Laura Codruta Kövesi speaking at a press conference after the President of Romania sacked her on July 9, 2018 in Bucharest. It was here where she told listeners: 'Corruption can be defeated. Don't give up.' Laura Codruta Kövesi speaking at a press conference after the President of Romania sacked her on July 9, 2018 in Bucharest. It was here where she told listeners: 'Corruption can be defeated. Don't give up.'

The EPPO is due to start operating next year, with new powers to investigate crimes across Europe against the EU budget.

Kövesi’s work has gained her powerful enemies in Romania. She was dismissed from the DNA last year after pursuing a successful felony conviction against Liviu Dragnea, then leader of the Social Democratic Party (PSD) and President of the Romanian parliament, the Chamber of Deputies, for putting two PSD functionaries on the payroll of the state child-protection agency.

Despite her political foes, many Romanians see Kövesi as a voice of hope who could drive corruption out of their country, and perhaps even put an end to fraud against the EU budget.

Kövesi responded to emailed questions from The World Today’s Sarah Whitehead and Roxana Raileanu just before a vote in Brussels on her candidacy for the role of Chief European Prosecutor of the EPPO.

How does being in the EU with its open borders affect your job?

In my view, Romania’s accession to the European Union came at a time when the Romanian justice system began to reform and the fight against corruption started to be more efficient. Thirteen years ago, corruption was a systemic problem in Romania which was found in almost all fields of activity: education, healthcare or public procurements. At that time, prosecutors were not independent. They were subordinate to the Minister of Justice. In some cases involving people with high positions in Romanian society, decisions were not taken by the justice system but at the headquarters of political parties. Moreover, at that time, high-level corruption cases were not investigated. Prosecutors were allowed to investigate petty corruption cases, typically targeting police officers, doctors or low-level civil servants.

In 2005, faced with such challenges, the Romanian state had to offer a credible response to this major national security risk.

The context was determined by Romania’s accession to the European Union that took place on January 1, 2007. There was a requirement from our European partners to build an independent and professional judicial system.

The result is that Romanian legislation has been updated to European norms and provides effective investigative tools to combat corruption. Now we can use undercover investigators, surveillance of bank accounts, wiretapping or access to IT systems. Prosecutors have become independent, which is of fundamental importance when combating crimes, especially corruption or organized crime.

These are the advantages of Europe’s ‘open borders’ for Romanian prosecutors.

Of course, open borders also mean that crimes have become borderless and freedom of movement allows offenders to move quickly to try to escape justice.

As a result, we have had to improve our cooperation with our colleagues from the European Union and to apply more effective instruments of international cooperation. We have become more involved in the exchange of experience with our colleagues abroad.

For example, we often see people who committed crimes using the proceeds to buy properties in foreign countries or open bank accounts in other jurisdictions. But no criminal should feel safe, regardless where he/she has hidden the money.

We have also received more international requests for mutual assistance in collecting evidence or identifying goods. As a result, we have been able to seize properties abroad or freeze foreign bank accounts.

Though we come from different legal systems, we prosecutors all face the same challenges in terms of independence and efficiency in combating crimes. This is why so important to cooperate and to share best practice.

You were described by The Guardian as leading 'an anti-corruption drive quite unlike any other in eastern Europe – or the world for that matter.' What direction would you like to take next?

My next goal is related to my candidacy for the role of chief prosecutor of the European Public Prosecutor's Office which is due to begin operations next year. Setting up an independent and effective European Public Prosecutor’s Office is a once in a lifetime professional opportunity. I would be honoured to take forward the work of so many people – politicians, public servants, practitioners and academics – who turned an idea into a legal text. It will now require great effort from the whole team to set up a thriving institution that is trusted by European citizens and able to protect the financial interests of the Union and contribute to the enforcement of the rule of law in the EU.

What motivated me to apply for this position is the chance to become part of this adventure, as well as my conviction that I have a combination of skills that can be a real asset in setting up a fully operational EPPO. These include management skills, extensive experience in dealing with representatives of European and international institutions as well as of national prosecution systems, and a proven ability to deal with public pressure and the stress engendered by the complexity of high-profile investigations.

What are the biggest challenges facing the justice system in Eastern Europe today?

Recently, the main challenges that the justice system faces have been the maintenance of its independence and the preservation of the legislative tools required to combat crimes effectively.

It is essential for the prosecutors to be truly independent of political factors in order to eliminate the risk of interference. Only a professional, independent and honest justice system can fight efficiently against corruption.

Take this example: If prosecutors were subordinate to the executive power, how could they open investigations against a member of the government or a high official? Or against someone who is both a high official and a party member? Would there be any guarantee that the investigation was fair and impartial? Or that there would be no repercussions against the magistrate who opened or concluded that investigation? Or, if the prosecutors were under the authority of the parliament, would there be any investigations against members of parliament?

For sure, if prosecutors lost their independence, there would no chance of high-level corruption crimes being investigated fairly and without regard to the suspect’s wealth or position in the state. In addition, to be able to combat corruption the efforts of the justice system must be supported by a stable legal and institutional framework.

Our investigations have been received with hope and trust by the Romanian people, but it is also true that they have mobilized an entire system formed of politicians and businessmen who feel threatened and are trying to maintain their control over public resources.

There have been repeated attempts to limit the efficiency of our investigations, through launching initiatives to amend anti-corruption legislation, restricting the tools used by prosecutors or refusing to waive the immunity of politicians charged with corruption offences. The entire justice system has faced unbelievable attacks, ranging from defamatory misinformation to hiring foreign companies that specialize in intimidation and harassment.

Only a few months ago, some members of Parliament tried to amend the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code in order to limit prosecutors’ investigative tools or to decriminalize some crimes. These amendments have not yet come into force, but they cannot improve justice and may only help suspects to escape due process.

Another form of pressure on the prosecutors is through the media. Politicians and businessmen who are investigated by prosecutors use the media to launch attacks and spread fake news about a prosecutor’s activity. As prosecutors we are not allowed to comment on our cases, so these attacks go unanswered.

Why do you think you have become so prominent among prosecutors?

I think other prosecutors should answer this question. I have always done my job in a professional, active and consistent way. Even though I have had a lot of challenges I continued my work honestly and professionally.

I have always defended the independence of prosecutors and encouraged all my colleagues to continue their work even if the media campaigns against them have become really aggressive.

What are your main achievements so far?

I have had a lot of good results in my 24 years as a prosecutor. In the last 11 years, I have held the highest positions in the Romanian public prosecution service. I was the Prosecutor-General for six years, and then the Chief Prosecutor of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) – the specialized Romanian structure with exclusive competence to investigate cases of high-level corruption and crimes against the EU budget – for five years. Thus I have coordinated the reform of the prosecution service after Romania's accession to the EU, participated in the harmonization of our criminal legislation with European law and contributed decisively to the achievement of credible results in the fight against corruption and fraud.

But I think that the key achievements are not shown in statistics. As the leader of DNA, I led a team of highly professional prosecutors who proved that the law is equal for everybody and that nobody is strong enough to evade it. These independent prosecutors have conducted investigations against people who seemed untouchable, regardless of their positions or wealth. Our investigations have contributed to raising awareness in Romania of the seriousness of corruption.

And most importantly we have proved that Romanian institutions can work efficiently, legally, and above all, we have shown that corruption can be defeated.