Romanian diplomat's car in hit-and-run: cover up?
-
Originally posted by troublemaker2005:
No time to read your blog. its all there in words, thousand of them. plus the quote i think millions of words. You are the one who starter name calling. Well don't matter its a nick not my name. shame on you
Hi 'troublemaker2005', noting the way in which U have shamefully defaced my original response, I really see no point in continuing any meaningful discourse with you.
Your indiscretions are shocking.
He who does not bother read has no right to comment.
Boo to u, Boo! Boo!
-
The original is a response a post at 'TODAYonline'-May 14, 2010: 'The principle of diplomatic immunity is sound'
I do hope that sharing this reproduction here as well, would go someway in clarifying the issue at hand. Sorry for any interruptions/ inconvenience caused.
Hi Ms Cheong, my reply is as follows (the relevant references/ links/ 'articles' of the VCDR are appended below for your convenience):Quote:Ace Kindred Cheong, Updated 10:25 AM May 16, 2010
I have nothing against diplomats having immunity for and when caarying out official duties.However what i disagree is when diplomats abuses or have abused such immunity for comitting crimes and have caused death in other countries.
The 'immunity' which you mention is not as 'infinite' as you seem to assume. Whilst the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR) does indeed provide in accordance with Article 31.1, "immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State", Article 31.4 elaborates further, the same article by stating that "The immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt him from the jurisdiction of the sending State." Your definition of 'immunity form persecution' thus seem quite lacking if not mistaken.
In accordance to A29: "The person of a diplomatic agent shall be inviolable", Ionescu was 'entitled' to leave Singapore 'at will', his reasons not withstanding, in accordance with the mutually agreed terms of the VCDR.Quote:A good example is Dr Silviu Ionescu a Romanian diplomat who have killed Mr Tong Kok Wai and injured 2 others.He managed to leave Singapore on the basis of diabetes and having to go back home for treatment.
About Romanian neglect in curbing Ionescu's public criticisms of Singapore, my response is in the article 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa', I shall thus not repeat my response here.Quote:Not only that Dr Silviu Ionescu had made a deliberate false police report that the embassy car has been stolen when in fact he was the one who have driven the embassy car.Also Dr Silviu publicly criticised Singapore and accused Singapore under the leadership of Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew is a country that do not respect law when Silviu was asked to comment by a foreign media.
I believe your worry to be that of 'state sponsored terrorism', whilst I find your worries not unreasonable, I must add that 'diplomacy' is a 2 edged sword. Not unlike the various notorious portrayals of the Christian Bible which can both be applied in good and bad ways (the Catholic Church once on basis of heretical Biblical interpretations, promulgated the collection of 'indulgences' to enrich none but their own brimming pockets), the VCDR likewise, when portrayed by less then well meaning folk, would likewise yield have 'less then well meaning' results.Quote:I am fearful that if such diplomats in future would be involved in heinous crimes like murder or worst terrorism, I am sure that he or she being a diplomat with immunity would be far more dangerous than usual terrorists who can be and will be captured without having to worry about offending the opposite parties and governments.
The VCDR is written with the lofty ambition of achieving high standards of diplomatic relations, standards requiring an almost religious, if not continuous bilateral abidance to its contained articles, 1- 53, every hour and every day for which the agreement stands.
I however, remain optimistic about the ultimate intentions and outcomes of both the original references.
As mentioned, there are already existing provisions for such within the VCDR viz A31.4, A9.1 another foremost precursor also states that the receiving state may at will and without requirement for explanation, "notify the sending State that the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non grata ".Quote:So what i like to comment is that when a diplomat is suspected in being involved in any crimes either in Singapore or any other countries, he or she can be detained to help investigate instead of allowing hm or her to leave the country and wait till the government which sends him or her to punish them for the crimes committed.
Mother Teresa once said, "To keep a lamp burning, we have to keep putting oil in it." I guess effort, energy and commitment, not to mention a sense of propriety is necessary to keep diplomatic relations strong; the 'misdemeanors' of the opposite party must be nipped in the bud, if overlooked and allowed to fester, these indiscretions will only snowball into larger tragedies which make public to the world what flimsy foundations our relations are premised upon.
Mind you, the VCDR in its 'maiden glory' is available at source online at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/ins...s/9_1_1961.pdf - 16pages, medium font, cover page and preamble inclusive.
Substandard interpretations of the VCDR and wild assumptions of the same thus defeat the inceptive premise of the diplomacy. We must be careful in all our relations and unless we're truly prepared, not 'flirt' with all and sundry. And when problems arise, may our spirits not deviate from that of the Law.
Face it, one cannot have one's cake and eat it too.
As our source article 'TODAYonline'-May 14, 2010: 'The principle of diplomatic immunity is sound' clearly states: "While ignoring immunity sometimes might seem preferable at first glance, it's a two-way street that needs to be respected all the time to protect Singapore's diplomats overseas. Only by following the principles of the Vienna Convention at home can one country expect others to do the same for its diplomats abroad. "
Too much wine maketh a decision maker tipsy.
May Singapore rise to the occasion, with the cooperation of the Romanian Government, and under the existing mutual terms of the VCDR, resolve this issue with dignity and grace.
The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa.
