Interview: DNA chief Voineag’s prosecutorial model: A blend of former chief prosecutors Morar and Kovesi with a personal touch

In a revealing interview with G4Media.ro, Marius Voineag, the head of Romania’s National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA), discusses the agency’s focus on significant corruption cases within Bucharest’s central administration. Voineag, steering away from drawing parallels with the past focus on local barons, emphasized the complexity of tackling high-level corruption, noting the absence of such cases upon taking office 10 months ago.

Voineag described his prosecutorial model as a blend of the approaches of his predecessors, Daniel Morar and Laura Codruța Kovesi, but with his distinctive signature. He aims to avoid the pitfalls of excessive reliance on physical restraints and undue media exposure, which he sees as errors from previous practices.

The Interview with Marius Voineag, DNA Chief:

Reporter: We’ve seen that your office displays a motto, „mindset is everything.” What’s your mindset at DNA?

Voineag: My mindset here at DNA is consistent with my entire career. The greatest satisfaction as prosecutors come from investigating significant cases, something irreplaceable in our job. My main goal is to transform this vision into reality, ensuring the DNA 2.0 slogan from my candidacy is more than just words.

Reporter: The artwork in your office shows a small fish under the water and a shark above it. Are you aiming for the small fish or the sharks?

Voineag: Our primary goal is to tackle significant acts of corruption, which are, unfortunately for us, never committed by the small fish. This makes our investigations challenging, but our focus remains on high-level corruption.

Reporter: Could you give examples of significant corruption cases that you’ve started investigating since joining DNA?

Voineag: We have cases ranging from county council presidents to high-ranking party officials. Unfortunately, I can’t delve into ongoing investigations, but I assure you, actions have been initiated. It’s important to approach these investigations with precision, avoiding a scattergun approach that could cause collateral damage.

Reporter: Some have noticed the disappearance of handcuffs from the scene.

Voineag: I’m not a fan of handcuffs. Our mentality is more judicial than police-oriented. Prosecutors have the autonomy to decide on the appropriateness of preventive measures, tailoring them to each case’s specifics.

Reporter: Who are your prosecutorial role models? Daniel Morar, now a lawyer? Laura Codruța Kovesi, currently the European Chief Prosecutor? Or Bogdan Licu, now a Constitutional Court judge?

Voineag: A mix of the first two, but with my own signature.

Reporter: And your relationship with Bogdan Licu?

Voineag: It’s amicable and as professional as can be. Though our paths have diverged, I hold great respect for him.

Reporter: On your model, you mentioned a mix between Morar and Kovesi, but with your own signature. What does that entail?

Voineag: It means learning from the positives of both eras under Morar and Kovesi, avoiding past mistakes, and adapting to the present, ensuring our approach fits the context of 2023-2024 without sticking too rigidly to a specific model.

Reporter: What mistakes do you aim to avoid?

Voineag: Excessive media exposure, which often complicates the work of case prosecutors. We aim for results to speak for themselves, with the quality of our investigations being validated by judicial decisions.

Reporter: Looking at significant corruption cases, it seems many are outside Bucharest.

Voineag: That’s both true and not. We don’t set specific targets; our goal is to break the vicious cycle of neglecting investigations into high-level corruption. We’re focused on igniting these efforts, granting prosecutors the freedom to pursue corruption cases from a certain level upwards.

Reporter: Will DNA’s operations slow down in the election year of 2004, or will it be business as usual?

Voineag: We will continue as normal. Despite the constant work, we’ll be more cautious with public communication to avoid accusations of influencing the electoral process.

Voineag reassured that DNA would conclude the vaccine case investigation once all evidence is meticulously reviewed, independent of the electoral timeline. He underscored DNA’s autonomy from electoral cycles, emphasizing the agency’s commitment to thorough and impartial judicial processes essential for Romania’s fight against corruption.