Update September 25, 2013
Romania's Constitutional Court ruled that killing ALL homeless animals in Romania after 14 days spent in their death camps if not adopted or perished before IS CONSTITUTIONAL!
Message for Europe! from ProMediaSud on Vimeo.
It is with great sadness and anger that we have to announce that the Romanian Constitutional Court has ruled that the new law that sentences ALL homeless dogs in Romania to death after 14 days if not adopted, or perished before... IS CONSTITUTIONAL.
Please see: http://webtv.realitatea.net/live
On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lăzăroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"! Go figure!
On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter.
Their approval of, and the implementation of GEO 155/2001 has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology.
So we have a government introduced policy which at best is ill informed, historically proven to be unsuccessful with previously proven successful strategies dismissed. And on top of all, a strategy which will polarize society resulting in violence between citizens and almost as if to reinforce the evidence that the strategy is ill advised, ill considered and incompetent, the children will be psychologically damaged.
One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times.
Please see: http://webtv.realitatea.net/live
On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lăzăroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"! Go figure!
On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter.
Their approval of, and the implementation of GEO 155/2001 has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology.
So we have a government introduced policy which at best is ill informed, historically proven to be unsuccessful with previously proven successful strategies dismissed. And on top of all, a strategy which will polarize society resulting in violence between citizens and almost as if to reinforce the evidence that the strategy is ill advised, ill considered and incompetent, the children will be psychologically damaged.
One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times.
Please, sign Occupy for Animals' latest petition
The European Parliament
The European Commission
The Council of Europe
The European Ombudsman
The European Anti-Fraud Office
The Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs, Mr Olivier Chastel,
The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of The Animals
By signing our petition at:
► ► https://www.change.org/petitions/european-union-please-take-action-regarding-romania-a-european-country-challenging-europe
the following message will instantly be sent to the above mentioned addressees:
Dear Sir / Madam,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted GEO 155/2001 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used during the debate at the parliament was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young boy under what remains dubious circumstances. However the stray animals were blamed and as a result of the media frenzy and the vote, a state of abuse of animals exists now in Romania. Animals and their owners and protectors were immediately, and still are, at serious risk. It must be remembered that many millions of Romanians are animal owners or protectors of the animals. This law has polarized Romania's society and made it dangerously divisive.
It had to be expected that millions of animal lovers would seek to protect their own animals or the animals they 'protect' on the streets. Millions! It had to be expected that half a country would seek to defend and protect, and that the other half would seek to aggress.
Not only would this policy, bring infamy to Romanian authorities and by association, with Romania, apparently ill considered was the fact that an 'eradication' strategy simply will not be successful. Owned dogs will continue to breed and thereby ensuring a plentiful and constant supply of animals on the streets. Occupy for Animals, along with many others, suggested and still maintains, that this is a desirable condition! If implemented, it would therefore be a futile and ineffective policy.
The 'Making The Link' Study and Project Group - a major collaboration of international organisations, academics and world leading experts in THE LINK between exposure to animal abuse and the resulting effect on children's psychological health and development, had warned the Romanian Constitutional Court that the implementation of GEO 155/2001 - their 'eradication' strategy, which can best be described as potentially 'the greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' - would have a deleterious impact of the health of the children of Romania.
'Making The Link' - initiator Malcolm Plant (BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dipl Psych., Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver) wrote (among other):
"We would urge you to re-enforce your decision last year on precisely the same issue and with no additional changes to circumstances. Our concern is primarily for the health of the children which we will be measuring over the next few years. Academically we are anticipating hitherto profound impact on the children's health unseen in any previous study if you were to ratify the proposed amendments. As human beings, as parents, we are frightened about the effects if the new generation of Romanians are exposed to street horrors on a previously unprecedented scale."
On 25th September, 2013 Constitutional Court judge Petre Lazaroiu, suggested that "the mass killing of stray dogs in Romania could traumatize the population"... Then the entire place ruled to cull all dogs... and that the eradication of Romania's homeless animals - although it had been ruled unconstitutional in January 2012 - was now "constitutional"!
On 25th of September, the Romanian Constitutional Court had an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous. They chose the latter.
Their approval of, and the implementation of GEO 155/2001, has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology.
Not only have the Romanian Government dismissed the warnings expressed by the experts, and failed to acknowledge T-N-R as the only proven successful strategy to control and curb stray animal populations (in fact: ALL 'catch & kill' policies have historically proven unsuccessful) but being aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed 'eradication' strategy, are aware that significant personal profits can be made through corrupt alliances.
The net result will be abject strategic failure and the number of animals will not decrease. Through corrupt alliances, personal profits from the animal corpse disposal will have been secured.
But the biggest cost is in the human domain. Children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals.
There is then some inevitability that once such aggression is socially sanctioned, their journey will continue by aggressing against person, against property. They will see no distinction. Their journey can easily lead to the killing of another person. Significant research has identified this development and ending. This is the slow diminishment of a society's moral substance and gradual increase into a prevalence of violence but a more immediate but equally destructive effect can be seen.
In any society, irrespective of political dictats, there is no homogeneity of support. Emotive issues exacerbate differences. Any society will contain those who passionately support the rights of companion animals and also those who have no regard or who are motivated by political hysteria. At such levels of passion, in counterpoint to each other, this polarization can produce levels of acute violence. Neighbor against neighbor! Even before official recognition of the law in Romania, two neighbors have fought over this issue and one was killed. Even before! One can only stand and watch now and wait while the death count gets higher!
So we have a government introduced policy which at best is ill informed, historically proven to be unsuccessful with previously proven successful strategies dismissed. And on top of all, a strategy which will polarize society resulting in violence between citizens and almost as if to reinforce the evidence that the strategy is ill advised, ill considered and incompetent, the children will be psychologically damaged. One cannot conceive of a more counter productive, societally destructive direction taken by any European Union Member Government in recent times.
Additional information is compiled at:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania--a-country-cries-out-for-revenge-after-the-tragic-death-of-a-four-year-old-boy-who-had-been-attacked-by-dogs.html
And:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania---on-the-greatest-animal-genocide-in-european-history-government-initiated-anarchy-violations-of-human-rights-and-children-rights.html
Occupy for Animals is being bombarded with emails and calls from desperate Romanian animal activists and rescuers who are pleading for help!
Not only are their own companion animals, and/or the animals that are in the care of their organisations and who most certainly constitute no 'danger' to the public and who often even already have potential adopters (outside of Romania) at risk of being taken by the dog catchers and thrown in their so-called 'shelters' where death is a certainty and not an option, but the people, too, are at risk of being physically attacked!
And it's only the beginning!
Considering the scale of the tragedy that is already unfolding, the societal disaster along with the potentially 'greatest animal genocidal impact on human health in European history' that we are heading towards, we are respectfully begging for you to intervene and to help Romania to get back on track before it's too late!
In addition to our plea for help, we also have a few questions that we - together with very very many people from Europe and from all around the world - would really love to have an answer to.
Below, our questions, suggestions, and remarks.
To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN, and the European Parliament's INTERGROUP on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the new 'legislation':
Romania's Constitutional Court ruled on 25th September, 2013 that the proposal which had been accepted by the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament on 10th of September, 2013, is "constitutional" and that the 'euthanasia' of all homeless dogs in Romania, after 14 days spent in their so-called 'shelters if not adopted or perished before this time has elapsed, is 'constitutional', too, although they had ruled in January 2012, that: "the killing of healthy animals was unconstitutional as a mean to control stray animal populations until all other solutions had been applied".
What has changed since January 2012 on the "management" of Romania's stray animals populations?
We haven't heard of any massive sterilization campaigns!
We haven't heard of any 'education of the populace regarding the importance of spay & neuter' their owned (but allowed to roam freely and to mate as they wish) companion animals! And in this context, we would like to remind you that an estimated 5 million puppies are born each year in Romania in rural areas of which some are being killed by their owners, and the others are simply being thrown out on the streets or in the woods.
We haven't heard of any measures taken to undermine breeding, including "back yard breeding"!
To the European Parliament's INTERGROUP on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals - regarding the before mentioned points:
Can, and will, the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Conservation and Welfare of Animals, please ask Mrs Daciana Sarbu - Vice President of the Intergroup, co-initiator of the Written Declaration on Dog Population Management 0026/2011, wife of Romania's Prime Minister Victor Ponta - what she has done in her own country to promote and implement a humane management of the stray animals populations as she has so brightly described in the WD 0026/2011?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to promote responsible animal ownership in her own country?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to educate the populace of Romania about the importance of spay and neuter, and/or not to let their animals roam freely and to mate as they wish?
Please ask Mrs Sarbu what she has done to avoid the tragedy that is now unfolding, bringing unnecessary suffering and death to both animals and their protectors?
As the wife of Romania's Prime Minister Vîctor Ponta, and a Vice President of the Intergroup, she had, and still has a unique position and opportunity to bring change to her country regarding stray animals population control and welfare, but we haven't - sadly and to our very great deception - heard of any actions taken by Mrs Sarbu in this field. In fact, we haven't heard anything from her since the adoption of WD0026/2011.
These questions might be, and probably are, irrelevant because they simply won't change a thing to the situation of the poor homeless dogs in Romania, but we really would love to know her, and/or your answer to our questions. In fact, we are sure that very very many people are interested in knowing the answers to these reasonable and justified questions.
Also, with the speech that Mrs Sarbu has given at the Intergroup-meeting from 12th of September, 2013, her totally misinformed and erroneous statements self-declared her as being unfit for office as either a member of the Intergroup, let alone as Vice President. Please, download and listen to said speech at the following link:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_iBJnK4Nmk1ZjhFYl9tMVNmU0k/edit
In light of the surprisingly misinformed content of the presentation by Mme Sarbu and her continued absence from Intergroup involvement especially when a serious focus is placed on her country, we would reserve the right to further explore Mme Sarbu's suitability for office and we are sure that you would encourage any adverse detail to be presented, as you of course only want officials who exemplify the highest quality in seeking the best of interest for the animals and people of Europe.
UPDATE October 3, 2013 - the additional information regarding Madame Sarbu's profoundly unprofessionally uninformed delivery can now be read at:
http://www.occupyforanimals.org/romania---daciana-sarbu-a-head-with-two-faces---one-face-smiling-at-the-death-bringers-the-other-face-smiling-at-the-protectors.html
Can the Intergroup please advise us as to who to complain to if someone is failing in his/her duty as regards to the position he/she, maybe now un-deservingly, finds himself/herself in?
To the EUROPEAN COMMISSION, the COUNCIL OF EUROPE, and the EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN - regarding the new 'legislation':
Former senator Marius Marinescu, president of the Romanian Animal Protection Association FPAM, and initiator of the Law 'Marinescu 1' commonly known as Law 9/2008, officially stated that:
"LAW NO. 9/2008 (Law MARINESCU 1) remains in force. Euthanasia is prohibited.
And that:
Article 7 index 1 of the Act provides: "It is forbidden to euthanize dogs, cats and other animals, except animals with incurable diseases identified by the veterinarian."
and that:
GEO (Government Emergency Ordinance) 155/2001 concerning euthanasia, approved on 10 September, 2013 by the Parliament, does not repeal the law 'Marinescu 1'"
and, considering that the dog catchers are already in action all over Romania - at the order given by their Government - and are catching all dogs that they can get hold of and sometimes even owned dogs on private properties (gardens and yards) to take them to an "uncertain" destiny, we believe this to be unlawful.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to shred some light into the matter as to which law is now the one that must be respected?
Can, and will, the EU-Commission help to restore the "order" in Romania if proven that the Romanian Government acts unlawfully?
To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding human rights violations and the safety of Romanian citizens:
We have seen people being arrested (already days before the vote on the new 'legislation'), we have seen dog catchers entering private properties and "stealing" owned companion animals, we have seen people being physically attacked by dog catchers when trying to defend their owned companion animals who they consider being part of their family, and we have (already) seen people (neighbors) killing each other. One just needs to check the Romanian news to find many cases, and one just needs to wait and watch while the death count gets higher. Or one can take action now and try to stop the anarchic madness.
And those who are not being physically aggressed are being forced to witness extreme cruelty to animals, and even to humans, on a daily basis, and to such an extent that they lose any good quality of life, and the feeling of being safe.
Experts have warned that exposure to abuse has an impact upon any individual who witnesses it, and that the exposure to uncontrolled animal abuse as happening right now in Romania, connects directly with children's psychological health. That children exposed to the capture and often immediate slaughter of the animals will seek to psychologically protect themselves from such trauma. They will desensitize. Reduce their sensitivity towards living creatures including fellow humans. Some will embrace the attributes of their violent society and finding legitimized sanction for the destruction of the animal sub-group, will also aggress against the animals.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in trying to protect the safety and the human rights of Romania's citizens?
Can, and will, the Council of Europe intervene in order to protect Romania's children from psychological impairment due to the exposure of uncontrolled animal abuse?
To the COUNCIL OF EUROPE - regarding the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' and violations of said Convention:
Romania has signed said Convention on 23/06/2004 - has ratified it on 06/08/2004 - and it entered into force on 01/03/2005 - and in addition to this, Romania has also embraced parts of said Convention in their National Animal Protection Law 9/2008.
Being a signatory of the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals', Romania had and still have a binding obligation to take adequate measures in the field of stray animal population control, including the housing and care of these animals.
As you know all of the before mentioned points of the Convention are NOT being respected.
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the Council of Europe take any measure to remind Romania of their binding obligations regarding the management of stray animal populations and the adequate care of these animals, among others?
Can, and will, the Council of Europe, please remind Romania that the 'European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals' is NOT an essentially cosmetic, futile, and very expensive useless piece of paper initiated at the expense of European tax payer's money, but without any value other than the paper on which it is being printed, and which can readily be dismissed?
To the EUROPEAN ANTI FRAUD OFFICE, and the BELGIAN STATE SECRETARY FOR EUROPEAN AFFAIRS - regarding corruption, misuse and potentially misappropriation of public funds and EU-funds
ALL 'catch & kill' or 'catch & incarcerate & starve to death' policies have proven unsuccessful in Romania. The WHO clearly states that killing stray animals does not stop the problem and only offers a temporary “solution”. The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Dog Population Management” (Geneva 1990) and various other academic studies show that killing dogs is ineffective. Despite mass extermination campaigns by misguided municipalities the street dog population grows, and the best examples of both good and bad stray animal population control policies come from their own country:
In 2001, Traian Basescu, the then-mayor of Bucharest launched a campaign that led to the extermination of about 144,000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9,000,000 Euros (62 Euros per dog) during the period from 2001-2007. Between 2008-2010, 20,000 dogs have been killed in Constanta spending 1,500,000 Euros (75 Euros per dog).