Thank you for your concern and interest over this issue.
Regards and God bless,
B.C.
- - - - - -
Ps: It is my opinion that some additional clarifications need to be added to the VCDR- such as the compliance with local traffic regulations etc. Whilst A31.2 goes so far as to state: "A diplomatic agent is not obliged to give evidence as a witness", that should the receiving state, by way of its ordinary local procedures, find a 'diplomatic agent', to be of immediate hazard to human life and limb of the local community, intervene to minimize such risk in the least disruptive manner whilst upholding the safety of the community and keeping the sending state informed of such interventions at the soonest possible time. -etc-
Application example:
A 'diplomatic agent' is stopped for suspected drunk driving. He is given the choice of either passing the on-site breathalyzer test, or making alternative arrangements to continue his passage of travel without himself being driver of a motorized vehicle. (the receiving country MFA would of course be accordingly informed of this incident).
= = = = = =
Quotes and references:
- Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (UN site): http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/ins...s/9_1_1961.pdf
- 'TODAYonline'-May 14, 2010: 'The principle of diplomatic immunity is sound':
- 11May2010: 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa'
- Mother Teresa Quotes: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/au...er_teresa.html
The following are appended articles of the 'Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations'
- Article 2 states: "The establishment of diplomatic relations between States, and of permanent diplomatic missions, takes place by mutual consent".
- Article 9.1 states:- "The receiving State may at any time and without having to explain its decision, notify the sending State that the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non grata or that any other member of the staff of the mission is not acceptable. .."
- Article 29 states: "The person of a diplomatic agent shall be inviolable. He shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. The receiving State shall treat him with due respect and shall take all appropriate steps to prevent any attack on his person, freedom or dignity."
- A31.1 states: "A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State. ..."
- A31.4 states: "The immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt him from the jurisdiction of the sending State." -
Quote:
Ace Kindred Cheong, Updated 07:01 PM May 16, 2010
Thank you B.C for your comments.I appreciate your kindness in your explaination.
By the way,i am a man not a woman so i hope you will address me as Mr and not Ms in future.
I like to say that when I wrote what happen when any diplomat decided to become or involved in acts of terrorism (Not state sponsored terrorism) but personal reason or murder (again not state sponsored murder or assassination ), will he or she as a diplomat be protected by immunity.
I do not know if such incidents or crimes committed ( not sponsored by the state or governments ) will have the same result?
Please advise.ThanksHi Mr Cheong, my apologies for the 'title prefix' mistake.
Whilst I'd not rather declare myself an expert in all such matters, just concerned, I will agree with you from my own readings, that diplomats are indeed held with high esteem, perhaps for good reason as they ought to serve the high and lofty ambitions such as article 3.1a, g: "representing the sending State in the receiving State", "promoting friendly relations between the sending State and the receiving State, and developing their economic, cultural and scientific relations", respectively.
I believe however, that like original 'holy matrimony' which indeed agonizes ill-prepared/ suited individuals, likewise the 'unadulterated' application VCDR, in its undiluted original form isn't for the 'fainthearted'- it should be therefore be only applied premised upon already good relations OR a mutually pronounced commitment towards achieving good relations. For those 'ill-prepared' for a marriage of such intensity, then abridged versions akin to 'engagement', 'cohabitation' or more preliminary proxies of such relations are perhaps better advised. (pls see Israeli policy on diplomatic bags checks for an example of some 'exceptions': "Most important are the reservation by most Arab nations concerning the immunity of diplomatic bags and non-recognition of Israel")
In regard to your question about "not state sponsored" crimes, which I believe the Ionescu case is similarly categorized, then I would conclude A31.4 to be the most efficacious and equitable means for resolution, not forgetting the preferably good relations between the 2 sovereigns to start with- that is in so far as the said 'sending state' displays preference towards
discipline of the said diplomat in accordance to A31.4, to which it should rightfully be given allowance for.
But if by unfortunate circumstance a failure of negotiations result, with the receiving state remaining ill satisfied with the extent to which justice has been served in accordance to A31.4, then the receiving state may choose, by application, the express waiver of the sending state via: A32.1 and .2: "The immunity from jurisdiction of diplomatic agents and of persons enjoying immunity under Article 37 may be waived by the sending State. Waiver must always be express".
Should both A31.4 and A32.1-2 both fail, then the least 'diplomatic' possibility would be to apply A39.2 only after having satisfied the requirements of:
- A9.1: "The receiving State may at any time and without having to explain its decision, notify the sending State that the head of the mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of the mission is persona non grata or that any other member of the staff of the mission is not acceptable. "
A39.2 which states: "When the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have come to an end, such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment when he leaves the country, or on expiry of a reasonable period in which to do so,..."
And as U see, A39.2 is a rather antagonistic article to use, one for which I question the purpose how such 'diplomatic-relations' could have really existed at all in the first place.
Hope this helps, just my 2c.
Rgds
B.C.
Ref:
- Diplomatic immunity[wiki]: 'Exceptions to the Vienna Convention': "Most important are the reservation by most Arab nations concerning the immunity of diplomatic bags and non-recognition of Israel"Quotes and references: -
Romania welcomes envoy
ROMANIA has welcomed a special envoy from Singapore, and said it would support him during his upcoming visit to Bucharest to help Romanian officials with their investigations into its former charge d'affaires to Singapore, Silviu Ionescu.
A statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) on Sunday said Minister George Yeo had written twice to his Romanian counterpart Teodor Baconschi to inform him of the appointment of Singapore's ambassador in Brussels as special envoy, and of the envoy's impending visit.
Mr Baconschi, in addition to welcoming Mr Anil Kumar Nayar, assured Singapore of Romania's strong commitment to due process in the case concerning Ionescu, and its determination to enforce the law to its utmost extent.
The former diplomat was found by a coroner's court to have run over three pedestrians along Bukit Panjang Road after a night of drinking on Dec 15 last year. He later abandoned the embassy vehicle and reported it stolen.
Singapore invited Romanian investigators to the republic to review the evidence against Ionescu over a month ago.
It appointed Mr Nayar to go to Romania when the European country was unable to finalise dates for the visit.
-- ST
-
QX179R, thanksfor the article, no clue why it ends with "It appointed Mr Nayar to go to Romania when the European country was unable to finalise dates for the visit."
Anyway, here's the other:
Title: Romania reassures S'pore on Ionescu's case
By: Low Mei Mei
Date: 16 May 2010 1851 hrs (SST)
URL: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1057031/1/.html
SINGAPORE: Romania's foreign minister has given the assurance that the authorities in his country have a strong commitment to fully observe the legal procedures in the hit-and-run case involving Dr Silviu Ionescu.
Mr Teodor Baconschi also underscored their determination to enforce the law to its utmost extent.
These reassurances were given in letters between Mr Baconschi and Singapore's Minister for Foreign Affairs George Yeo.
Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said in a statement on Sunday that there had been an exchange of letters between Mr Yeo and Mr Baconschi on the case of Dr Ionescu.
In two separate letters, Mr Yeo informed Mr Baconschi of the appointment of Singapore's Ambassador in Brussels as Singapore's Special Envoy to Romania.
Mr Yeo also informed Mr Baconschi of the forthcoming visit to Bucharest by the Special Envoy.
MFA said Mr Baconschi, in his two replies, welcomed the visit of Singapore's Special Envoy. It also expressed readiness to extend full support for the Envoy's mission.
Singapore's MFA said it welcomes these assurances from the Romanian foreign minister himself. It added that it will extend the fullest possible cooperation to the Romanian authorities to ensure that justice is served.
- CNA/irI guess from the start, the best way forward would have been for mutual envoys in this regard to have been identified at the soonest possible occasion whence any significant 'incursions' by a 'diplomatic agent' had occurred, themselves kept informed and colaborating- since diplomatic relations, by virtue of their mutual nature, and being created in the spirit of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (VCDR), ought ultimately be resolved through provisions of the same listed in the VCDR.
Thus a 'visit' this day, 5months after the said 'incursion' dated 15Dec2009, is indeed a very late appointment. Unfair to the chosen envoy Mr Nayar and very late in the process of mutual reconciliation.
Even the eventual negotiations amongst prosecutors are ought to be conducted through diplomatic channels.
Singapore must thus quickly establish diplomatic channels via its chosen envoy so that Romanian prosecutors can be clear and agreeable with the evidence at hand. Whilst it might be understandable that Romanian prosecutors might be uncomfortable with a Singaporean prosecutor taking their place in the Romanian courts, this would be a good opportunity for a Singaporean investigator &/or prosecutor to be sent to Romania to respond to whatever queries the Romanians should have in their investigations- if Romania is agreeable that is. If necessary, core personnel and witness should be facilitated in traveling &/or video conferencing facilities amply harnessed both during Romanian investigations as well as in court, so that Justice to be properly served, modern technology facilitating, distance notwithstanding.
'Love letters' to and fro are today the parlance of a lover's duet. May modern technology be harnessed, may Justice prevail.
In closing,
'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa'.
"God doesn't require us to succeed; he only requires that you try".~ Mother Teresa
Regards
B.C.
-
Originally posted by bic_cherry:
Hi 'handsome troublemaker2005', noting the way in which U have courageously corrected my original response, I really see no point in continuing my meaningful discourse with you.
Your indiscretions are courageous.
He who does not have time to read has still every rights to comment.
*kisses*
Really i never bothered to read all your long text quotes but you actually read all my posts. *hugs*.
I just commented because i have internet connection and rights is vested to everyone
-
[TDY] 'Immunity should only go so far'
I believe that in making this comment, Mr Terrence Lim omits the vital fact that the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Article 31.4 states: "The immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt him from the jurisdiction of the sending State."Quote:Immunity should only go so far
Letter from Terence Lim Eu Seng
05:55 AM May 18, 2010
I refer to the commentary "The principle of diplomatic immunity is sound" (May 14).
I do not dispute the necessity of diplomatic immunity per se but it should not cover universally and obviously heinous crimes. Ambiguous legal practices or local laws in different countries may of course contribute to fear of imprisonment or retribution.
However, it would be ludicrous to suggest that diplomats need immunity from even atrocities such as rape or causing death in order to do their job well.
The rules should be amended to push diplomats to also fulfil their duty of reciprocating respect, rather than just letting immunity take precedence unconditionally.
http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/ED...only-go-so-far
The fault with Mr Lim's article thus lies in his severely lacking, if not misleading definition of 'diplomatic-immunity'.
