Journalist Razvan Savaliuc believes that the criminal complaint of Ioan Bendei was just a formality, therefore the legal proceedings against the Antennas were not initiated after the criminal complaint filed by the RCS & RDS administrator. Furthermore, the cable company representative was victimizing himself as if someone taught him to do this, Savaliuc argued.
The journalist made this statement after the luju.ro publication, where he is senior editor, wrote that the case against the Antennas was a SRI operation carried out by DNA.
" Bendei’s complaint's is a formality to cover up ... I can see in the transcripts of the indictment that Bendei is generating discussions and he is playing the victim as if someone has taught him how to carry a dialogue for others to get it that he is afraid. You can see a man who not only is not the victim, but he plays the victim in the sense of putting together a blackmail file”, Răzvan Savaliuc said Wednesday night on the Subjective show on Antenna 3.
The journalist made a reference in this case to president Traian Băsescu and to the fact that the SRI is under the president’s subordination.
"I cannot help thinking of Traian Basescu and to the fact that he nominated the Antennas and SRI works under the direct subordination of Traian Basescu. I wonder whether there isn’t a direct connection and whether the SRI began to put together this file before, after which the service provided the elements to the Prosecution and thus lead to the formulation of a case file.
The disclosure was made by luju.ro, after statements made to the effect that the Antennas criminal prosecution started after Ioan Bendei’s complaint.
" A crystal clear demonstration of the fact that the DNA has not opened legal proceedings against the Antennas and against the Voiculescu family as a consequence of the criminal complaint filed by the RCS&RDS director, Ioan Bendei, dated April 19 2013, which can be found at page 81 in the prosecution indictment.
There is mentioned in black and white the existence of a national safety warrant, requested by the SRI and granted by the High Court of Cassation and Justice in March 2013, more than a month before the complaint - denunciation filed by the RCS&RDS administrator, that the prosecutors argue was the grounds of the file.
What's a national security mandate doing in a case file related to the press, which bears no connection with any of the offenses in the category covering national security and why has the High Court approved such a warrant? "the quoted source writes..