The only towns in Romania that used catch/neuter/release programs were Oradea and Lugoj, and the results are showing:
ORADEA
2006 – stray dog population: 4,000
2011 – stray dog population: 270
Costs incurred to spay/neuter a dog: 14 euro – program run and funded by Robert Smith - FPCC/Dog - Project Oradea, UK, in collaboration with city hall Oradea
LUGOJ
2008: 2,500 stray dogs
2011: 235 stray dogs
Costs to spay/neuter a dog: 12 euro – program run and funded by city hall Lugoj in collaboration with local animal welfare organization, Free Amely.
According to Princess Maja von Hohenzollern, Romania has killed an incredible 10 million stray dogs during the period from 2004 to 2009. That IS a 'genocide of dogs' that has never happened in Europe - and the entire world - before. Romania has killed almost as many dogs as the entire population of Romania with the only "result" that the streets of Romania are again (still) littered with live and dead dogs.
Overall it is estimated that Romania has spend between 25 and 40 million euros between 2001 and 2008 for the 'management' of the stray animals, while their numbers only grew larger!
Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dogs were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%.
The stray dog business as a very lucrative business and by intentionally NOT taking the right decisions to solve the problem, the Romanian government supports the prosperity of a dirty industry in which many people (including mayors and other politicians who accept bribes) profit from:
- the collecting of dogs
- the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design)
- the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals
- the incineration of the deceased animals
YES: "interestingly", even culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice!
QUESTIONS:
Can, and will, the OLAF please investigate the correct (or fraudulent) use of public funds spent under the pretext of stray animals management in Romania? As you know best, Romania ranks high at the corruption-index and it has been suggested countless times by many Romanian organisations during the last years, that the money would disappear into the pockets of greedy, dishonest politicians, mayors and business men, but that the dogs would not benefit from the public money that is being spend for their supposed management and care. We have seen shelters where the dogs were not even given a drop of water all the while the municipality had spent gigantic sums for their "care".
Can, and will, the Belgian State Secretary for European Affairs please let us know if the European Union gives money for animal welfare to Romania and the exact amount? If that proves to be the case then an independent commission should be assigned to do a complete investigation as to the appropriation of these monies.
What could perhaps be happening is that money slated for animal welfare could very well be used for purposes other than it was intended maybe even for the personal gains of those individuals who advocate these atrocities. Misappropriation of money and falsification of documents to cover up such misappropriation is nothing new and has been uncovered in other countries of the Eastern Block. Such information, however, is usually covered up and a wall of silence is put up by methods of intimidation.
Thank you, in advance, for the time taken to read this, for considering our plea for help, and for answering our questions!
[signer's name]
Thank you!
Romania
a country cries out for revenge after the tragic death of a four-year-old boy
who has, apparently, been attacked by dogs
September 4, 2013 - today marks the beginning of a very dark time for Romania's homeless animals. Following the tragic death of little Ionut, a four-year-old boy who was killed by dogs after he entered a private, fenced land, Romanian President, Traian Basescu, urged the Government to elaborate an emergency ordinance that ALL dogs be killed.
Since the tragic accident, all Romanian televisions and newspapers are continuously talking about this tragedy. They do shows, tell stories, interview people who feel disturbed by dogs, they show false statistics, they distort the reality, and they inflame the entire population.
But too little is being mentioned that little Ionut was left too long unsupervised by his grand mother; they he and his 6 year-old brother had left the park; wandered very far away; and entered a private, fenced property where dogs were. And this last statement bears repeating "dogs". Of course, it was quickly said that it was 'stray dogs', but these dogs could as well have been 'guard dogs', perhaps even deliberately encouraged to be aggressive. Since no-one is compelled to identify and to register his/her dogs (only the pure breeds are being registered, but ONLY with the Romanian Kennel Club) nobody can be taken accountable even if someone is being attacked or killed on private ground.
We do not know for sure... the dogs can have been guard dogs, and they can as well have been strays. But little Ionut's tragic death is sad beyond words, in any case.... and our hearts and thoughts go out to the family of the little boy.
But we know that the strays always take the blame because it is convenient for the politicians and it fuels the anti-stray propaganda machine... Under the pretext of the “stray’s terror” generous budgets are being allocated and their biggest weapon is the manipulation of the population through mass-media.
A few years ago there was the case of a woman attacked by dogs in a private yard, because she entered the premises at night, without any authorization, which had been presented to the public as a woman killed by strays. The same type of story happened again when a drunk woman was attacked by dogs who had owners, and they also blamed the strays for her death. There were other such cases...
The case of the 4 year old child killed by dogs is more than blurry and strange. There are things in the official version that just don't add up and many people have started to ask questions and wonder. Even Romanian MEP Corneliu Vadim Tudor had publicly expressed doubts on the official version of the boy's death. We have compiled the inconsistencies which have emerged days after the death of the little boy at the bottom of this page and we invite you to read them, to watch the video and see the pictures, to read the different statements, and to build up your own opinion...
Don't blame the dogs...
blame your corrupt politicians!
In 2001, Traian Băsescu, the then-mayor of Bucharest launched a campaign that led to the extermination of about 144,000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9,000,000 Euros (62 Euros per dog) during the period from 2001-2007. The dog catchers in Brasov spent about 2 million EURO in 8 years. Between 2008-2010, 20,000 dogs have been killed in Constanta spending 1,500,000 Euros (75 Euros per dog). Overall it is estimated that Romania spent between 25 and 40 million EURO on strays from 2001 until 2008.
Between 2001 and 2011 the Romanian animal control people have killed hundreds of thousands dogs by spending tens of millions of EUROs in public funds, while the number of stray dogs only grew larger because the authorities quickly came to realize that the mere existence of the strays is a very profitable business!
Between 2001 and 2011 the Romanian animal control people have killed hundreds of thousands dogs by spending tens of millions of EUROs in public funds, while the number of stray dogs only grew larger because the authorities quickly came to realize that the mere existence of the strays is a very profitable business!
In this 2001 photo, Madame Brigitte Bardot listens to Bucharest Mayor Traian Basescu, right, after saying she wanted to save the lives of some of the 200,000 stray dogs roaming the Romanian capital, some of which authorities had planned to "euthanized".
But the word 'euthanasia' is probably not appropriate when it comes to Romania. And therefore, and before going into the matter, we feel that we need to qualify 'euthanasia Romanian style' for our dear readers.
'Euthanasia Romanian style' (whether you like the expression or not) has nothing in common with the merciful and painless ending of an animal's life as practiced in western societies.
In the past, "euthanasia" in fact meant: poisoning, strangulation, being burnt alive, beaten to death or injected with magnesium sulphate, water, vinegar, paint thinner and other chemical substances...
Today, "euthanasia" means starving to death, freezing to death, or being left to die of the consequences of diseases and/or of injuries inflicted during the catching, or of unprofessional sterilizations left without veterinary care.
... or ending the animals' life with the cheapest methods "available".
In the past we have seen dogs being clubbed to death with shovels, with axes, puppies and small dogs being thrown against the wall, dogs being put in the crematoriums while still alive.
The next video (graphic) will give you an idea about "euthanasia Romanian style"... In this video Traian Basescu, at that time mayor of Bucharest, said about the stray dogs: "We will take care of them like if they were our children."
But the word 'euthanasia' is probably not appropriate when it comes to Romania. And therefore, and before going into the matter, we feel that we need to qualify 'euthanasia Romanian style' for our dear readers.
'Euthanasia Romanian style' (whether you like the expression or not) has nothing in common with the merciful and painless ending of an animal's life as practiced in western societies.
In the past, "euthanasia" in fact meant: poisoning, strangulation, being burnt alive, beaten to death or injected with magnesium sulphate, water, vinegar, paint thinner and other chemical substances...
Today, "euthanasia" means starving to death, freezing to death, or being left to die of the consequences of diseases and/or of injuries inflicted during the catching, or of unprofessional sterilizations left without veterinary care.
... or ending the animals' life with the cheapest methods "available".
In the past we have seen dogs being clubbed to death with shovels, with axes, puppies and small dogs being thrown against the wall, dogs being put in the crematoriums while still alive.
The next video (graphic) will give you an idea about "euthanasia Romanian style"... In this video Traian Basescu, at that time mayor of Bucharest, said about the stray dogs: "We will take care of them like if they were our children."
Fact is: the campaign started by Basescu, the then-mayor of Bucharest, led to the extermination of more than 144.000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9 million euros on taxpayer's money between 2011 and 2008 with the result that the streets of Bucharest are again littered with dead and life animals.
... and blame the mighty dog-catchers, too!
Although the problem of the aggressive dogs is supposedly the number one priority, the animal control folks rarely catch aggressive dogs. Instead they almost always take puppies and little, friendly dogs that are easy and safe to catch. This approach has the double benefit of keeping the dangerous dogs on the streets in order to perpetuate the “terror of the strays” while making the dog catchers appear as heroes and saviors in the eyes of the people.
Some dog catchers catch everything they can get their hands on, including dogs with owners or protectors and dogs that are sterilized and returned to their territory according to HG 955/2004. There were cases where dogs were taken while walking next to their owners or where the dog catchers went into people’s yards and took their dogs. A lot of the owners tried to negotiate a return fee smaller than the official one and eventually, especially in Bucharest, a “protection fee” paid to the dog catchers became the norm.
Some dog catchers catch everything they can get their hands on, including dogs with owners or protectors and dogs that are sterilized and returned to their territory according to HG 955/2004. There were cases where dogs were taken while walking next to their owners or where the dog catchers went into people’s yards and took their dogs. A lot of the owners tried to negotiate a return fee smaller than the official one and eventually, especially in Bucharest, a “protection fee” paid to the dog catchers became the norm.
In the above picture: the certainly most "famous" corrupt Romanian big-style-dog-catcher, Flavius Barbulescu, from Brasov.
On Brasov and the business of gathering dogs:
Several mayors with business “abilities” transformed the local animal control departments into businesses that made money by catching and killing dogs from small towns that didn’t have their own shelters or by catching the dogs in a town without shelter and “hosting” the dogs in a different city, tens of km away. The corrupt mayors became so addicted to these profits that they imposed quotas on their dog catchers: the Brasov dog catchers hunted in 4-5 counties, bringing over 120,000 lei to Brasov’s budget. Most of the dogs were exterminated in the Stupini shelter and a small number were handed over to other cities that had shelters.
The whole operation was made profitable at the price of torturing the animals and breaking the Romanian animal protection laws. After loading up the dogs and before heading for Brasov, the Brasov dog catchers would be paid per number of dogs for capture, transportation, sheltering and euthanasia.
Since they were already paid and everyone saw them leaving with the dogs, nothing (certainly not their conscience) stopped the dog catchers from releasing most of the dogs on their way back to Brasov, to make sure that the problem continues and they are called back to “help”. Any animal lover would be happy to hear that, if they didn’t know that the dogs would be caught again and again, sometimes injured in the process, and would most likely continue to multiply.
The chief dog-catcher, Flavius Barbulescu, even got to buy his own jeep, a Mitubischi L200, for about 30,000 EURO, under the pretext of helping large animals, such as cows, pigs, bears, rhinoceros or giraffes that might have wondered into the public roundabouts build by mayor Scripcaru. Rumor has it that the jeep is used in certain weekends by two local authorities in their hunting trips.
Please read also the information compiled on our page 'Corruption, organized crime and stray dog business in Romania'. It will open your eyes as to the classic mechanism of siphoning off public money... How Romanian's tax payer's money goes down the drain - or better said: is being incinerated together with the dogs while the stray animal populations only keep growing!
On Brasov and the business of gathering dogs:
Several mayors with business “abilities” transformed the local animal control departments into businesses that made money by catching and killing dogs from small towns that didn’t have their own shelters or by catching the dogs in a town without shelter and “hosting” the dogs in a different city, tens of km away. The corrupt mayors became so addicted to these profits that they imposed quotas on their dog catchers: the Brasov dog catchers hunted in 4-5 counties, bringing over 120,000 lei to Brasov’s budget. Most of the dogs were exterminated in the Stupini shelter and a small number were handed over to other cities that had shelters.
The whole operation was made profitable at the price of torturing the animals and breaking the Romanian animal protection laws. After loading up the dogs and before heading for Brasov, the Brasov dog catchers would be paid per number of dogs for capture, transportation, sheltering and euthanasia.
Since they were already paid and everyone saw them leaving with the dogs, nothing (certainly not their conscience) stopped the dog catchers from releasing most of the dogs on their way back to Brasov, to make sure that the problem continues and they are called back to “help”. Any animal lover would be happy to hear that, if they didn’t know that the dogs would be caught again and again, sometimes injured in the process, and would most likely continue to multiply.
The chief dog-catcher, Flavius Barbulescu, even got to buy his own jeep, a Mitubischi L200, for about 30,000 EURO, under the pretext of helping large animals, such as cows, pigs, bears, rhinoceros or giraffes that might have wondered into the public roundabouts build by mayor Scripcaru. Rumor has it that the jeep is used in certain weekends by two local authorities in their hunting trips.
Please read also the information compiled on our page 'Corruption, organized crime and stray dog business in Romania'. It will open your eyes as to the classic mechanism of siphoning off public money... How Romanian's tax payer's money goes down the drain - or better said: is being incinerated together with the dogs while the stray animal populations only keep growing!
Thankfully, some Romanian media
are becoming increasingly critical
In an excellent report by STIRILE PRO TV, the enormous amounts of public money that are being spent on the supposed management of the stray animals are being questioned! The article states that, according to official data, the authority who's in charge of the management of stray animals claimed the city's total budget of 14.5 million lei - that is almost 3.3 million Euros!
And that interventions only come with great delay, despite desperate requests of citizens.
"At the moment we have an average response time between 30 and 40 days. I mean the "action on the field". But to be effective you need to get somewhere in less than 2 weeks," says Razvan Bancescu, coordinator of ASPA.