The omission of this vital fact thus throws Mr Lim's entire argument off kilter since the existing clause within the agreement does indeed provide for the prosecution of crimes, committed under the 'guise' of 'diplomatic-duty', so effectively there should not be any 'immunity'.
The VCDR, as I understand, was written in the spirit of improving relations between Sovereigns. Why else would there be clauses defending the privileges regarding the acceptance and rejection of diplomats by the receiving state, not to mention emphasis upon the mutuality of diplomatic relations?
In all fairness, adherence to the original terms of the VCDR (just 16 pages long (normal font size) as the internet version may be), requires a high degree of mutual commitment for adherence- and thus is perhaps ill suited for all and sundry.
WHY ELSE would the persecution for crimes committed within the territory of the 'receiving state' be persecuted by the 'sending state', but for the presence of a deep sense of trust and cooperation that exists, with certainty that justice would eventually be served.
Singapore and Romania are poor examples in this regard, where despite after almost 43 years of mutual relations, there is yet nothing much to show for in this regard as the contracting state(s)'s infantile interpretations of the VCDR deliver embarrassing public results, and that with the flip-flop involvement of the 'Interpol' no less.
Unless prepared for the high and lofty points of agreements contained within the VCDR, young and 'less developed' states are perhaps best suited to mutually accept 'abridged' versions of the VCDR- e.g. excluding certain unfulfillable articles earlier on, with a view to further additions later on as the relationship improves.
What's left for now remains the judicious adherence to the mutual terms of lofty VCDR agreement between the contracting sovereigns themselves- that would ultimately "push diplomats to also fulfil their duty of reciprocating respect".
Your assumptions are in keeping with the typical misguided citizenry.
In the spirit of public edification and thus active participation in the process of establishing good relations, may I invite your interest with an involved perusal of the 'original-version' of the VCDR 1961, 16pages, normal font (cover-page, preamble inclusive) at: http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/ins...s/9_1_1961.pdf
In the hope for better International Relations,
With Love and God bless,
Bic_Cherry.
- - - - - -
Reference(s):
- 11May2010: 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa'
- 'TODAYonline'-May 14, 2010: 'The principle of diplomatic immunity is sound'
- 18April2010: 'Ionescu Interpol Notice withdrawn?'
- "România and Singapore established on 30 May 1967, diplomatic relations..": [Bucharestherald.ro: 8April2010]: 'International search warrant for Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu' -
Wheels of justice are grinding forward - George Yeo on Ionescu case
Foreign Minister George Yeo says it is wrong to conclude that no progress has been made on the case of former Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu.
Giving an update in Parliament, Mr Yeo assured the house that the Romanian legal process has " moved into a new phase" and that the wheels of justice are "grinding forward ".
However Singapore should allow the Romanian authorities " reasonable time " to go through their own legal processes.
Ionescu, who was allegedly involved in a hit and run accident in Singapore, was recently detained by the Romanian authorities for 29 days.
Mr Yeo says he understands that it is possible for the prosecutor to seek an extention of the detention when the 29 days are up.
Meanwhile, Mr Yeo adds the Singapores foreign affairs ministry has also been giving periodic updates to the EU ambassador to Singapore.
Romania is member state of the European Union.
" At a cocktail I could sense the embarassment and awkardness felt by the European Union diplomats and they have a rule in all their foreign missions, the national flag fly side by side with the EU flag. So even though this is strictly a bilateral matter, there is not doubt that EU diplomats and EU governments feel that they have an interest in seeing this case satisfactorily resolved and justice properly served."-- 938Live
-
'Progress being made in Ionescu prosecution' (Wayang show)
My response to [TDYonline19May2010]: 'Progress being made in Ionescu prosecution'
If Mr G Yeo really wants to speed things up, he'd just pick up the phone and give his Romanian counterpart, Mr Teodor Baconschi a telephone call/ email and the 2 settle how to bring Ionescu to justice.
Tell or dun tell us everything about the 'secret plan' never mind, as we trust Mr Yeo and will all be able to see 'progress' through regularly updating news reports.
What we are just waiting to hear is some sense of ownership by a Minister, "Our officers are doing their job and both Mr Teodor Baconschi and myself are monitoring the progress of the Ionescu issue"
Otherwise, the rest is just wayang show, including 'original scenes' like:
- Romanian 'love letters' dated 11Feb, received only 8March2010 by SG MFA- [TDYonline10Apr2010] 'Romania's MFA gives its account'
- Interpol red notice, put on then take off, thanks to Interpol 'rubber stamp courier services ltd' due to SG's 'undiplomatic' use of A39.2.
- Ionescu appealing to 'wrong court' against a 'suspended' Interpol notice- see 7May: 'Bid to stop arrest fails'.
- Ionescu making wild allegations to press until his getting '29days detention', (to keep him from helping the press sell newspapers maybe).
- Romanian Investigators having 'waited their turn' for possibly>100days- till after SG coroner ceremoniously pronounced Ionescu as responsible for the accidents along with envoy-from-Singapore's scheduled visit- [ST16May2010]: 'Romania welcomes envoy'.
