Acest site foloseste cookies. Navigand in continuare, va exprimati acordul asupra folosirii cookie-urilor Afla mai multe! x

Daniel Chitoiu illegally turned the National Agency for Fiscal Administration into a new Prosecutor's Office

Postat la: 25.02.2014 - 11:57 | Scris de: Ziua News


Daniel Chitoiu proposed a new decree to the Government enabling fiscal inspectors to enter each citizen's house and verify the owned assets. The search warrant will be issued by a judge at any moment of the day or night for each fiscally suspect citizen. The regular citizen will have to prove that his fiscal statements are compliant with the actual situation. The right to justice and the right to a fair trial are simply trodden unfer foot, turning Romanian citizens into prisoners of a dictatorial fiscal system.

By Voichita Rascanu

The amendments to the Fiscal Procedure Code and Minister Chitoiu's proposal to approve the Taxpayers' Chart, currently in public debate, is a copy of Patriot Act. The State, through its representative body ANAF (National Agency for Fiscal Administration) and using the excuse of fighting against tax evasion, keeps all the rights and powers, including those otherwise reserved by the Constitution to prosecutors and judges, while the citizen's rights are merely formal and the citizen is only allowed to bear the tyrannical legislation.

The Fiscal Procedure Code and the Chart proposed by Chitoiu are unconstitutional, uneuropean and are likely to send Romania back to the Middle Age. ZIUAnews will demonstrate that Daniel Chitoiu, Vice-PM and Minister of Finance, has created a system that deliberately mingles terms used in several common law branches and which does not comply with the separation of powers principle for the sole reason of preventing the Romanian taxpayer from using his fundamental rights.

The Constitution, ready to be annulled

According to Article No. 57 of the Fiscal Procedure Code on the investigation on the scene, "the fiscal authority may run an investigation on the scene and will draw the minutes. Should the access be denied, the fiscal authority may enter the residence of the natural person with the prior authorization obtained from the competent justice, applying the same civil procedure code provisions on the presiding judge's order." The same article is also found in the Chart proposed by Chitoiu. However, according to Article No. 27 of the Romanian Constitution on the inviolability of residence, there are only exceptional circumstances that allow an authority to legally enter a natural person's domicile or residence. Given that the exceptions are strictly interpreted and enforced, Chitoiu's Chart and the Fiscal Procedure Code cannot be considered exceptions: "The domicile and the residence are inviolable. No person may break into, enter or stay in another person's domicile or residence without the permission of the latter. The only exceptions to Line No. 1 shall be situations when a court order or an arrest warrant is executed, when a danger that affects the life, physical integrity or assets of an individual is removed, when national security or public order is protected or an epidemic is prevented from spreading."

These are the strictly stipulated provisions that enable a representative of the state authority to enter another person's domicile or residence. The provisions in Chitoiu's Chart are all more dangerous because they do not stipulate exactly what the state representative is allowed or forbidden to do once inside another person's residence, whether they are allowed to collect documents found, already resemblant to a search, or simply to look around, which makes room for abuse difficult or impossible to mend. At present each citizen's house or residence may be broken into with the authority of either a criminal law judge who issues a search warrant or a civil law judge who issues a presiding judge order. The difference is that the criminal law judges who issue such warrants are either presiding judges or hereby appointed, while the presiding judge orders are randomly allocated through ECRIS system. More, according to the Fiscal Procedure Code, the fiscal authority representative is entitled to the protection of police or gendarmerie officers when entering a natural person's domicile or residence, deliberately mistaking the fiscal inspector's role and status with the court enforcement officer's tasks and status, the role of the latter being to enforce the court decisions!

The access to Justice, denied by Chitoiu

Chitoiu decided that the fiscal body is entitled to seize the natural person's right to bring proof of evidence. In other words, the citizen's right to defend in court is denied. Although termination of certain civil rights is a civil law institution which is ordered by a judge, the Minister of Finance decided that all fiscal inspectors are allowed to order it. According to Chitoiu's Chart and Fiscal Procedure Code, the citizens under investigation "will present supporting documents in their defence with a view to clarifying their personal fiscal situation within 60 days as of the verification note receipt, otherwise their rights will be terminated". If the fiscal body seizes that the citizen's right to bring supporting documents in his defense is terminated, the supporting documents proof of innocence will no longer be used in court. Thus, each citizen's right to a fair trial is violated. More, Chitoiu's Chart even mentions the term of "delay of verification for good reasons" without explaining what the good reasons may be, who establishes and considers them or the appeal against the decision of considering the delay reasons unjustified. Again, the lack of precision will generate abuse. Also, the continuous amendments to the Fiscal Code and Fiscal Procedure Code cause the impossibility of the law predictibility, as stipulated by European provisions. Another contradiction of Chitoiu's Chart is that it stipulates that the citizen has the right to give the fiscal body information items, only to later specify that the citizen is obliged to provide ANAF all the information items.

Also, Article No. 65 of the Fiscal Procedure Code specifies that it is the citizen who will prove that his fiscal statements are compliant with his current situation. In other words, the proof of evidence is reversed and the only obligation of ANAF remains to wait for the common citizen to make, at his own expense, all efforts to convince the fiscal body of his fairness!

Chitoiu proposed the so-called Taxpayer's Chart for open debate, a document comprising dozens of abusive provisions which he refuses to debate. The Vice-PM was called by the ZIUAnews reporters with questions on the document, but our only debate was with the Vice-PM's secretary.

Adauga comentariu