So if you have an aggressive dog erring around your property and your playing children, you can be assured that the ASPA will "help" you in 30 to 40 days from now...
BUT what people do not know: they don't come so late because they are so busy, or because they do not have enough staff, they come intentionally so late to make you believe so! ...And to have even more budgets being allocated!
On the number of stray dogs living in Bucharest,
dog bite reports, and other figures...
Razvan Bancescu, president ASPA, has declared that in the Capital City, there are 64,000 stray dogs. The number is official, but more voices have sustained that their number is even bigger. In reality, the number of stray dogs would be much lower, and 64,000 is an inflated lie.
In a recent article published in the Romanian news, Anca Tomescu, Project Coordinator for Vier Pfoten, has declared for "DeCe News" that:
"This is a gross lie that Mr. Bancescu invoked! 64,000 dogs mean money"
When they confronted Mr Băncescu (ASPA) who praised himself for making lots of statistics, with a few very simple, reasonable and justified questions, the head of the ASPA was not able to answer them.
Simple questions as to:
remained unanswered. Mr Băncescu could answer none of these questions...
"He must prove with documents that he did conduct a study, thus he did not invent this number, he has to show the this study exists, and that there are 64,000 dogs. Still it is good that he did not come with 64,003"
Anca Tomescu added ; "the study we conducted, with a map under our eyes, with markers, based on neighborhoods, streets, literally counting the dogs, walking ...been there on the streets, showed 25,000 dogs. Of course we might have missed some dogs. We say that there are 35,000 dogs, because we know that we are not specialist in this matter but we did it by the number of houses, of apartment buildings, of streets, we did struggle, but we did as mush as we could.
FACT IS: the higher the number of estimated stray dogs, the higher the allocated budget.
Regarding the question "why are the figures inflated?" Anca Tomescu replied: "More dogs, mean more money. The dogs bring a benefit of lots of money, a huge budget, (funds from public funds) which we can not ask for, if we have a small number of dogs. You do realize that 64,000 dogs is good, very good, right? "
The budget for the stray animals "management" allocated for 2013 is about 4,2 million LEI. An additional 2.6 million LEI will be allocated for 2014, bringing the allocated budget to more than 6 million LEI for 2014.
Anca Tomescu added : "with 4 millions EURO, anybody interested to solve this problem, would solve it, without any doubt, with proper and humane campaigns, adoption campaigns, sterilization campaigns, shelters. You need to want to do it. 4 million euro is a HUGE amount of money.
She concluded that : "if this year they say 64,000 dogs and have a budget of 4 million EURO, and that the next year they will have 6 million, it means that next year they will claim to have even more dogs on the streets!
Romania's animal protection association FNPA estimates the total number of stray animals in entire Romania at 0,5 million. The authorities estimate them at 3 millions.
The stray animals business is a very lucrative business where many people profit from:
- the collecting of dogs
- the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design)
- the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals
and the incineration of the deceased animals... and the top of the iceberg is PROTAN, a controversial company of incineration.
The costs for the incineration and transport per kg dead (dog) body is about 15 EURO.
Since most shelters don’t have weight scales and Protan reception documents specify that the quantity column should be filled out by the customer, the weight is being eyeballed by the animal control folks. The reporting is often fictive so that 1 kg dead body can mean even 10 kg on paper, with the profit 10 times increased.
With the total number of stray animals (3 millions) as reported by the authorities, 250 millions Euro could be gained only in this stage!
With an industry-funded by the public budget already developed around the stray dogs there is a major interest to maintain a relatively constant stray dog population. Because the extermination doesn’t solve the problem since the streets are being permanently populated with new or dumped dogs, more and more dogs have to be collected so that “managing” the dog problems becomes a constant and reliable source of easy profits at tax-payers’ expense. A gravy train for contractors with good relations with mayors...
Solving the stray animals issue would leave all those who make big money from the "stray business" (including mayors and other politicians who receive bribes) without their huge profits!!!
FALSE STATISTICS: dog bites and surveys
The statistics presented in the mass media regarding the number of people bitten by dogs are false.
For instance the (false) statistic for Bucharest presented by the authorities for 2010 was: 13,200 people bitten.
In reality, 789 people have been bitten by dogs (owned + stray) in Bucharest, according to the Institute of Infectious Disease “Matei Bals”
AND the number of registered dog bites includes also other animal bites (cats, rats etc.)
People are being advised by the medical staff / friends/ other patients or on their own initiative, to declare that they were bitten by unknown, stray dogs – in order to avoid paying for the related treatment costs. About 70% of the citizens bitten by dogs with owners declared the troubles were caused by street dogs.
AND the statistic reported for a town include actually the cases from the surrounding areas, too.
An other manipulating method is the surveys:
the question is “do you agree with the dogs in the street?” Of course, the majority answers “no” (including animal lovers); the result of the survey is: “the majority wants the dogs to be killed”
A correct survey for example was made by eResearch Corp, with clear and correct questions (like “how do you think/like the stray dog problem to be managed: by euthanasia, sterilization, incarceration?”) it showed that 67% are against euthanasia and that 70% consider sterilization to be the best solution.
In a recent article published in the Romanian news, Anca Tomescu, Project Coordinator for Vier Pfoten, has declared for "DeCe News" that:
"This is a gross lie that Mr. Bancescu invoked! 64,000 dogs mean money"
When they confronted Mr Băncescu (ASPA) who praised himself for making lots of statistics, with a few very simple, reasonable and justified questions, the head of the ASPA was not able to answer them.
Simple questions as to:
- when this census took place?
- and in which areas?
- who was part of the team who made this census?
- how much this census did cost?
- if this census has been validated by some specialist in this matter?
- which are the most important conclusions if this study?
remained unanswered. Mr Băncescu could answer none of these questions...
"He must prove with documents that he did conduct a study, thus he did not invent this number, he has to show the this study exists, and that there are 64,000 dogs. Still it is good that he did not come with 64,003"
Anca Tomescu added ; "the study we conducted, with a map under our eyes, with markers, based on neighborhoods, streets, literally counting the dogs, walking ...been there on the streets, showed 25,000 dogs. Of course we might have missed some dogs. We say that there are 35,000 dogs, because we know that we are not specialist in this matter but we did it by the number of houses, of apartment buildings, of streets, we did struggle, but we did as mush as we could.
FACT IS: the higher the number of estimated stray dogs, the higher the allocated budget.
Regarding the question "why are the figures inflated?" Anca Tomescu replied: "More dogs, mean more money. The dogs bring a benefit of lots of money, a huge budget, (funds from public funds) which we can not ask for, if we have a small number of dogs. You do realize that 64,000 dogs is good, very good, right? "
The budget for the stray animals "management" allocated for 2013 is about 4,2 million LEI. An additional 2.6 million LEI will be allocated for 2014, bringing the allocated budget to more than 6 million LEI for 2014.
Anca Tomescu added : "with 4 millions EURO, anybody interested to solve this problem, would solve it, without any doubt, with proper and humane campaigns, adoption campaigns, sterilization campaigns, shelters. You need to want to do it. 4 million euro is a HUGE amount of money.
She concluded that : "if this year they say 64,000 dogs and have a budget of 4 million EURO, and that the next year they will have 6 million, it means that next year they will claim to have even more dogs on the streets!
Romania's animal protection association FNPA estimates the total number of stray animals in entire Romania at 0,5 million. The authorities estimate them at 3 millions.
The stray animals business is a very lucrative business where many people profit from:
- the collecting of dogs
- the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design)
- the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals
and the incineration of the deceased animals... and the top of the iceberg is PROTAN, a controversial company of incineration.
The costs for the incineration and transport per kg dead (dog) body is about 15 EURO.
Since most shelters don’t have weight scales and Protan reception documents specify that the quantity column should be filled out by the customer, the weight is being eyeballed by the animal control folks. The reporting is often fictive so that 1 kg dead body can mean even 10 kg on paper, with the profit 10 times increased.
With the total number of stray animals (3 millions) as reported by the authorities, 250 millions Euro could be gained only in this stage!
With an industry-funded by the public budget already developed around the stray dogs there is a major interest to maintain a relatively constant stray dog population. Because the extermination doesn’t solve the problem since the streets are being permanently populated with new or dumped dogs, more and more dogs have to be collected so that “managing” the dog problems becomes a constant and reliable source of easy profits at tax-payers’ expense. A gravy train for contractors with good relations with mayors...
Solving the stray animals issue would leave all those who make big money from the "stray business" (including mayors and other politicians who receive bribes) without their huge profits!!!
FALSE STATISTICS: dog bites and surveys
The statistics presented in the mass media regarding the number of people bitten by dogs are false.
For instance the (false) statistic for Bucharest presented by the authorities for 2010 was: 13,200 people bitten.
In reality, 789 people have been bitten by dogs (owned + stray) in Bucharest, according to the Institute of Infectious Disease “Matei Bals”
AND the number of registered dog bites includes also other animal bites (cats, rats etc.)
People are being advised by the medical staff / friends/ other patients or on their own initiative, to declare that they were bitten by unknown, stray dogs – in order to avoid paying for the related treatment costs. About 70% of the citizens bitten by dogs with owners declared the troubles were caused by street dogs.
AND the statistic reported for a town include actually the cases from the surrounding areas, too.
An other manipulating method is the surveys:
the question is “do you agree with the dogs in the street?” Of course, the majority answers “no” (including animal lovers); the result of the survey is: “the majority wants the dogs to be killed”
A correct survey for example was made by eResearch Corp, with clear and correct questions (like “how do you think/like the stray dog problem to be managed: by euthanasia, sterilization, incarceration?”) it showed that 67% are against euthanasia and that 70% consider sterilization to be the best solution.
On corruption in Romania
Corruption is part of daily life in Romania, with almost half of Romanians admitting to paying bribes. Now the EC is putting increasing pressure on the Romanian government to end bribery.
It's almost become compulsory. "They no longer mention it, you know what's expected." Some officials struggle against the rampant corruption but it often results in their dismissal. It's an ongoing battle between the politicians exploiting corruption and those fighting it. But following a push from Europe a number of high profile politicians have been charged, to the delight of Romanians. "People want to see convictions." (Video Uploaded by journeymanpictures on Jun 23, 2008)
It's almost become compulsory. "They no longer mention it, you know what's expected." Some officials struggle against the rampant corruption but it often results in their dismissal. It's an ongoing battle between the politicians exploiting corruption and those fighting it. But following a push from Europe a number of high profile politicians have been charged, to the delight of Romanians. "People want to see convictions." (Video Uploaded by journeymanpictures on Jun 23, 2008)
The EU should crack down on corruption in Romania, say the MEPs
According to a statement from the European Commission, corruption is costing the European Union's economy about 120 billion euros per year! That's almost the size of the EU's annual budget!
Left video: "The European Commission should put anti-corruption on the security agenda", says staunch anti-corruption fighter Monica Macovei. The Member of European Parliament from the EPP group has been trying to encourage the EU to adopt standardised anti-corruption laws for years.
Right video: Mr Nigel Farage says (among other): "There is a disaster coming down the track, and I am afraid that at the end the whole thing is gonna break up! And I would also like to point out: you're in denial over Romania and Bulgaria! Those countries are racked with corruption and organized crime, they should never have been allowed to join the European Union!"
Left video: "The European Commission should put anti-corruption on the security agenda", says staunch anti-corruption fighter Monica Macovei. The Member of European Parliament from the EPP group has been trying to encourage the EU to adopt standardised anti-corruption laws for years.
Right video: Mr Nigel Farage says (among other): "There is a disaster coming down the track, and I am afraid that at the end the whole thing is gonna break up! And I would also like to point out: you're in denial over Romania and Bulgaria! Those countries are racked with corruption and organized crime, they should never have been allowed to join the European Union!"
|
|
Why corruption will last in Romania
The summer 2012 has shown up the nature of Romania's entire political class!
Corruption is part of daily life in Romania, with almost half of Romanians admitting to paying bribes. It's almost become compulsory. "They no longer mention it, you know what's expected." Some officials struggle against the rampant corruption but it often results in their dismissal. It's an ongoing battle between the politicians exploiting corruption and those fighting it.
Almost everyone cheats or accepts cheating. Bribery is widespread. Indeed, it may be that Romanian society currently needs corrupt politicians in order to function. An honest political elite working to reform society would lead to a collapse of the current system, since a significant number of leading business people, journalists, judges, teachers, academics, leaders of civic society and syndicates would have to be dismissed (and some imprisoned). The higher-educational degrees of many major politicians would have to be reviewed (and in many cases annulled).
On top of everything else, Ponta was proven to have lied about a master's degree and to have plagiarised much of his doctoral thesis. The accusation came from the camp of President Băsescu, who seems oddly unaware that himself exaggerated his own daughter academic credentials in 2009 when defending her nomination for a place in the European Parliament. (Some of Basescu's closest, and most powerful, allies are doctors in science without any peer-reviewed scientific publication.) Two of the ministers appointed by Ponta proved to have serious problems – one was dismissed as he plagiarised the other presented herself falsely as a graduate of a prestigious US university. Ponta resolved the issue by dismissing the governing body of the expert group that had accused him of plagiarism, claiming that it was staffed by Băsescu's supporters.
Most members of the political elite enter politics with a poor record: most of the older politicians were closely connected to the Communist Party before 1989; while most of the younger politicians have no experience of work beyond jobs that they received due to their political affiliations.
No political leader – Ponta, Antonescu, Băsescu and many others – can enjoy credibility in the eyes of the public when they inveigh against nepotism. Daciana Sârbu, Ponta's 36-year-old wife, had little on her curriculum vitae when she entered politics, but immediately became an adviser to the Năstase government – in which her father served as a minister. She is now a member of the European Parliament (and Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals) – one of the best-paid jobs possible for a Romanian politician. So too is Adina-Ioana Vălean, Antonescu's wife.
The ascent of Băsescu's daughter Elena to a similar position in the European Parliament was appalling even by Romanian standards. In an incredibly short time, she moved from being a model to being leader of the PDL's youth wing and then to the European Parliament. (The job that Băsescu's other daughter, Ioana, has – as a notary – may to non-Romanians seem unlikely to raise suspicions, but in Romania being a notary is one of the best jobs and almost impossible to get without very good connections.)
In attacking politicians as corrupt, the media risk hypocrisy. Most advertising comes from the state or from companies connected, tightly or loosely, to politics. There is no truly independent media outlet in Romania and journalists are viewed as buyable.