- The (Romanian) investigators now being delayed in getting "clearance 'on their side'"etc- [TDYonline19May2010]: 'Progress being made in Ionescu prosecution
Are all just a 'wayang' just a waste of time if there is no one really coordinating- and mutually embarrassing publicly.
After almost 43 years of mutual relations, our Ministers cannot 'face' each other except by 'coincidence' whilst waiting waiting for an audience with Pope Benedict at St Peter's Square in 21Apr2010?
Please lah, the only person around enjoying all this 'attention' must be Ionescu himself as he seeks more loopholes in the mutual effort of the Sovereigns to make his appeals to various courts.
And maybe the 'Pope' himself whose 'great demand' was cause of the 'delay' - which resulted in the miraculous meeting between ministers- without which the 2 might have never met nor spoken.
Please read my [11May2010] forum article: 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa'
And other posts in this thread.
I agree,
"If you want a love message to be heard, it has got to be sent out.
To keep a lamp burning, we have to keep putting oil in it"~ Mother Teresa
Love
Bic Cherry
References:
- Mother Teresa Quotes: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/au...er_teresa.html
- [TDYonline10Apr2010] 'Romania's MFA gives its account': "(Romanian ) Minister of Justice put in a request on Feb 11 for an "international rogatory commission"... to look into the details of the case, Singapore's MFA said the proposal was only conveyed to Singapore on March 8"
- [Bucharestherald.ro,8April2010]: 'International search warrant for Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu': "România and Singapore established on 30 May 1967, diplomatic relations.."
- [TDYonline23April2010]: 'A chance meeting at the Vatican'
- [ST,7May2010]: 'Bid to stop arrest fails': "The Bucharest Court of Appeals on Thursday overruled his request, deeming it inadmissible but said he could still appeal to the High Court of Justice".
- [CNA,8May2010]: 'Ionescu detained for questioning by Romanian authorities'
- [SGforums, 11 May2010]: 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa'
- [ST16May2010]: 'Romania welcomes envoy': "Singapore invited Romanian investigators to the republic... over a month ago. It appointed Mr Nayar to go to Romania when the European country was unable to finalise dates for the visit".
- [TDYonline19May2010]: 'Progress being made in Ionescu prosecution
-
Singapore's Special Envoy senses "good effort" by Romanian authorities on Ionescu case
SINGAPORE : Singapore's Special Envoy to Romania said he sensed a "good effort" by Romanian authorities in the hit-and-run case of former diplomat Silviu Ionescu.
Anil Kumar Nayar said this during a teleconference with Singapore reporters on his meetings with officials from the Romanian ministries justice and foreign affairs, as well as legal officials in Bucharest.
He said his sense is that they are trying to move forward for justice to be served.
"It has been encouraging," he said.
Dr Ionescu is wanted in Singapore in connection with a hit-and-run accident in December last year, which killed one pedestrian. - CNA/ms -
Romania 'doing its part'
SINGAPORE'S special envoy to Romania has ended his visit to the country, and is convinced that its officials are doing their bit to ensure that suspended diplomat Silviu Ionescu is brought to book.
Mr Anil Kumar Nayar, Singapore's Ambassador to the European Union, arrived in Romania with other officials from the Republic's Attorney-General's Chambers on Tuesday.
Over the past four days, the team met key people in Romania handling the case, including prosecutors and officials from the Foreign and Justice ministries. It also expressed Singapore's serious intent to see justice served in the case.
Mr Nayar was sent to the country to help speed up Romania's investigations into Ionescu, the country's former charge d'affaires in Singapore who was found by a court here to be responsible for a hit-and-run accident that killed one and injured two along Bukit Panjang Road on Dec 15.
Speaking by phone from Romania, he told The Straits Times yesterday: 'So far, our own sense is that the Romanian officials dealing with this case are indeed trying their best to move the case forward towards an outcome whereby justice is served.
'That was the overall sense that we got from our discussions here.'
-- ST
-
My Response to 'Just turned 50' over at the REACH discussion corner -
Hi, my Response to 'Just turned 50' over at the REACH discussion corner [link]:
Hi, 'Just turned 50' (I am a Guest)
- Thank you for your positive response to my article. Indeed, all would be 'very well' if the sovereigns could be as such, revering of the law and interpreting it correctly.Quote:@'Just turned 50' : 20/05/2010 3:17 PM: "BC is suggesting, by his fine interpretion of the VCDR, that the Singapore Government response in this case is inappropriate !"
- Your exclamation at the end of your sentence, unfortunately betrays 2 facts> that despite understanding my reasoning behind the FP (first post)- i.e. 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa' @source: http://www.sgforums.com/forums/3317/...8#post_9779656 , U are unable to accept the 'truth'.
- Yes, by my understanding of what is spirit of the VCDR, the Singapore response based upon A39.2 indeed misplaced if not undiplomatic- and U are welcomed to rebut me on the substance of my interpretation of A39.2 as cf A31.1, 4 as I'd previously alluded to in my FP/ message 'The book of law should be read in spirit, from front to back and not vice versa' @ http://www.sgforums.com/forums/3317/...8#post_9779656Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "by those statements, you are suggesting that our Singapore responses is wrong".
