SUA ne acuza de incalcarea flagranta a drepturilor omului cu exemple foarte prost documentate

Anuntam ieri modificarea de catre Guvernul Romaniei a legii privind interceptarile telefonice denumita de presa “ochiul si timpanul”. Curios este ca actiunea s-a facut in paralel cu publicarea ieri in SUA a raportului anual cu privire situatia drepturilor omului in 2008 unde Bucurestii sunt criticati pe probleme de coruptie, lipsa increderii in justitie, conditiile dure din inchisori si nu in ultimul rand, citez: “folosirea in afara parametrilor legali a interceptarilor electronice”.

“Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence
The constitution prohibits such actions, and the government generally respected these prohibitions in practice. Nevertheless, there was a widespread perception that illegal surveillance still exists.
The law permits the use of electronic interception both in criminal cases and for national security purposes. A judge has to issue a warrant upon request from the prosecutor investigating the case. In exceptional circumstances, when delays in getting the warrant from the judge would seriously affect the criminal investigation, prosecutors may begin interception without a judicial warrant. Following this, however, a request for authorization must be submitted within 48 hours. Some human rights NGOs have noted that under the national security law a prosecutor may authorize the issuance of a warrant for an initial period of six months, which can be extended indefinitely in three-month increments without judicial approval. There were reports of electronic interception used outside of these legal parameters”.

Totodata raportul acorda spatii largi fata de discriminarea tiganilor si homosexualilor si despre agresarea lor fara motivatie de catre Politia romana.

“The constitution and law prohibit such practices; however, there were numerous NGO reports of police mistreatment and abuse of detainees and Roma, primarily through excessive force and beatings by police (...) In many cases of police violence against Roma, police claimed they used force in self-defense, responding to alleged hostility by Romani communities during police raids in search of criminal offenders. The Romani Center for Social Intervention and Surveys (Romani CRISS) and other NGOs continued to claim that police used excessive force against Roma and subjected them to maltreatment and harassment

(...)ACCEPT, an NGO fostering lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights, complained that police singled out LGBT community members for violence and harassment”.

Vezi raportul complet aici: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2008/eur/119100.htm