The above text has been partially sourced from the following, very interesting article by 'European Voice' - please read it all, at: http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/2012/august/why-corruption-will-last-in-romania/75032.aspx
The stray dog business in Romania
and how to incinerate public money
Between 2001 and 2011 the Romanian animal control people have killed hundreds of thousands dogs by spending tens of millions of EUROs in public funds, while the number of stray dogs only grew larger.
Under the pretext of the “stray’s terror” generous budgets were allocated. The Bucharest dog catchers spent about 13 million EURO in 7 years (2001-2008)!
Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dogs were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%. Instead enormous gas quotas were approved. In Brasov, 4 rundown old cars with easy to tamper with mileage tracking systems were each allocated about 350-400 l of gas per month, which means each car did about 100 km/day. Land was rented for the municipality shelters, despite that fact that local authorities had land they could build on. In Brasov, the municipality paid in 8 years more than 1,500 EURO/month (170,000 EURO in total) to the owners of a former swine farm that was in really bad condition and it also invested in modernizing the farm. All of this while it could have built a brand new shelter with 15,000 EURO on a land it owned.
About 100,000 lei were annually spent on tranquilizers and lethal substances, but nobody ever checked that against the number of dogs reported caught and/or euthanized. These substances were bought illegally (without prescriptions), used illegally (because the dog catchers got lazy and started to catch all dogs with tranquilizers, committing two felonies and one?) and may have even been used or sold as drugs (Vetased, the most used tranquilizer contains ketamine, which is used as a drug and is legally considered drug since 2010).
"The stray dog business in Romania" is an excellent report written by Codrut Feher (FNPA). Please read the entire report as well as the information compiled on our page 'Corruption, organized crime and stray dog business in Romania'. It will open your eyes as to the classic mechanism of siphoning off public money... How Romanian's tax payer's money goes down the drain - or better said: is being incinerated together with the dogs while the stray animal populations only keep growing!
Under the pretext of the “stray’s terror” generous budgets were allocated. The Bucharest dog catchers spent about 13 million EURO in 7 years (2001-2008)!
Contrary to the popular belief that fuels the anti-stray protests, the money spent on food for the strays was just a infinitesimal part of the budget, as the dogs were being fed “subliminal” quantities, to quote the so called specialists from DSVA Brasov. Out of a total budget of 1,500,000 lei for 2008, the dog catchers in Brasov allocated only 5,000 lei for the dog food, less than 3%. Instead enormous gas quotas were approved. In Brasov, 4 rundown old cars with easy to tamper with mileage tracking systems were each allocated about 350-400 l of gas per month, which means each car did about 100 km/day. Land was rented for the municipality shelters, despite that fact that local authorities had land they could build on. In Brasov, the municipality paid in 8 years more than 1,500 EURO/month (170,000 EURO in total) to the owners of a former swine farm that was in really bad condition and it also invested in modernizing the farm. All of this while it could have built a brand new shelter with 15,000 EURO on a land it owned.
About 100,000 lei were annually spent on tranquilizers and lethal substances, but nobody ever checked that against the number of dogs reported caught and/or euthanized. These substances were bought illegally (without prescriptions), used illegally (because the dog catchers got lazy and started to catch all dogs with tranquilizers, committing two felonies and one?) and may have even been used or sold as drugs (Vetased, the most used tranquilizer contains ketamine, which is used as a drug and is legally considered drug since 2010).
"The stray dog business in Romania" is an excellent report written by Codrut Feher (FNPA). Please read the entire report as well as the information compiled on our page 'Corruption, organized crime and stray dog business in Romania'. It will open your eyes as to the classic mechanism of siphoning off public money... How Romanian's tax payer's money goes down the drain - or better said: is being incinerated together with the dogs while the stray animal populations only keep growing!
The killings have already started
The first dogs that will have to pay are the ones that are already incarcerated in the public shelters - those who are vaccinated, sterilized and that constitute no danger to the public...
The mayoress of Craiova, Lia Olguta Aliescu, who hates dogs and who is well known for allowing horrible suffering to go on in the local public shelter over which she has the responsibility, did not waste any time and was the first Romanian mayor to announce that she had ordered the killing of all dogs in their local shelter. The killing of the more or less 500 unfortunate souls have started today, September 4, 2013. The next unfortunate souls will probably be the dogs at the public shelter in Râmnicu Vâlcea.
Next week, it's the turn of the dogs in Bucharest's public shelters. Followed by those on the streets. Razvan BANCESCU, head of the Authority for Supervision and Protection of Animals (ASPA) said that a lot more dogs will be taken from the streets, the aggressive ones - or better said: deemed aggressive - will be killed immediately and the others will be thrown in one of their shelters. The number of shelters in the capital will be increased from actually 8, to 50. And given that one shelter has only a capacity of more or less 160 dogs, and considering that there are around 60.000 stray dogs in the capital alone, those for whom there will be no place, will also be killed. Those who will not be killed immediately, will be killed if not adopted within a few days. In fact, ALL will the killed, some sooner, others a bit later.
The fate of the homeless dogs of Timisoara is also already determined: mayor Nicolae Robu did not waste any time to sentence them all to death!
For the unfortunate animals who have the misfortune to enter such a public shelter, or publicly financed animal shelter, of which most are nothing less than illegal extermination camps run by untrained, poorly educated, underpaid and cruel shelter workers, and where they are being left to starve or to freeze to death, where they die of the consequences of diseases and injuries (often inflicted during the catching) and left without veterinary care, death will come as a welcome relief... because there are many things worse than death. But sadly, very sadly, death won't come swiftly. And it won't be fear nor painless...
Although the euthanasia of healthy animals had been deemed "unconstitutional" by the Romanian Constitutional Court, it seems to be 'okay' now... And there goes our trust in the Romanian Constitution, and in the authority and credibility of Romania's Courts and their Judges!
In addition to the mass killings happening right now in public shelters, the angry, murderous populace thinks that they have got a free ticket to kill and dogs and cats are being bludgeoned, shot and poisoned in villages and towns all over Romania. Pregnant bitches, little puppies and socialized gentle dogs, none are being spared!
While crying out for revenge over the tragic death of little Ionut, they kill dogs and cats right in front of the children that they claim they are wanting to protect, not knowing that the uncontrolled exposure of children to animal abuse has serious ramifications on the psychological health of these children resulting in a serious psychological disturbance.
No-one cares that killing stray animals is unlawful... neither the populace, nor the authorities. But this is nothing new. Although Romania has a very good animal protection law and even prescribes penalties, these are rarely enacted resulting in an essentially cosmetic ineffective animal protection law. The proposed law will allow local authorities to apply euthanasia of dogs that have stayed more than 14 days in a shelter. Killing stray animals on the streets, will remain unlawful also under the new law.
The mayoress of Craiova, Lia Olguta Aliescu, who hates dogs and who is well known for allowing horrible suffering to go on in the local public shelter over which she has the responsibility, did not waste any time and was the first Romanian mayor to announce that she had ordered the killing of all dogs in their local shelter. The killing of the more or less 500 unfortunate souls have started today, September 4, 2013. The next unfortunate souls will probably be the dogs at the public shelter in Râmnicu Vâlcea.
Next week, it's the turn of the dogs in Bucharest's public shelters. Followed by those on the streets. Razvan BANCESCU, head of the Authority for Supervision and Protection of Animals (ASPA) said that a lot more dogs will be taken from the streets, the aggressive ones - or better said: deemed aggressive - will be killed immediately and the others will be thrown in one of their shelters. The number of shelters in the capital will be increased from actually 8, to 50. And given that one shelter has only a capacity of more or less 160 dogs, and considering that there are around 60.000 stray dogs in the capital alone, those for whom there will be no place, will also be killed. Those who will not be killed immediately, will be killed if not adopted within a few days. In fact, ALL will the killed, some sooner, others a bit later.
The fate of the homeless dogs of Timisoara is also already determined: mayor Nicolae Robu did not waste any time to sentence them all to death!
For the unfortunate animals who have the misfortune to enter such a public shelter, or publicly financed animal shelter, of which most are nothing less than illegal extermination camps run by untrained, poorly educated, underpaid and cruel shelter workers, and where they are being left to starve or to freeze to death, where they die of the consequences of diseases and injuries (often inflicted during the catching) and left without veterinary care, death will come as a welcome relief... because there are many things worse than death. But sadly, very sadly, death won't come swiftly. And it won't be fear nor painless...
Although the euthanasia of healthy animals had been deemed "unconstitutional" by the Romanian Constitutional Court, it seems to be 'okay' now... And there goes our trust in the Romanian Constitution, and in the authority and credibility of Romania's Courts and their Judges!
In addition to the mass killings happening right now in public shelters, the angry, murderous populace thinks that they have got a free ticket to kill and dogs and cats are being bludgeoned, shot and poisoned in villages and towns all over Romania. Pregnant bitches, little puppies and socialized gentle dogs, none are being spared!
While crying out for revenge over the tragic death of little Ionut, they kill dogs and cats right in front of the children that they claim they are wanting to protect, not knowing that the uncontrolled exposure of children to animal abuse has serious ramifications on the psychological health of these children resulting in a serious psychological disturbance.
No-one cares that killing stray animals is unlawful... neither the populace, nor the authorities. But this is nothing new. Although Romania has a very good animal protection law and even prescribes penalties, these are rarely enacted resulting in an essentially cosmetic ineffective animal protection law. The proposed law will allow local authorities to apply euthanasia of dogs that have stayed more than 14 days in a shelter. Killing stray animals on the streets, will remain unlawful also under the new law.
Poisoned and bludgeoned dogs
in Bucharest, Baragadiru Ilfov, September 6, 2013
|
|
Killing is NO solution!
The killings that have already started and which will continue throughout Romania and which will end the lives of hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions of innocent creatures in the most gruesome ways, WILL NOT solve the problem for the following reasons:
Mark our words: in a few years from now Romania's streets will be littered again with life and dead dogs. All those who have already died, and those who will die, will have died for nothing!
Catch-Neuter-Return is the only proven humane and effective method to reduce stray animal populations. Statistical studies indicate that in order to fully control a stray population, you need to achieve a 70 percent sterilization rate of the animals within a particular community. Once you reach the 70 percent threshold, the probability that an unsterilized female comes into contact with an unsterilized male is sufficiently small, and the population stops growing.
Killing stray animals, however, does not stop the problem and only offers a temporary “solution”. The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Dog Population Management” (Geneva 1990) and various other academic studies show that killing dogs is ineffective. Despite mass extermination campaigns by misguided municipalities the street dog population grows, and the best examples of both good and bad stray animal population control policies come from their own country:
- Technically and logistically speaking, it is simply impossible for the dog catching services to capture all the stray dogs.
- Owned dogs who are not sterilized also contribute to the stray animal population but they won't be killed. Most owned dogs in Romania are not sterilized and allowed to roam freely and to mate as they wish. They will continue to reproduce litter after litter which will then simply be abandoned by their owners and so the sad cycle will continue year in, year out, with new puppies replacing the dying or killed adult population. Just one unaltered female dog and her offspring can produce 67,000 puppies in only six years. In seven years, one female cat and her offspring can produce an incredible 370,000 kittens. Male animals contribute to the companion animal overpopulation crisis even more than females do. Just one un-sterilized male animal can impregnate dozens of females, creating dozens upon dozens of unwanted offspring.
- If the Romanian government was interested in solving the stray animals issue, they would have started mass sterilization campaigns long time ago. But fact is that the stray animals business is a profitable dirty industry in which many people profit from: the collecting of dogs --- the construction of unnecessary shelters (including research and design) --- the housing of animals, including supposedly feeding and caring of the animals --- the incineration of the deceased animals. Solving the stray animals issue would leave all those who make big money from the "stray business" (including mayors and other politicians who receive bribes) without their huge profits!!!
Mark our words: in a few years from now Romania's streets will be littered again with life and dead dogs. All those who have already died, and those who will die, will have died for nothing!
Catch-Neuter-Return is the only proven humane and effective method to reduce stray animal populations. Statistical studies indicate that in order to fully control a stray population, you need to achieve a 70 percent sterilization rate of the animals within a particular community. Once you reach the 70 percent threshold, the probability that an unsterilized female comes into contact with an unsterilized male is sufficiently small, and the population stops growing.
Killing stray animals, however, does not stop the problem and only offers a temporary “solution”. The World Health Organization’s “Guidelines for Dog Population Management” (Geneva 1990) and various other academic studies show that killing dogs is ineffective. Despite mass extermination campaigns by misguided municipalities the street dog population grows, and the best examples of both good and bad stray animal population control policies come from their own country:
- In 2001 the then-mayor of Bucharest launched a campaign that led to the extermination of about 144,000 stray dogs in the capital alone, spending almost 9,000,000 Euros (62 Euros per dog) during the period from 2001-2007. Between 2008-2010, 20,000 dogs have been killed in Constanta spending 1,500,000 Euros (75 Euros per dog). As you know, both the city of Bucharest and Constanta are again littered with live and dead dogs.
- The only town in Romania that used catch/neuter/release programs was Oradea, and the results are showing: in 6 years the population of strays decreased 8 times.
The next video ‘Man’s Best Friend’ - a documentary filmed between 2011 and 2012 - outlines how this battle has played out before, and reveals all the options for dealing with this complex and emotional zoological disaster. For more information, please visit: mansbestfriend.ro and facebook.com/pages/Mans-Best-Friend/276505522427249
Ten reasons why Romania’s proposed mass-kill
of millions of stray dogs won’t work
and two reasons why it might
...is the title of an article written by Michael Bird, a UK journalist in Romania, and originally published at michaelbirdjournalist.wordpress.com
September 23, 2013 - An English version of a comment piece published here in Romanian: http://www.contributors.ro/editorial/zece-motive-pentru-care-propunerea-romaniei-de-a-ucide-in-masa-milioane-de-caini-nu-va-functiona-si-doua-motive-pentru-care-s-ar-putea-sa-functioneze/
No one wants dogs on the streets in Romania. In a country with up to two million loose canines, no one is standing on a pedestal in the centre of Bucharest shouting We Want More Dogs! We want a Dog for every school! In every office, a mandatory dog at every desk! Two dogs for every church!