- As I also later responded to [TDYonline19May2010]: 'Progress being made in Ionescu prosecution', found at http://www.sgforums.com/forums/3317/...9#post_9796401 , "If Mr G Yeo really wants to speed things up, he'd just pick up the phone and give his Romanian counterpart, Mr Teodor Baconschi a telephone call/ email and the 2 settle how to bring Ionescu to justice."Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "What our government did was to step up pressure,when diplomatic third party notes and the recalling of their embassador for consultation clearly did not have the desired results. Until that interpol notice was issued, the Romanian responses have been all talks but no action".
- the failure of the Romanian ambassador to conclude the Ionescu case is thus no excuse for the flagrantly 'undiplomatic' use of A39.2 by SG- the remnants of which (a 'suspended' Interpol notice) remain a spanner in the works of cementing mutual relations, not to mention the currently important Ionescu saga at hand.
- U recall PM Lee's 2006 election message: 'PM Lee says countries worldwide respect and admire Singapore's proven system'?- If U are proud to be SGporean, den please stop comparing yourself to your neighbors. If U have a mind of your own, you'd study the problem and suggest viable solutions and not just support PAP 'lock-stock-barrel'. Then again, it is perhaps your job around these forums to defend PAP at all cost, by 'fair or foul', U have my sympathies.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "If this was to happen in Indonesia or Malaysia, there would have been demonstration in the streets already!"
- Does the present situation indeed require the "breaking of relations"? The latest news I see is that [ST22May2010]"SINGAPORE'S special envoy to Romania has ended his visit to the country, and is convinced that its officials are doing their bit to ensure that suspended diplomat Silviu Ionescu is brought to book".Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "To answer to the citizen of Singapore, and to entrench our position within the nations of the world, our government will have to consider breaking of diplomatic relation if all else failed."
- If U indeed support our gov, please stop your nonsensical posts as its people like U who pressure the govt by saying " our government will have to consider breaking of diplomatic relation if all else failed"- why are U talking about "all else has failed" when there is evidently progress being made, are U a warmonger?
- Just plain rhetoric to make yourself look good, whilst defending the indefensible that is.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: " We of course will not appreciate this outcome, "
- International pressure? U have no leg to stand on with your twisted and undiplomatic use of A39.2- one with no leg to stand on such that by 18April, 'Ionescu' was off the interpol list, after what I understand was Romanian protest- off the Interpol website that is.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "therefore the interpol notice and bringing the case to EU attention is what we call application of international pressures".
- Michael Fay wasn't a diplomat dear, so your comparison is obtuse to say the least.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "Remember Michael Fay from the USA ? If we cane him, notwithstanding the personel appeal of a US president, and the very strong US media pressure at that time, how can we let this scrumbag get away hiding under the perceived immunity of this VCDR."
- "perceived immunity of this VCDR" - this is thus a wrong assumption (my FP has already explained).
- U have no qualms about appearing good by comparing yourself to the worst tyrants of humanity, I really do hope that your shamefully inadequate views do not represent that of the SG government/ PAP.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "By the way, Israel send out hit teams when they could not touch the organiser of terrorist actions against their country, by legal channel. The CIA and the former KGB plus a host of many other countries are known to have employed hit squads.That is an example of the phase "by HOOK or by CROOK". What options that our government have exercise so far, are all well within the norms of diplomatic recourses!"
- Won't comment about the 'US diplomat accident in Romania' as I don't have the full facts about the final outcome as yet.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "I have read somewhere that a very similiiar accident happened in Romania some years ago, and the US diplomat involved, got away scot free. Now if we were to let this 'drunk, womaniser,liar and coward get away, that will be an excellent example of '2 wrongs does not make it right'."
- Whilst the effort to bring Ionescu to justice is commendable, the immediate use of such 'undiplomatic' methods isn't. I have already alluded to in my first post what, in the spirit of the VCDR, that protocol ought to be, so please do read it again.
- Just accept it that this time, either a mistake was made, or clarification omitted- despite our efforts to "always ensuring that we are on sound and reasonable grounds"- could it be the 'jackpot syndrome' on discovering A39.2, or the stress of the coming elections, I dunno? Just hope that overcome the 'puzzlement', stop bickering and cooperate in the spirit of the VCDR.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "Singapore is just 1 little dot in the world ! Time and again, we have to stand up to greater nations then Romania, like the USA and China, when necessary (always ensuring that we are on sound and reasonable grounds)".
- Say what U may, that's your right of free speech but please just remember that its oft said that 'pride comes before fall'Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "That is why we are able to command the respect of the world and consistently punched way, way above our weight in the world of geo-political plays!"
- Thanks for the invite, it's been responded to accordingly.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: "Dear BC, please think through your case again."
- Just hoping that as u grow older, U get wiser too.Quote:@'Just turned 50':21/05/2010 3:49 PM: " Thanks for your birthday greeting ! "
Its not healthy to wear 'rose tinted' glasses all of the time.
Do have a nice day,
love,
B.C.
I say,
"If you want a love message to be heard, it has got to be sent out.
To keep a lamp burning, we have to keep putting oil in it"~ Mother Teresa -
Trip of Romania reps delayed
THE visit by Romanian representatives of a joint technical working group here to interview witnesses linked to the hit-and-run involving former diplomat Silviu Ionescu has been postponed by a few days.
