Țuca Zbârcea & Asociații has won the appeal in an important case at the High Court of Cassation and Justice

The lawyers of Țuca Zbârcea & Asociații firm have obtained, for the benefit of the Romanian President Traian Băsescu, the annulment of the decision of the lower court, which had rejected as unfounded the challenge of the Head of the State regarding the warning of the National Council for the Fight Against Discrimination, in the case of the offense addressed to a television reporter.

One year ago, the Council decided by unanimous vote that the „Stinking Gypsy” remark used by the Romanian Head of the State when addressing a journalist from a private TV channel represented discrimination.

„It is a reparation award in accordance with the relevant legal principles. It is a decision that confirms the fact that the President has, as well, not only obligations, but also rights that must be protected and respected. It is a decision that brings us joy because we believed in this cause and we prepared it thoroughly. Moreover, the decision of the High Court is important because it is more than a reparation measure for the benefit of the President: it must be regarded as an useful precedent in the defense of the right to private life of every citizen and in the subordination of the idea of legality that must be at the basis of the act of justice”, stated Florentin Țuca, Managing Partner in Țuca Zbârcea & Asociații and the defender of the Romanian President, Traian Băsescu.

At the previous hearing, on the 8th of May 2007, Florentin Țuca, the founder of the law firm and Robert Roșu, a Partner within the firm, were present. ”The act allegedly punishable was wrongfully classified”, affirmed at that time the defenders of the President, adding that, in this case, there was no discrimination. The lawyers have pointed out that the President’s right to private life was violated, as the recording was made while Traian Băsescu was in the car, with his wife, without knowing he was being recorded, which shows that the act was not committed in public. The President’s defenders have also pointed out that the recording was illegally obtained and was given to the media against the will of the Head of the State, accusing the National Council for the Fight Against Discrimination that it sanctioned the Romanian President following intense media pressure. In addition, the lawyers have made a comparison between the situation of a criminal case where no evidence except for that lawfully obtained is admitted with the situation in this file in which the recording was made randomly and without any legal basis.

The decision given now by the Supreme Court is definitive.