For four years I have been writing about and filming stray dogs in Romania, including a film, ‘Man’s Best Friend’, released on Vimeo this week: https://vimeo.com/74578670 (see video above)
During this time, mayors, residents and dog lovers alike all agreed – no more dogs on the streets.
However when the council of a town in east Romania, Botosani, killed 200 dogs in 2011, there was a rumour that a local animal activist group was planning a ‘Dog Bomb’.
A ‘Dog Bomb’ is where pet-loving extremists orchestrate fertile dogs to breed over a six-week period and, once they have hundreds of puppies, they set the animals loose in the city. Dog anarchy follows. But it was only a rumour. No one – not even the Dog Bombers of Botosani – wants dogs on the streets.
So if everyone has the same end in mind, why can’t they agree on the means?
Following the horrific canine attack on a four year-old boy in Bucharest earlier this month, Mayor of Bucharest Sorin Oprescu pushed through a new law allowing councils to kill strays after 14 days in captivity – in a move fiercely contested by animal rights activists and now under dispute in Romania’s Constitutional Court.
Here are ten reasons why this new law may not solve the problem of dogs on the streets – and two reasons why it might.
1. In a massive city, with a mass of dogs, mass-killing is rarely effective. The more dogs you kill, the more space and food there is for new dogs. The World Health Organisation backs this up. As long as people dump dogs on the street and let dogs loose on the street to breed, there will be more dogs. When dogs disappear, other dogs appear.
2. To kill the animals, cities need vets. Vets must want to kill the animals. But many vets don’t want to murder. People did not study for six years to swap the surgery for the slaughterhouse. Last month in southwest city of Timisoara the vets voted not to collaborate with City Hall to kill the dogs. More could follow.
3. All dogs must die – except mine. When Romanians are surveyed, they say they want to kill strays. But if you ask the same Romanians, if they want to see the charming, big brown-eyed mutt which greets them every day with a cocked head and a wagging tail, killed by lethal injection, they will refuse. Because this dog is kind to children, friendly to strangers and he never bites – and, when he does bite, it’s because he’s scared. It is always other people’s dogs who are dangerous. The dogs in the other block. In the other yard. In the other city.
4. Bucharest tried mass-murder. As Mayor of Bucharest, Traian Basescu ordered the killing of around 100,000 dogs between 2001 and 2003. It failed.
5. The wrong dogs will die. The dog catchers will pick up the quiet, old, sad and castrated dogs – the ones that can’t breed. The problem is not just stray dogs. The problem is loose dogs. I’ve followed dog catching around the housing areas of the Bucharest suburbs. When the residents leave for work in the morning, they let their dogs out on the street. If they are caught by dog catchers, the owners pick them up from the shelter and pay a fine. These are virile dogs. They breed with strays. They create new puppies. The problem persists.
6. People will hide the dogs. There are a lot of old, single and idle people in Bucharest. Often they love dogs. They will be watching for the dog catchers and, if they come for their strays, they will conceal them in their flat, basement, garage or yard.
7. No-kill could become a black market. In the past, dog catchers in Bucharest took money from residents in blocks to leave their stray dogs alone. This could happen again.
8. It is hard to catch a dog. There are around 15 trained dog catchers for three million people of Bucharest and its suburbs. They catch dogs by shooting them with a tranquilizer gun loaded with sedatives such as ketamine. The city will need a batallion of trained marskmen who can be trusted with a gun and a litre of a party drug with a high street value.
9. Bucharest is a metropolis run by a village council. It can’t cope with grand projects and grand challenges. Or even small ones. I live on Piata Unirii – a square at the centre of the city. An international showpiece. In one year, they have not finished re-surfacing the pavement. It is a building site of dust, mud, rocks and holes. If Bucharest cannot lay a few paving stones in its city centre, it cannot manage the mass-murder of over 50,000 lives.
10. The capital never gave other solutions a chance. Councillors will argue back that the NGOs’ favoured idea of the sterilisation and the return of dogs to the streets does not work, because stray dog attacks on people keep rising. But the City never tried a mass-scale programme to see whether the dog numbers would fall. If, over a five year period, many NGOs could co-ordinate professional sterilisation in conjunction with all seven City Halls of Bucharest and the surrounding county of Ilfov, alongside comprehensive adoption and education about responsible ownership, while giving the authorities the right to euthanize sick, old and aggressive dogs, the problem could stop.
And two reasons why it might work…
1. Under the new law, in a small city in Romania, it will probably be possible to round and kill up to 1,000 stray dogs. But in Bucharest, this needs an unprecedented effort. The city needs to declare war on dogs. It needs a militia to go block by block, possibly forcing residents to leave their homes, while police carry out searches, removing every dog they suspect of being a stray. There must be no exceptions. They must enforce the 14-day rule before murdering the dogs. Killing 60,000 dogs means a massacre – and a massacre can only be effective if is ruthless and mechanical.
2. Politicians enlist citizens to be vigilantes. Using the media, politicians demonize all dogs as violent. The Government passes a new law allowing dogs to be killed. This sends a signal to citizens that they have the liberty to beat, poison, run over or lynch any loose dog. Anecdotally, friends are telling me of how bodies of dogs are appearing more often on the outskirts of Bucharest. If the nation’s leaders keep up the rhetoric, this may continue. The streets will be running with blood and poison and the blocks will be echoing with the sound of bats against brains until the last stray in Bucharest is dead – while the authorities bear no responsibility.
Source
September 23, 2013 - An English version of a comment piece published here in Romanian: http://www.contributors.ro/editorial/zece-motive-pentru-care-propunerea-romaniei-de-a-ucide-in-masa-milioane-de-caini-nu-va-functiona-si-doua-motive-pentru-care-s-ar-putea-sa-functioneze/
No one wants dogs on the streets in Romania. In a country with up to two million loose canines, no one is standing on a pedestal in the centre of Bucharest shouting We Want More Dogs! We want a Dog for every school! In every office, a mandatory dog at every desk! Two dogs for every church!
For four years I have been writing about and filming stray dogs in Romania, including a film, ‘Man’s Best Friend’, released on Vimeo this week: https://vimeo.com/74578670 (see video above)
During this time, mayors, residents and dog lovers alike all agreed – no more dogs on the streets.
However when the council of a town in east Romania, Botosani, killed 200 dogs in 2011, there was a rumour that a local animal activist group was planning a ‘Dog Bomb’.
A ‘Dog Bomb’ is where pet-loving extremists orchestrate fertile dogs to breed over a six-week period and, once they have hundreds of puppies, they set the animals loose in the city. Dog anarchy follows. But it was only a rumour. No one – not even the Dog Bombers of Botosani – wants dogs on the streets.
So if everyone has the same end in mind, why can’t they agree on the means?
Following the horrific canine attack on a four year-old boy in Bucharest earlier this month, Mayor of Bucharest Sorin Oprescu pushed through a new law allowing councils to kill strays after 14 days in captivity – in a move fiercely contested by animal rights activists and now under dispute in Romania’s Constitutional Court.
Here are ten reasons why this new law may not solve the problem of dogs on the streets – and two reasons why it might.
1. In a massive city, with a mass of dogs, mass-killing is rarely effective. The more dogs you kill, the more space and food there is for new dogs. The World Health Organisation backs this up. As long as people dump dogs on the street and let dogs loose on the street to breed, there will be more dogs. When dogs disappear, other dogs appear.
2. To kill the animals, cities need vets. Vets must want to kill the animals. But many vets don’t want to murder. People did not study for six years to swap the surgery for the slaughterhouse. Last month in southwest city of Timisoara the vets voted not to collaborate with City Hall to kill the dogs. More could follow.
3. All dogs must die – except mine. When Romanians are surveyed, they say they want to kill strays. But if you ask the same Romanians, if they want to see the charming, big brown-eyed mutt which greets them every day with a cocked head and a wagging tail, killed by lethal injection, they will refuse. Because this dog is kind to children, friendly to strangers and he never bites – and, when he does bite, it’s because he’s scared. It is always other people’s dogs who are dangerous. The dogs in the other block. In the other yard. In the other city.
4. Bucharest tried mass-murder. As Mayor of Bucharest, Traian Basescu ordered the killing of around 100,000 dogs between 2001 and 2003. It failed.
5. The wrong dogs will die. The dog catchers will pick up the quiet, old, sad and castrated dogs – the ones that can’t breed. The problem is not just stray dogs. The problem is loose dogs. I’ve followed dog catching around the housing areas of the Bucharest suburbs. When the residents leave for work in the morning, they let their dogs out on the street. If they are caught by dog catchers, the owners pick them up from the shelter and pay a fine. These are virile dogs. They breed with strays. They create new puppies. The problem persists.
6. People will hide the dogs. There are a lot of old, single and idle people in Bucharest. Often they love dogs. They will be watching for the dog catchers and, if they come for their strays, they will conceal them in their flat, basement, garage or yard.
7. No-kill could become a black market. In the past, dog catchers in Bucharest took money from residents in blocks to leave their stray dogs alone. This could happen again.
8. It is hard to catch a dog. There are around 15 trained dog catchers for three million people of Bucharest and its suburbs. They catch dogs by shooting them with a tranquilizer gun loaded with sedatives such as ketamine. The city will need a batallion of trained marskmen who can be trusted with a gun and a litre of a party drug with a high street value.
9. Bucharest is a metropolis run by a village council. It can’t cope with grand projects and grand challenges. Or even small ones. I live on Piata Unirii – a square at the centre of the city. An international showpiece. In one year, they have not finished re-surfacing the pavement. It is a building site of dust, mud, rocks and holes. If Bucharest cannot lay a few paving stones in its city centre, it cannot manage the mass-murder of over 50,000 lives.
10. The capital never gave other solutions a chance. Councillors will argue back that the NGOs’ favoured idea of the sterilisation and the return of dogs to the streets does not work, because stray dog attacks on people keep rising. But the City never tried a mass-scale programme to see whether the dog numbers would fall. If, over a five year period, many NGOs could co-ordinate professional sterilisation in conjunction with all seven City Halls of Bucharest and the surrounding county of Ilfov, alongside comprehensive adoption and education about responsible ownership, while giving the authorities the right to euthanize sick, old and aggressive dogs, the problem could stop.
And two reasons why it might work…
1. Under the new law, in a small city in Romania, it will probably be possible to round and kill up to 1,000 stray dogs. But in Bucharest, this needs an unprecedented effort. The city needs to declare war on dogs. It needs a militia to go block by block, possibly forcing residents to leave their homes, while police carry out searches, removing every dog they suspect of being a stray. There must be no exceptions. They must enforce the 14-day rule before murdering the dogs. Killing 60,000 dogs means a massacre – and a massacre can only be effective if is ruthless and mechanical.
2. Politicians enlist citizens to be vigilantes. Using the media, politicians demonize all dogs as violent. The Government passes a new law allowing dogs to be killed. This sends a signal to citizens that they have the liberty to beat, poison, run over or lynch any loose dog. Anecdotally, friends are telling me of how bodies of dogs are appearing more often on the outskirts of Bucharest. If the nation’s leaders keep up the rhetoric, this may continue. The streets will be running with blood and poison and the blocks will be echoing with the sound of bats against brains until the last stray in Bucharest is dead – while the authorities bear no responsibility.
Source
On the massacre of Botosani: Botosani made national in international headlines on 11th of May, 2011, when the vet Cristian Petru Pencu, assisted by his drunken helpers, "managed" to kill 230 healthy dogs in 2 hours time.
Make no mistake because the above sentence contains the word 'vet': these dogs had not been euthanized by injection; these 230 healthy dogs had been slaughtered!
The volunteers who until then had fed the dogs at the municipal shelter every day, discovered them in the morning, in plastic bags, with blood everywhere.
The vet who was responsible for the killing of the 230 dogs was later accused of intentional murder and another 15 people had been surveyed. The police doubted that he managed to make lethal injections to 230 dogs in two hours. stating that: "10 minutes are needed for an injection. The doctor therefore needed 2300 minutes ..."
Make no mistake because the above sentence contains the word 'vet': these dogs had not been euthanized by injection; these 230 healthy dogs had been slaughtered!
The volunteers who until then had fed the dogs at the municipal shelter every day, discovered them in the morning, in plastic bags, with blood everywhere.
The vet who was responsible for the killing of the 230 dogs was later accused of intentional murder and another 15 people had been surveyed. The police doubted that he managed to make lethal injections to 230 dogs in two hours. stating that: "10 minutes are needed for an injection. The doctor therefore needed 2300 minutes ..."
|
|
Do the Romanian politicians want the stray dogs to remain?
The article below was written by Marit Anderzén and was originally published on the website of dingochamp.com
The debate about the Romanian stray dogs is once again highly topical. This time at an international level since a 4 year old boy unfortunately was reported dead, allegedly after being attacked by dogs in Bucharest. On the Swedish news, September 9, we saw inhabitants of Bucharest protesting and requiring that “the 65 000 wild dogs” that spread terror in the streets, and prevent people from living a normal life, must be killed.
Stray dogs causes sanitary and welfare problems but it’s established though that mass killing is not the long term solution. As long as people keep unsterilized dogs outside their houses and apartments, there will always be a reproductive base for a new stray dog population. The killing of street dogs can therefore never be a one-off unless the problem is not taken care of preventively. The only way to permanently solve the problem is by explicit legislation, castrations and education in modern dog keeping.
With this said, complex of problems as to street dogs is firstly a political issue, and from a Swedish perspective and as a citizen of the EU, one begins to wonder whether the politicians of Romania really want to solve the problem or not.
A highly political issue
We can never neglect the fact that it is the unneutered dogs, owned or not owned, that continuously give rise to new stray dog populations. Several preventive measures should be taken both within legislation and education. In practice it’s impossible to distinguish the stray dogs from the owned dogs. Therefore it must be legislated explicitly that every dog that stays outside must be neutered with no regards to if the dog has an owner or not. If both stray dogs and owned dogs compulsory have to be neutered, these dogs cannot spontaneously originate a next generation of dogs, born to a life on the streets. To make this effective one must probably also legislate for owned dogs to have a microchip and be registered so that every person that doesn’t accept sterilization of their dog can be forced to pay a tax as a deterrent, the same thing must be applied to those who abandon their dog. Castration actions should be performed by NGO’s that are motivated by nothing else but “what’s best for the dog”, have the know-how and the organization to do this. In order for people to accept and follow laws like this, it is evident that the politicians have to vigorously stress that such a law exists and also work for a general change of attitudes when it comes to dogs. My experience is that the awareness of laws and regulations pertaining to this area today is very low and that the rendering of it varies between different parts of Romania. With media campaigns and educational work in modern dog keeping it will be possible to over time change todays’ attitude when it comes to low status dogs.