They were expected to have arrived on Wednesday, but they will be here from Sunday to next Wednesday instead.
A Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesman said on Wednesday: 'The Romanians have informed us that the visit will now take place from 30 May to 2 June. We welcome the visit.'
The visit will help the Romanian authorities in their case against Ionescu, who is being investigated on charges of manslaughter, leaving the scene and making false statements.
A coroner's court here had found the 50-year-old former charge d'affaires in Singapore responsible for a hit-and-run accident that killed one and injured two along Bukit Panjang Road on Dec 15.
-- ST
-
Romanian officials arrive
TWO Romanian officials flew into Singapore yesterday afternoon to build their case against suspended diplomat Silviu Ionescu, who is denying his role in a hit-and-run accident here on Dec15.
The senior level prosecutor and police officer were met at Changi Airport's Terminal2 at about 4pm by Romania's acting charge d'affaires here, Mr Alex Coseru.
Neither man spoke to The Straits Times as they walked from the arrival hall to the embassy car waiting outside.
The visit by the officials, who will link up with their counterparts from Singapore to form a working group, is expected to deepen Romania's investigations into the involvement of Ionescu in the double hit-and-run case.
This is important because the former charge d'affaires has refused to return to Singapore to face charges, after a Coroner's Court found him responsible for hitting three pedestrians in Bukit Panjang Road on Dec15. One of them later died, while the other two were injured.
As neither country has an extradition treaty with the other, the Romanian government could not compel Ionescu, 50, to return.
-- ST
-
Ionescu case: fact-finding duo go back to Romania on Tuesday
SINGAPORE: The two Romanian officials on a fact-finding visit in Singapore on the hit-and-run case involving former diplomat Silviu Ionescu will return to Romania on Tuesday.
Romania's Acting Charge d'affaires Mr Alexandru Coseru said this in response to queries from Channel NewsAsia.
But he said he did not have details of the work of the officials.
He said the embassy was only facilitating Romania's investigations.
Channel NewsAsia understands that the two representatives of the Joint Technical Working Group had interviewed witnesses in Singapore.
A court in Bucharest had ordered Dr Ionescu to be detained for a 29-day period, pending investigations.
He is wanted in Singapore for a hit-and-run accident which killed a pedestrian in December last year.
- CNA/ir -
Ionescu trial in Romania
BUCHAREST - ROMANIAN diplomat Silviu Ionescu, will be tried in his native country over a hit-and-run crash in Singapore in December that killed a Malaysian national, prosecutors said on Thursday.
A former charge d'affaires in Singapore, he has been indicted for homicide, causing physical injuries and false statements, a press release from the general prosecutor's office said.
The date of his trial has not been set yet and he will remain in custody until then, the statement said. He was arrested by Romanian authorities in May.
Ionescu is alleged to have hit three pedestrians in two incidents in December while driving a car belonging to the Romanian mission. One of the victims, a 30-year-old Malaysian national, suffered brain damage and died on Christmas Day, while the two others, aged 24 and 18, suffered injuries.
The diplomat, who flew back to Romania days after the accident, 'did not stop to let pedestrians cross like they were allowed to do by a green light', prosecutors said. 'He left the scene of the first crash and drove on to the following crossroad where he again did not stop by a pedestrian crossing and caused another accident', they added.
Ionescu has publicly denied he was the driver, claiming the car was stolen. According to prosecutors, the claim 'does not conform to reality.' Singapore's foreign ministry has repeatedly called on the Romanian government to 'ensure that justice is served and seen to be served' in Ionescu's case. -- AFP
-
looks like justice has caugh up with him in Romania
-
If the car was stolen, wouldn't there be fingerprints, Dna and heap loads of evident lying around?
-
FM Yeo urges patience in Ionescu's case
SINGAPORE: Foreign Minister George Yeo has urged patience in the case of a former Romanian diplomat allegedly involved in two hit-and-run accidents here.
Dr Silviu Ionescu has been formally charged with homicide by Romanian courts.
He will also be tried for giving false information and causing physical injuries.
Dr Ionescu will be tried in his own country, according to Romanian authorities who said this on Thursday. The date of his trial has yet to be fixed.
At a community event on Sunday, Mr Yeo told reporters that the Singapore government's lawyer in Romania has been kept informed by Romanian authorities.
He added that Singapore will render assistance if required to do so.
"It's very important for us to be patient, because if we're impatient, and we're offside, then we lose. So observing due process is absolutely important, both in Singapore and in Romania. It means going through what is required step by step, and sometimes holding back our desire to make comments or do things which we may regret later," said Mr Yeo.
In the early hours of December 15 last year, a black Audi belonging to the Romanian embassy ran down three pedestrians in two separate accidents at Bukit Panjang.
One man, Malaysian Tong Kok Wai, soon died from his injuries. Another, Singaporean Bong Hwee Haw, has filed a civil suit against Dr Ionescu for compensation.
A coroner's inquiry in May had established that the former charge d'affaires was behind the wheel at the time.
- CNA/ir -
WOW...Is he above the law?
All the other criminals didn't even get the chance to be sentenced in their homecountry?
