiff in her career as a lawyer with 31 cases in the ECHR that she did not want a single leu as compensation.
- “I had an argument with Ms. Kovesi when we had to ask for these compensations. I told her that it was her right to ask, I gave her the Baka case against Hungary as jurisprudence, which was also the basis of today’s conviction. The European Court granted the judge in Hungary a compensation of 100,000 euros, so that she could have a criterion of the request that she could make to the ECHR. I was very surprised when she told me that she did not want to ask for any amount of money, neither as moral damages, nor as material damages , nor to reimburse their legal costs.
- She said that the decision itself is very important, as a personal remedy, that it is enough, and that she does not want Romanian citizens to pay her a sum of money. As a detail, (…) the compensation obtained in the claims of the European Court are paid by the Ministry of Finance, of our money. (…) I admit it, he was the first plaintiff in my life who did not want any amount of money, “said the lawyer in the interview given to the PressHub platform.
Laura Codruța Kovesi told Digi24 on Tuesday night that the ECHR decision in her case is generally valid in all member states of the Convention and that all prosecutors and judges can be protected from possible abuse.
“Q.In the Constitutional Court decision, the RCC limited my right to challenge the revocation. This limitation violated a fundamental right of mine. In the motivation, the ECtHR explains why my right to freedom of expression was also violated. As such, there are no real reasons for the revocation, “said Laura Kovesi.
He said his dismissal sent a message of discouragement to the entire judiciary and that the ECHR decision sent a message that magistrates should not fear abuse.
“The ECtHR decision says that when magistrates do their job correctly, no one should change them for political reasons,” said Kovesi.
She refused to send a message to Tudorel Toader, the former Minister of Justice, who drafted the evaluation report based on which he requested his removal from the DNA leadership: “I have nothing to send you. I’m just saying when I did this, you said you had no chance. For me, it didn’t matter what he had to say, it doesn’t matter right now. “
What the ECtHR decided in the case of the former DNA chief:
- Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights has been violated
- Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention has been violated.
[ad_2]