Why won’t Romanian politicians neuter and educate?
My simple answer to that is that the system is corrupt and that a group of individuals benefit from keeping a certain amount of stray dogs on the streets, this in combination with the disinterest in low status dogs and the lack of knowledge. What the situation looks like in every city depends on how each individual mayor address the issue.
If the mayor of a town is open for dialogue and cooperation with local or foreign animal welfare organizations they can together achieve success in curbing or even reducing the numbers of unwanted dogs by castrations. Currently, the problem seems to be that far from many, in deed very few, of the mayors are open to systematically allow neutering of all street dogs. The most common model is unfortunately a mayor that rather follows “the wind of majority” and buys political popularity by taking more or less radical actions on the street dogs. Periodically dogs are captured and kept in municipal pounds where they finally perish or get killed if they have not already died during the capture or transport. Several of the dogs that disappear during these periods of abduction do have an owner or are marked dogs already neutered and vaccinated by NGOs or dedicated local vets. Emptying the streets from unwanted dogs is in my opinion often done totally indiscriminately, especially when election time is approaching or at a time when dogs have caused serious accidents.
Too often when I visit Romania I hear people from different local animal welfare organizations say that “the biggest obstacle for us is to find an influential politician that is willing to cooperate with us and listen to us. Most politicians refuse to accept long term solutions to the problem with the strays unless it’s beneficial for themselves. They actually gain from keeping dogs on the streets, not only strategically to receive votes but also economically”.
How to make money on street dogs
During my six years as active within different stray dog projects in Romania, I have heard several stories about how local politicians and their coworkers on a regular basis make money from different fundings that officially are earmarked for castrations, vaccinations and ethical euthanasias, to be performed by skilled veterinarians and with insight from animal welfare organizations. Some stories almost sounded made up in my ears. Especially the ones about euthanasias in municipal pounds where the executive performer debits for an ethical and expensive method but in practice uses a cheap or maybe even free method. It didn’t take long though until I experienced myself that the utilization of the stray dogs for private financial reasons is not just rumors or made up stories. I must admit that I have seen far from every city and every municipal pound in Romania, so I cannot say that this is how it works everywhere, but the two examples below can for sure give us a hint of what reality looks like.
During one of my many trips to Romania I visited a veterinarian who runs a private clinic and currently also is an entrepreneur in the castration business. He is a so called “old school paper vet” (this type of agricultural vets, that rather work with bureaucracy than hands on with animals, are so common in Romania that they actually have got their own epithet). He has an agreement with the mayor of the town to neuter 100 dogs per month. He also has another agreement with an animal welfare organization of approximately 50 castrations per month on their behalf. Just by coincidence I had a chance to read through the bills he sends his clients and I discovered that he systematically bills both clients for neutering the same dogs. After seeing the premises where the dogs were neutered and recovering before they return to the streets I realize that he does not have the capacity to castrate even the 100 dogs a month in the way and with the procedures he claims that he applies. Judging from the condition the dogs were in and the lack of documentation, my guess is that perhaps only a third of the neutered dogs returned to their turf and survived the procedure. My misgivings turned out to be justified as I discovered several dead dogs superficially buried behind the clinic with this vets marking in the ears.
Another time I visited a municipal pound where about 100 dogs are gathered, many of them have been kept since the pound opened five years ago. The place was steadily filling up with new arrivals but the constant number is remaining at approximately 100 dogs. From what I can see the overcrowding is regulated by the dogs themselves since they are placed up to 5 dogs in 4 square meter boxes. Un-spayed females and males are crammed in together with pregnant females, sick dogs and puppies which function as food for the larger dogs. The mayor of this town has employed two veterinarians, who also run private clinics on the side, to take care of the dogs at the center. As the veterinarians hardly ever visit the place an animal welfare organization has started negotiating with the mayor. They asked for a key to the center so they could make up a schedule for volunteers to at least clean for the dogs and feed them some days a week with the help of private donations. The mayor agreed to the proposal but when the organization after a while questions the veterinarians handling of the dogs he denies the volunteers entry to the pound and as a consequence the dogs receive no food, water or care. After a couple of weeks the relations stabilizes and the volunteers are once again permitted to take care of the dogs. A plea was also made to the vice mayor of this town, who himself is a devoted pure breed dog owner, to try to get permission from the politicians to castrate and vaccinate the dogs at the municipal pound in order to be able to place some of them in local families. The organization also offered to start extensive castrations of the city’s dogs and thereafter return them to their turf, this by their own funds and their own veterinarians. But the vice mayor says “no” as he claims that he has the intention to build another municipal pound in the city for a huge number of dogs.
A new entrepreneur business
In fact the politicians appropriate very large sums of money to the handling of the street dogs but in reality the money rarely benefit the pound dogs or prevent new puppies from being born. The whole social structure is corrupt and it seems like greedy hands have found the perfect income and the perfect object thru which they gain political popularity – the handling of the low status dogs that nobody cares about but a lot of people seem willing to pay for and vote about. I dare to maintain that the Romanian politics regarding the street dogs has created a whole new entrepreneur business among devious veterinarians and managers of dog pounds. A corrupt veterinarian that attests that a castration activity is ongoing creates a legitimate expense in the official budget. At the same time pounds for the dogs are lucrative as they are subject to high and regular expenses in the official budget, as on the paper the dogs receive care, food, veterinary attention and also ethical euthanasias when needed. But I’m sure that anyone who ever visited a couple of Romanian municipal pounds have seen with their own eyes that the dogs get neither of this, at least not in proportion to what is paid for.
"We will be witnessing a massacre of dogs which will last for years to come!"
Romanian historian Lucian Boia said about the planned killing of Romania's homeless animals
The historian Lucian Boia, in an interview given to B365.ro said that even in the XIX century, foreigners were very intrigued by the big number of dogs on our streets.
He explained that this phenomenon is due to the Romanians' lack of management skills and he thinks that the problem can be solved differently: "if you ask me what I think about the latest solution we came up with - the euthanasia of dogs - I think it is a barbarian one and I do not appreciate it. Of course, we shouldn't have got to this stage, but even now I thing that a different solution could have been found.
Do you know what it will happen? It is horrible! There are tens of thousands of dogs on the streets only in Bucharest. In Romania, we will witness a massacre of dogs which will last for years to come. Romania with all of her problems, is not very well seen and now it will be the country where the people main preoccupation will be the killing of dogs. This is the image Romania will have and it is not a false one.
After they will kill them, it will happen what also happened after Basescu killed the dogs when he was Mayor of Bucharest. Other dogs came and took the place of the killed ones. But we will be the country specialized in killing dog. I think this image is a sinister one and we could make an effort - surely there are very many dogs, and we shouldn't have arrived to this point - but we could make an effort to increase the number of shelters, and their capacity to take in dogs, where they can be fed and sterilized. We need to accept this kind of spending, and I think it is not higher compared with what people steal in Romania"
Why Bucharest never was and never will be "Little Paris", how much foreigners have influenced the development of the city and how deserved is the positive image the citizens have about Bucharest between the two world wars, you will find out, Friday when we will publish the complete interview with Lucian Boia about this subject...
The petition
To:
Traian Basescu, the President of Romania
Different Romanian Government Officials
Copy to:
The European Parliament
The European Commission
The Council of Europe
The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Mr President,
Dear Romanian Government Officials,
we have learned of your intention to kill all homeless dog's following the tragic death of the little boy, Ionut.
We deeply regret the tragedy that happened to the little boy who had, apparently, be killed by dogs and we are sorry that we have to tell you that your action is due since too long! You are the ones to blame in case of incidents with stray dogs in which citizens come to damage, and not the abandoned, homeless dogs who find themselves on your streets with no fault of their own. But if you insist in applying the same methods of dog mass murder that have been conducted in Romania for 20 years and which did not solve the problem, the risk will remain permanent. Countless animals will have died in vain because nothing will have changed.
Your plans are not only contrary to the recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organisation) that states that TNR (trap-neuter-release) is the only proven method to control and reduce stray animal populations, but your intentions are also wrong on a number of levels including those moral and legal. They contradict your own Constitutional Court's Decision 1/2012 (that euthanasia is ILLEGAL as a stray dogs management method until all other solutions have been applied properly, uniformly and with responsibility by local authorities); European Animal Rights Conventions and any adequate humans moral principles!
Please, allow us to remind you that:
Romania being a member state of the European Union since January 1, 2007 and a signatory of the European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals since 2004, your country MUST respect the signed treaties and conventions, and thus has clear obligations in terms of animal welfare and stray animal population control.
We urge you to immediately stop the killings that are already going on in numerous Romanian villages and cities and to start a massive Catch-Neuter-Vaccinate-Return program in Bucharest and all other Romanian municipalities. The only proven and humane method of stray animals population control is the sterilization and return of the gentle and healthy stray dogs, compulsorily accompanied by the sterilization of dogs with owners that are the main source of street dogs by mass abandoning. Approximately 5 million puppies are born in Romania in rural areas every year, some of them being killed by their owners and the others being abandoned in the streets and the woods, and as long as the dogs with owners will not be sterilized, through coherent programs, Romania's streets will never be free of dogs.
Please, be advised that if the killing of dogs continue we will show to the entire world the reality of the dog camps; we will notify worldwide about the financial interests behind the business of killing dogs; we will withdraw any support that we have given so far to your country; we will boycott Romanian products and tourism, as no one will want to associate with a corrupt, cruel and immoral country.
Yours,
[Signer's name]
Traian Basescu, the President of Romania
Different Romanian Government Officials
Copy to:
The European Parliament
The European Commission
The Council of Europe
The European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
Mr President,
Dear Romanian Government Officials,
we have learned of your intention to kill all homeless dog's following the tragic death of the little boy, Ionut.
We deeply regret the tragedy that happened to the little boy who had, apparently, be killed by dogs and we are sorry that we have to tell you that your action is due since too long! You are the ones to blame in case of incidents with stray dogs in which citizens come to damage, and not the abandoned, homeless dogs who find themselves on your streets with no fault of their own. But if you insist in applying the same methods of dog mass murder that have been conducted in Romania for 20 years and which did not solve the problem, the risk will remain permanent. Countless animals will have died in vain because nothing will have changed.
Your plans are not only contrary to the recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organisation) that states that TNR (trap-neuter-release) is the only proven method to control and reduce stray animal populations, but your intentions are also wrong on a number of levels including those moral and legal. They contradict your own Constitutional Court's Decision 1/2012 (that euthanasia is ILLEGAL as a stray dogs management method until all other solutions have been applied properly, uniformly and with responsibility by local authorities); European Animal Rights Conventions and any adequate humans moral principles!
Please, allow us to remind you that:
- On 6th of August, 2004, your country has ratified the European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals which makes it a binding obligation to take (adequate) measures in this field.
- The Treaty of Rome, signed in 1957, established the European Economic Community; the Treaty is the legal base which is periodically revised to take account of institutional and policy changes within the European Union. The Treaty of Rome did not include a reference to animal welfare but in 1992 a declaration on animal welfare was annexed to the revised Treaty of Maastricht. A further revision resulted in the Treaty of Amsterdam which, included a protocol on animal welfare requiring EU policy-makers to pay "full regard" to animal welfare when adopting legislation in a number of policy areas. The Treaty of Amsterdam became effective on 1 May 1999. In 2009 the text of the protocol was incorporated in the text of the Lisbon Treaty, as Article 13, which includes additional policy areas.
- In addition to these, the European Parliament Written Declaration 0026/2011, adopted October 13, 2011, were initiated to further consolidate a concrete and lasting protocol for the humane treatment of animals by Union Member States. Romania being a member state whose MEPs have signed Written Declaration 0026/2011 in promoting humane treatment of animals including their population control is therefore legally bound by its statutes.
- on 4th of July, 2012 the European Parliament Resolution on the establishment of an EU legal framework for the protection of pets and stray animals ( 2012/2670 (RSP) has been adopted by the European Parliament
Romania being a member state of the European Union since January 1, 2007 and a signatory of the European Council's Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals since 2004, your country MUST respect the signed treaties and conventions, and thus has clear obligations in terms of animal welfare and stray animal population control.
We urge you to immediately stop the killings that are already going on in numerous Romanian villages and cities and to start a massive Catch-Neuter-Vaccinate-Return program in Bucharest and all other Romanian municipalities. The only proven and humane method of stray animals population control is the sterilization and return of the gentle and healthy stray dogs, compulsorily accompanied by the sterilization of dogs with owners that are the main source of street dogs by mass abandoning. Approximately 5 million puppies are born in Romania in rural areas every year, some of them being killed by their owners and the others being abandoned in the streets and the woods, and as long as the dogs with owners will not be sterilized, through coherent programs, Romania's streets will never be free of dogs.
Please, be advised that if the killing of dogs continue we will show to the entire world the reality of the dog camps; we will notify worldwide about the financial interests behind the business of killing dogs; we will withdraw any support that we have given so far to your country; we will boycott Romanian products and tourism, as no one will want to associate with a corrupt, cruel and immoral country.
Yours,
[Signer's name]
Thank you!
The European Parliament's Intergroup
on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals
takes position!
Show Romania the red card!
Please take a photograph together with your animal companion showing Romania the red card, or any other message, and send it to OFA at:
Email: [email protected] - or using our contact form - or by sending it by email to our Facebook-page
We will make a huge collage from all the received pictures and send it to Romania's president, the Prime Minister, other government officials together with the signatures list of our petition, and the Romanian media in addition to publishing the pictures on our website.
We look very much forward to receiving your pictures! Let's SHOW ROMANIA THE RED CARD!
Romania is acting unconstitutionally,
says 'Making The Link'
The 'Making The Link' Study and Project group are embarking on a radical but succinct initiative which will challenge the Government of Romania for acting unconstitutionally.
It is claimed that their support of a program which exposes children to the possibility of psychological damage is not consistent with the Duty of Care embraced within the Romanian Constitution.
In support of this action we seek evidence of current events with photographs of children being exposed to animal abuse in Romania. These photos must be current and have the date and the exact location identified.