-
Ionescu trial in Romania to start on July 27
SINGAPORE: Singapore says the trial of former Chargé d'Affaires Dr Silviu Ionescu in Romania, which begins on Tuesday, is an important step forward in ensuring that justice is served.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said in a statement on Monday that its Special Envoy to Romania, Ambassador Anil Kumar Nayar will attend the start of the trial.
Dr Ionescu has been indicted by Romania's General Prosecutor's Office for homicide, and is also accused of causing physical injuries and making false statements.
He was arrested by Romanian authorities in May, for allegedly hitting three pedestrians while driving a car belonging to the Romanian Embassy in Singapore.
One of the victims died.
Dr Ionescu has publicly denied he was the driver, claiming the car was stolen.
Singapore's foreign ministry has repeatedly called on the Romanian government to "ensure that justice is served and seen to be served" in the case.
- CNA/jm
-
Ex-Romanian diplomat Ionescu asks to be released on judicial supervision
BUCHAREST, Romania : Former Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu has asked to be released on judicial supervision on the first day of his manslaughter trial in Romania.
Ionescu is wanted in Singapore for his involvement in two hit-and-run accidents along Bukit Panjang on December 15 last year in which one person was killed and two others injured.
Ionescu has been in custody in Romania since May and was brought to the courtroom wearing handcuffs.
During the hearing, he claimed the evidence against him was not sufficient and, moreover, falsified.
He said that he did not write the very first report to the police, detailing exactly what happened in December last year, but that he only wrote the second report.
Even that report, he said, was rewritten by someone else and contained mistakes.
The court hearing is still continuing, but if the judge decides to release Ionescu under judicial supervision, he would have to remain in Romania and report to police on his whereabouts.
Neither of the victims of the accident nor their representatives is present at the hearing, but they are likely to be invited to the trial later on, in accordance with Romania's laws.
One person died and two were injured in two separate hit-and-run accidents in Singapore on December 15.
Ionescu, a Romanian charge d'affaires in Singapore at that time and who was allegedly the driver, is now indicted for homicide, causing physical injuries, and giving false statements.
One of the victims is claiming over $630,000 in compensation.
The diplomat flew back to Romania days after the accident and claimed that he was not the driver of the car, and that the car was stolen.
- CNA/al
-
Hard to jail him.
This case will drag on for a long long time.
-
Jul 28, 2010
Release request denied
By Mihai Ursu FOR THE STRAITS TIMES
Ionescu had sought to be freed under judicial supervision, under which he would not be allowed to leave the country and would have to report to the police regularly. -- PHOTO: SHIN MIN
BUCHAREST - A CRIMINAL court on Wednesday rejected former Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu's request for release under judicial supervision, which would have freed him from detention.
A court official and Ionescu's attorney, Mr Nelu Tasca, confirmed that the 50-year-old former charge d'affaires will remain behind bars until further notice. Mr Tasca, however, said Ionescu was appealing against the ruling.
'We could not agree to such a ruling that takes no account of my client's presumption of innocence and of the scarce evidence against him. We have already appealed against the ruling and a higher court will examine our appeal in the following days,' he said.
The court's ruling came a day after Ionescu rejected the charges laid against him, including culpable homicide, personal injury, making false statements and leaving the site of an accident.
Now remanded in a Romanian prison, the former diplomat is being put on trial after allegedly hitting three pedestrians on Dec 15 last year in Bukit Panjang in Singapore, killing one of them. He left Singapore three days after the accident and refused to return to face charges.
On Tuesday, Ionescu had sought to be freed under judicial supervision, under which he would not be allowed to leave the country and would have to report to the police regularly.
Read the full report in Thursday's edition of The Straits Times.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_559041.html -
MFA says Ionescu trial not about S'pore system or govt
SINGAPORE : Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) has stressed that the trial of former Romanian diplomat Silviu Ionescu is not about the Singapore system or its government.
It said this in response to queries about the allegations by Dr Ionescu that there was a political conspiracy.
"The trial is about what happened on 15 December 2009 which resulted in death and serious injuries, and the evidence found has pointed to Ionescu," an MFA spokesman said in a statement on Wednesday.
"His responsibility will have to be addressed through the Romanian legal process for justice to be served, and this is where the focus should be," the spokesman added.
Singapore's Special Envoy, Anil Kumar Nayar, also stressed this point when he spoke to the media after the first day of the hearing in Bucharest on Tuesday.
He said: "Yes, we are pleased that the case has come to court, we are pleased that the process is going on. This is the commitment that has been given to us by the Romanian foreign minister, the Romanian government, that they also, like us, want to see that justice is done. That is our main priority.
"So I want to make it very clear here, that what is on trial here is not our legal system or Singapore as a whole."
Mr Nayar also made it clear that what's on trial are the facts of the case which Dr Ionescu has to answer for.
"I think what Romania and Singapore both want is to see that justice is done," he said.
Mr Nayar said significant progress has been made because investigations have been completed on the Romanian side, and the case has come to court.
He said the important thing is not to prejudge outcomes and make hypothetical predictions or assumptions but to "make sure that the process moves forward to the conclusion that it should reach and make sure that justice is done".
"I remain cautiously optimistic, but a little bit more optimistic than I was during the last visit, at least in the sense that there has been movement from the last time," he added.
- CNA/al