Romanian friends are invited to take pictures showing children being exposed to animal abuse and to send them to '[email protected]' or by using the contact form on their website.
Thank you, in advance!
Below, the letter that Malcolm Plant, initiator of the 'Making The Link' Study has sent to the Romanian Government, the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of Europe today, 8th of September, 2013.
The letter has been published at: http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!letter-to-the-romanian-government/c977
To:
The President of Romania, Mr Traiain Basescu
The Prime Minister of Romania, Mr Victor Ponta
Secretary General of the Government
Ministry of Health
Ministry of Labor, Family and Social Protection
Copy to:
The President of the European Parliament, Mr Martin Schultz
The President of the European Commission, Mr José Manual Barroso
The Council of Europe
The President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, Mr Dan Jørgensen
Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, Mr Andrea Zanoni
Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, Daciana Sarbu
SUBJET: Humanity challenged ---- September 7th, 2013
Dear Mr President,
Dear Mr Prime Minister,
Dear Ministers,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We would seek to advise you of a significant body of research which has established the fact that children exposed to animal abuse and slaughter introduces serious psychological aberrations, such as enhanced learned aggression which would be, once enacted against animals, also promote anti-social behaviour and criminal aggression against people and property.
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!the-study---fact-sheet/c1dc9
Such is the strength of this Link that informs significant bodies such as the Justice Department of the USA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
http://nationallinkcoalition.org/
As you are aware the Romanian Constitution provides for a Duty of Care to ensure protection of Romanian Citizens' mental health.
The relevant clause from the Romanian Constitution is:
CHAPTER II Fundamental rights and freedoms
Right to life, to physical and mental integrity
ARTICLE 22 (1)
The right to life, as well as the right to physical and mental integrity of a person are guaranteed
Therefore it is suggested that any activity encouraging exposure to animal abuse is unconstitutional.
Notification is hereby given that should the Romanian Government continue with such encouragement then a legal case will be mounted to indict the Government for non-compliance with the Constitution of Romania.
May I respectfully suggest curtailment of the current activity against animals to ensure that such activity is not progressed?
Yours respectfully,
Malcolm Plant - BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dip Psych
Initiator of the 'Making the Link' Study and Intervention Project
Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver http://www.humananimalconnection.org/
For information on the 'Making The Link' Study and Intervention Project, please visit:
ABOUT the 'Making The Link' Study:
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!about/c1h5o
PROJECT PARTNERS:
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!project-partners/ci4f
--------------------------
Pentru:
Președintele România, domnul Băsescu Traiain
Primul Ministru al Romaniei, domnul Victor Ponta
Secretarul General al Guvernului
Ministrul Sanatatii Ministrul Muncii, al Familiei si al Asistentei Sociale
Copiați a:
Președintele Parlamentului European, domnul Martin Schultz
Președintele Comisiei Europene, domnul José Manuel Barroso
Consiliul Europei
Președintele Intergrupului Parlamentului European cu privire la bunăstarea și conservarea animalelor, domnul Dan Jørgensen
Vice-Presedinte al Intergrupului Parlamentului European cu privire la bunăstarea și conservarea animalelor, domnul Andrea Zanoni
Vice-Presedinte al Intergrupului Parlamentului European cu privire la bunăstarea și conservarea animalelor, Daciana Sarbu
Subiect: Omenirea contestat ---- 07 septembrie 2013
Stimate domnule președinte,
Stimate domnule prim-ministru,
Draga Miniștri,
Doamnelor și domnilor,
Dorim sa va aducem la cunostinta existanta unui numar mare de informatii stabilite pe baza de cercetari stiintifice prin care s-a stabilit faptul ca toti copiii expusi la acte de cruzime asupra animalelor pot deveni victime ale multor tulburari psihologice ca de exemplu exacerbarea agresiunii care o data aplicata asupra animalelor, poate duce de la acte anti-sociale la acte de cruzime si chiar la acte criminale asupra oamenilor si/sau a proprietatii si bunurilor acestora.
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!the-study---fact-sheet/c1dc9
Importanta celor afirmate in link-ul de mai jos este atat de mare incat a fost acceptate de insasi Departamentul de Justitie al USA si de FBI.
http://nationallinkcoalition.org/
Dupa cum bine stiti Constitutia Romaniei garanteaza cetatenilor tarii dumneavoastra si dreptul la sanatate mintala:
CAPITOLUL II - Drepturile şi libertăţile fundamentale
ARTICOLUL 22 - Dreptul la viaţă şi la integritate fizică şi psihică
De aceea consideram ca expunerea la acte de abuz si cruzime asupra animalelor este defapt neconstitutionala
Prin aceasta scrisoare dorim sa informam Guvernul Roman ca orice continuare de incurajare a expunerii copiilor la acte de abuz si cruzime asupra animalelor va putea atrage decizia de a incepe actiune legala impotriva Guvernului Roman pentru nerespectarea prevederilor Constitutiei Romaniei.
Doresc sa va recomand in modul cel mai respectuos sa puneti capat actiunilor curente impotriva animalelor si sa luati masurile necesare pentru a nu se mai repeta in viitor.
Va multumesc pentru atentie.
Cu respect,
Malcolm Plant - BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dip Psych
Initiator of the 'Making the Link' Study and Intervention Project
Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver http://www.humananimalconnection.org/
It is claimed that their support of a program which exposes children to the possibility of psychological damage is not consistent with the Duty of Care embraced within the Romanian Constitution.
In support of this action we seek evidence of current events with photographs of children being exposed to animal abuse in Romania. These photos must be current and have the date and the exact location identified.
Romanian friends are invited to take pictures showing children being exposed to animal abuse and to send them to '[email protected]' or by using the contact form on their website.
Thank you, in advance!
Below, the letter that Malcolm Plant, initiator of the 'Making The Link' Study has sent to the Romanian Government, the European Parliament, the European Commission and the Council of Europe today, 8th of September, 2013.
The letter has been published at: http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!letter-to-the-romanian-government/c977
To:
The President of Romania, Mr Traiain Basescu
The Prime Minister of Romania, Mr Victor Ponta
Secretary General of the Government
Ministry of Health
Ministry of Labor, Family and Social Protection
Copy to:
The President of the European Parliament, Mr Martin Schultz
The President of the European Commission, Mr José Manual Barroso
The Council of Europe
The President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, Mr Dan Jørgensen
Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, Mr Andrea Zanoni
Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals, Daciana Sarbu
SUBJET: Humanity challenged ---- September 7th, 2013
Dear Mr President,
Dear Mr Prime Minister,
Dear Ministers,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We would seek to advise you of a significant body of research which has established the fact that children exposed to animal abuse and slaughter introduces serious psychological aberrations, such as enhanced learned aggression which would be, once enacted against animals, also promote anti-social behaviour and criminal aggression against people and property.
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!the-study---fact-sheet/c1dc9
Such is the strength of this Link that informs significant bodies such as the Justice Department of the USA and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
http://nationallinkcoalition.org/
As you are aware the Romanian Constitution provides for a Duty of Care to ensure protection of Romanian Citizens' mental health.
The relevant clause from the Romanian Constitution is:
CHAPTER II Fundamental rights and freedoms
Right to life, to physical and mental integrity
ARTICLE 22 (1)
The right to life, as well as the right to physical and mental integrity of a person are guaranteed
Therefore it is suggested that any activity encouraging exposure to animal abuse is unconstitutional.
Notification is hereby given that should the Romanian Government continue with such encouragement then a legal case will be mounted to indict the Government for non-compliance with the Constitution of Romania.
May I respectfully suggest curtailment of the current activity against animals to ensure that such activity is not progressed?
Yours respectfully,
Malcolm Plant - BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dip Psych
Initiator of the 'Making the Link' Study and Intervention Project
Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver http://www.humananimalconnection.org/
For information on the 'Making The Link' Study and Intervention Project, please visit:
ABOUT the 'Making The Link' Study:
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!about/c1h5o
PROJECT PARTNERS:
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!project-partners/ci4f
--------------------------
Pentru:
Președintele România, domnul Băsescu Traiain
Primul Ministru al Romaniei, domnul Victor Ponta
Secretarul General al Guvernului
Ministrul Sanatatii Ministrul Muncii, al Familiei si al Asistentei Sociale
Copiați a:
Președintele Parlamentului European, domnul Martin Schultz
Președintele Comisiei Europene, domnul José Manuel Barroso
Consiliul Europei
Președintele Intergrupului Parlamentului European cu privire la bunăstarea și conservarea animalelor, domnul Dan Jørgensen
Vice-Presedinte al Intergrupului Parlamentului European cu privire la bunăstarea și conservarea animalelor, domnul Andrea Zanoni
Vice-Presedinte al Intergrupului Parlamentului European cu privire la bunăstarea și conservarea animalelor, Daciana Sarbu
Subiect: Omenirea contestat ---- 07 septembrie 2013
Stimate domnule președinte,
Stimate domnule prim-ministru,
Draga Miniștri,
Doamnelor și domnilor,
Dorim sa va aducem la cunostinta existanta unui numar mare de informatii stabilite pe baza de cercetari stiintifice prin care s-a stabilit faptul ca toti copiii expusi la acte de cruzime asupra animalelor pot deveni victime ale multor tulburari psihologice ca de exemplu exacerbarea agresiunii care o data aplicata asupra animalelor, poate duce de la acte anti-sociale la acte de cruzime si chiar la acte criminale asupra oamenilor si/sau a proprietatii si bunurilor acestora.
http://makingthelink.wix.com/a-time-for-change#!the-study---fact-sheet/c1dc9
Importanta celor afirmate in link-ul de mai jos este atat de mare incat a fost acceptate de insasi Departamentul de Justitie al USA si de FBI.
http://nationallinkcoalition.org/
Dupa cum bine stiti Constitutia Romaniei garanteaza cetatenilor tarii dumneavoastra si dreptul la sanatate mintala:
CAPITOLUL II - Drepturile şi libertăţile fundamentale
ARTICOLUL 22 - Dreptul la viaţă şi la integritate fizică şi psihică
De aceea consideram ca expunerea la acte de abuz si cruzime asupra animalelor este defapt neconstitutionala
Prin aceasta scrisoare dorim sa informam Guvernul Roman ca orice continuare de incurajare a expunerii copiilor la acte de abuz si cruzime asupra animalelor va putea atrage decizia de a incepe actiune legala impotriva Guvernului Roman pentru nerespectarea prevederilor Constitutiei Romaniei.
Doresc sa va recomand in modul cel mai respectuos sa puneti capat actiunilor curente impotriva animalelor si sa luati masurile necesare pentru a nu se mai repeta in viitor.
Va multumesc pentru atentie.
Cu respect,
Malcolm Plant - BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dip Psych
Initiator of the 'Making the Link' Study and Intervention Project
Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver http://www.humananimalconnection.org/
What is wrong with this photo?
About the above picture: this picture had been shared by a Romanian newspaper, stating it was taken in Motru on 4th of September, 2013. However... a quick Google Search revealed that the picture is at least one year old.
BUT: in the context that it is being used here - to illustrate the connection between children being exposed to animal abuse and the resulting effect on their psychological health - the date of the picture is of NO importance!
Fact is: Children ARE being exposed to these horrors in Romania (and other countries) and this has an impact on their psychological health. The following post by Malcolm Plant, will explain:
To say it in the words of Malcolm Plant (BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dip Psych - Initiator of the 'Making the Link' Study and Intervention Project, Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver):
"Can you see what is wrong in this photo?
Tonight there sits a country of Europe where the moon drips with blood and the sun has turned black. At the edge of Europe. At the edge of civilization. At the edge of sanity!
In response to the death of a 4 year old child who had strayed onto private property, media hysteria was promoted by the government to kill all homeless animals. Romania is drenched in the blood of many animals where wholesale slaughter is taking place across the country at this moment.
Death is all around. It can be seen everywhere. It is palpable. But there is a hidden death. Invisible but deeper. Children born with natural regard and compassion for living creatures are exposed to these horrors. To protect themselves from emotional pain of seeing such abuse, they desensitize to them. They shut off their feelings of empathy and compassion. Once lost... never regained.
A society exists where regard for others is being washed away by the grotesque visions seen on the streets and the inadequacies and irresponsibilities of a government who preside over a new kind of theft, much more obscene. The theft of children's innocence and ability to care! Ability to exercise compassion and empathy. Humanity lies weeping in the corner at such a betrayal of trust!
Can you see what is wrong in this photo?"
It is not a quantum leap of imagination to suggest that constant exposure to abuse must have an impact upon any individual who witnesses it.
A pilot study conducted in Bistrita, Romania, with a control group in Berlin, Germany, in 2012-2013, has shown that animal abuse connects directly with children's psychological health and on societal security in those environments where strategic controls are not applied, and where animal welfare laws exist but are rarely reinforced, and which furnishes licence for animal abuse without repercussions, and thus provides the potential to increase violence and abuse against person and property within these societies.
86,3 % of children in the investigative 14-16 year old age group in Bistrita, Romania, had seen animal abuse in public 'many times'.
It is suggested that exposure to external stimuli causes conceptualisation, or schemata, to be ‘fixed‘ by the time the child is 8 years old. Exposure to abuse and aggression (human and animal) results in all the effects which have been identified by the study:
Children who, within a few years, develop from innocence and balance to psychological disturbance, displaying internal and external acute disharmony... a journey from peace, harmony and innocence, to anger, hatred and destruction.
By clicking on the link below, you can listen to an interview conducted by Thomas Janak, WILD TIME RADIO, with Malcolm Plant, talking about the 'Making The Link' Study - the European study to identify psychological effects of children regularly exposed to community animal abuse and evaluation of efficacy of interventions.
BUT: in the context that it is being used here - to illustrate the connection between children being exposed to animal abuse and the resulting effect on their psychological health - the date of the picture is of NO importance!
Fact is: Children ARE being exposed to these horrors in Romania (and other countries) and this has an impact on their psychological health. The following post by Malcolm Plant, will explain:
To say it in the words of Malcolm Plant (BSc, BA (Hons), MSc, Dip Psych - Initiator of the 'Making the Link' Study and Intervention Project, Fellow of the Institute for Human-Animal Connection, University of Denver):
"Can you see what is wrong in this photo?
Tonight there sits a country of Europe where the moon drips with blood and the sun has turned black. At the edge of Europe. At the edge of civilization. At the edge of sanity!
In response to the death of a 4 year old child who had strayed onto private property, media hysteria was promoted by the government to kill all homeless animals. Romania is drenched in the blood of many animals where wholesale slaughter is taking place across the country at this moment.
Death is all around. It can be seen everywhere. It is palpable. But there is a hidden death. Invisible but deeper. Children born with natural regard and compassion for living creatures are exposed to these horrors. To protect themselves from emotional pain of seeing such abuse, they desensitize to them. They shut off their feelings of empathy and compassion. Once lost... never regained.
A society exists where regard for others is being washed away by the grotesque visions seen on the streets and the inadequacies and irresponsibilities of a government who preside over a new kind of theft, much more obscene. The theft of children's innocence and ability to care! Ability to exercise compassion and empathy. Humanity lies weeping in the corner at such a betrayal of trust!
Can you see what is wrong in this photo?"
It is not a quantum leap of imagination to suggest that constant exposure to abuse must have an impact upon any individual who witnesses it.
A pilot study conducted in Bistrita, Romania, with a control group in Berlin, Germany, in 2012-2013, has shown that animal abuse connects directly with children's psychological health and on societal security in those environments where strategic controls are not applied, and where animal welfare laws exist but are rarely reinforced, and which furnishes licence for animal abuse without repercussions, and thus provides the potential to increase violence and abuse against person and property within these societies.
86,3 % of children in the investigative 14-16 year old age group in Bistrita, Romania, had seen animal abuse in public 'many times'.
It is suggested that exposure to external stimuli causes conceptualisation, or schemata, to be ‘fixed‘ by the time the child is 8 years old. Exposure to abuse and aggression (human and animal) results in all the effects which have been identified by the study:
- aggression against person and property,
- theft,
- arson,
- reduced empathy,
- and they have heightened inclinations towards suicide
Children who, within a few years, develop from innocence and balance to psychological disturbance, displaying internal and external acute disharmony... a journey from peace, harmony and innocence, to anger, hatred and destruction.
By clicking on the link below, you can listen to an interview conducted by Thomas Janak, WILD TIME RADIO, with Malcolm Plant, talking about the 'Making The Link' Study - the European study to identify psychological effects of children regularly exposed to community animal abuse and evaluation of efficacy of interventions.
September 9, 2013 - Romania reintroduced euthanasia!
Today, 9th of September, 2013, the Committee for Public Administration has reintroduced the euthanasia. Tomorrow, 10th of September, 2013, from 9 am till 12 am the debates will continue and it will be voted upon.
UPDATE - 10th of September, 2013 (12:30 CET)
The fate of Romania's homeless animals is now decided with:
266 votes in favor of euthanasia,
20 votes against euthanasia,
and 23 abstentions
The mayor of Bucharest had sealed the fate of Bucharest's stray dogs already on 6th of September, 2013
The first who will be killed will be the unfortunate dogs who are already in their shelters. This has been decided before the vote of the Romanian Parliament, before the promulgation of the law by the president, before it has been published in the Monitorul Official, and before the legal time for contests has passed...
Theoretically the new law can be contested at Romania's Constitutional Court. Once the appeal is registered with the Constitutional Court, the law can not be promulgated by President Basescu... it's frozen until the court decides in a way or another.
To register an appeal a number of support signatures are needed. Once the needed signatures have been gathered, the appeal can be registered with the Constitutional Court. The CCR will then decide if they accept the appeal - meaning if they will even listen to the case or not.
If the CCR takes the case, it will take some time until the CCR comes with a verdict. During all this time, the law can not be promulgated by President Basescu, and thus there is theoretically no new law yet, and mayors will not yet be allowed to kill healthy animals after 14 days if not adopted, because they have to (they should) respect the actual Romanian animal protection law.
Former senator Marius Marinescu will challenge the law allowing euthanasia
before the Romanian Constitutional Court
Former senator Marius Marinescu, current President of the Federation for the Protection of Animals and the Environment (FPAM) will challenge the approved law allowing euthanasia of ALL stray animals after 14 days if not adopted before the Romanian Constitutional Court.
This has been confirmed today buy Paula Iacob, the lawyer who has worked with Marinescu on gathering the necessary support signatures.
This has been confirmed today buy Paula Iacob, the lawyer who has worked with Marinescu on gathering the necessary support signatures.
His Excellency,
Mr. President of Romania,
Traian Basescu,
Your Excellence,
Undersigned: Dan Caraman, Doriana Cimpan, Ivona Elena Cerneschi, Daniel Catalin Fenechiu, Simona Mihaela Oprea, Alexander Morarescu, Alice Draghici, Florin Surghie, Violeta Podolianu, Mihnea Stoica, Ingrid Zaarour - lawyers in the Bucharest Bar, Niculae Lovin Serban - dean of Bar Ilfov, Papiniu Andreea Alexandra public notary, please receive this material submitted for analysis which represents: AMICUS CURIAE
By your Excellence,
in accordance with art. 77 paragraph (2) of the Constitution of the Romanian Parliament a request for review of the Law on amending and supplementing Government Emergency Ordinance no. 155/2001 on approval of the management of stray dogs.
1. Technique legislative breaches on 10/09/2013, Legal, Discipline and Immunities and Public Administration , Territorial Planning and Ecological Balance filed Permanent Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies, Joint Report on the request for review of the Law on amending and supplementing Ordinance emergency Government Ordinance no. 155/2001 on approval of the management of stray dogs following the decision of the Constitutional Court no. 1/11.01.2012 sent to the Commission for Public Administration Territorial Planning and Ecological Balance and the Legal, discipline and immunities to review, on 18/03/2013.
Ab initio, please note that the two commissions had time to reach you, consider that sufficient and reasonable (about 6 months) for the preparation and submission of the Joint Report.
However, we are aware that the Report is subject to criticism, being superficially prepared, in haste, under the pressure of time and on purpose omitting issues of law and fact, known to members of the Chamber of Deputies which could influence their vote or content of the allowed amendments.
The Legislation knows two great moments:
a) The establishment of social situations which require legal regulation
b) The separation of legal ideal should apply these statements depending on a company's legal consciousness.
Legislative action involves changing trend, innovation of new normative legal solutions, rated as superior as or better than existing regulatory solutions.
Action regulation is subject to strict discipline as do the legislative procedure, the Parliament being held inter alia to respect the Constitution and the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Romania.
To think and act otherwise is to accept abuse, chaos and lack of accountability of the legislative process and pernicious influence on Romanian society and the Romanian state. In culpably, the joint committee of the two major theses in recitals hides Constitutional Court Decision no. 1/11.01.2012 mandatory both in terms of device and accounting considerations and the legal and factual basis for these two committees have submitted Joint Report of the Standing Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies.
Thus, although the findings are cited in the report of the Constitutional Court:
“... the Constitutional Court finds that the wording of Art. 1 section 8 of the law does not meet the requirements of foreseeability required by art. 1 paragraph 5 of the Constitution of Romania, republished. The Court notes that the text of art. 1 section 8 of the Act sets out the proposed solutions regarding the obligation of public authorities to tackle the stray dogs without regard for the order to be applied so that the public authorities responsible for applying the much criticized law will be put in a position to randomly choose one or more of these. However, the proposed solutions of an act can not be applied randomly, the legislature is required to establish the conditions, methods and application of clear criteria and objectives. Thus, based on the much criticized law, the Court noted that the Legislature should establish a priority order on these solutions and the solution euthanizing stray dogs to be applied only as a last resort and only when all other solutions have been consistently applied by local authorities, but have not reached to limit or eradicate this phenomenon - of the importance of providing the order of application of legislative measures, see Decision no. 536 of 28 April 2011, published in Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 482 of 7 July 2011" are omitted other equally important sentence: "Human dignity, from a constitutional point of view, involves two inherent dimensions, namely the relationships between people, which targets the right and duty of the people to be respected and accordingly, to respect fundamental rights and freedoms of their peers (see, to that effect, and Decision no. 62/18.01.2007, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 104 of 12.02.2007) and the human relationship with the environment, including the animal world, which implies, for the animals, man's moral responsibility to care for these creatures in a way to illustrate the nature of civilization achieved."
In this way the proposed and approved amendments but also the spirit and the essence of the law were flawed.
The Constitutional Court states that the euthanasia of stray dogs should be applied only as a last resort and only when all other solutions have been consistently applied by local authorities but have not reached to limit or eradicate this phenomenon (to observe and Decision 536/28.04.2011 of the CFR).
We question the Joint Report due to the absence therein of:
This Joint Report should have included the amendments allowed for the purposes mentioned above. This omission was intended to protect those involved, responsible and decision makers in local government who have been unable or unwilling for illicit reasons to solve the problem of stray dogs using the legislative framework at hand until the occurrence of the tragic event in September 2013.
There is a preliminary assessment of the impact of proposed legislative changes through amendments to the Romanian society. The only "assessment" was made through the statements of leaders, opinion formers and politicians, transmitted in society and media channels and the deeply unserious idea appeared which stated that the only solution is killing all the dogs as the only solution.
A large amount of people disagree this monstrous idea and are being mocked. In relation to this last category of people among which we count ourselves, we want to show that the law itself, the solutions adopted, produce us a deep sadness.
We believe the law to be promulgated in this form violates human dignity, because the legislature will actually target the mass killing of stray dogs. This explains the different and changing period in which they can be accommodated in shelters, from 30 days to 14 days (art. 4 of the Act) and the ambiguity of formalities that must be met, versus a real opportunity to save their lives. The period of 14 working days is insufficient for evaluating, medical sterilization, control and possibly medical treatment, vaccination, deworming, immunization, micro chipping, knowing that a dog which did not go through these phases can not be given for adoption. Moreover, in the same period, the adopter must prepare necessary documentation (proof of space that results in appropriate conditions for growth and housing of dogs, financial resources for the raising and maintenance of dogs, owners’ or shareholders’ agreement with backyard neighbours, adoption fee-which amount is not known until now). Also, in the same period, the adopter must be effective and create conditions that can not take formal notice of the existence of the dog offered for adoption, its characteristics and the time remaining until his murder.
We conclude that Parliament did not want to take responsibility to use appropriate terms.
Thus, although euthanasia is a method for suppression of life, medical assistance and that sole noble purpose of the subject of further protecting the suffering caused by an incurable disease, the term is used by the legislator wrongly, being violated so binding principles defining the concepts that undertake within the proposed legislative solutions to achieve an explicit configuration of concepts and terms used in the new regulations that have another meaning than the common, to ensure their proper understanding and thus avoid misinterpretation (article 25 of Law 24/2000 republished).
The legal document should be written in a language and style, specific legal regulation, concise, sober, clear and precise to exclude any ambiguity, in strict compliance with the rules of grammar and spelling. The specific terms may be used only they refer to the activity mentioned in the regulation.
Excellence, please note that in:
the term euthanasia is used in the wrong way and with its wrong significance.
Correctly and according to the will of the Romanian Parliament in place of the term euthanasia, the term murder or killing should be used. As a related fact, to demonstrate that the euthanasia procedure and how the meaning of this term is described in art. 5 of the law, a careful and impartial observer must be comprised by confusion in understanding and applying the provisions of art. 7 of the law.
The Romanian Parliament should consider that as just this once, to take full responsibility for its intentions. If we wanted to euthanize stray dogs then, unequivocally and correctly, the procedure for suppression of life can only target incurably ill dogs. If the legislature intended the disappearance of all stray dogs, the correct term to be used was killing or murdering.
2. Social peace. Respect for human dignity:
According to art.4 ( 1 ) of the Constitution: "The State foundation is based on national unity and solidarity among its Romanian citizens"
According to Art. 4. (2) of the Constitution of Romania: "Romania is the common and indivisible homeland of all its citizens regardless of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, religion, sex, opinion, political adherence, property or social origin"
Excellence, please respectfully state that:
Legislative solution adopted without showing reasons which made it impossible to apply alternative methods without showing those responsible for this failure, has divided society and undermined the solidarity that should exist between citizens of the country. We believe you should make an effort on the part of local authorities and public, to convince us that although alternative solutions were applied properly and all involved in the process have acted in good faith and in a professional manner to meet certain standards of life the citizen, there is only the solution. Ignoring the fact that it has never been called into question by the political class, we thoroughly question the existence or absence of a civilized life in Romania.
We can not leave unnoticed the fact that the law to be promulgated enroll in fact in the same note of disregarding the will, aspirations, feelings, emotions of citizens of this country.
We noticed that the activity of "taking" of stray dogs which are on the public domain restarted in force gave way to a recently born satisfaction on the one hand and suffering, on the other.
Moving to another register, dare to take this opportunity to ask the political class as a whole: What explanations does a parent present his child during the capturing of a stray dog, knowing that it will be killed? Probably he will say: “The dog must be killed in order to protect you, the dog can kill you” or he can say: “We live in a country of barbarians and politicians wanted it (this)."
Excellence, your high mission is to identify and use the leverage necessary to reduce as much as possible the shock felt by those who for reasons of education, culture, morality, social status, affection, and relationship with the environment are not prepared to accept the application of such a law, in the form sent for promulgation. The frustration is being reinforced by the lack of liability of policy makers and local government responsible for the present situation.
Excellence, please allow us to conclude, recalling the words of the eminent lawyer and professor Vintilă Dongoroz, which state the following: "A law which asks man not to be human, is absurd and can not be implemented"
With deep consideration.....
Mr. President of Romania,
Traian Basescu,
Your Excellence,
Undersigned: Dan Caraman, Doriana Cimpan, Ivona Elena Cerneschi, Daniel Catalin Fenechiu, Simona Mihaela Oprea, Alexander Morarescu, Alice Draghici, Florin Surghie, Violeta Podolianu, Mihnea Stoica, Ingrid Zaarour - lawyers in the Bucharest Bar, Niculae Lovin Serban - dean of Bar Ilfov, Papiniu Andreea Alexandra public notary, please receive this material submitted for analysis which represents: AMICUS CURIAE
By your Excellence,
in accordance with art. 77 paragraph (2) of the Constitution of the Romanian Parliament a request for review of the Law on amending and supplementing Government Emergency Ordinance no. 155/2001 on approval of the management of stray dogs.
1. Technique legislative breaches on 10/09/2013, Legal, Discipline and Immunities and Public Administration , Territorial Planning and Ecological Balance filed Permanent Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies, Joint Report on the request for review of the Law on amending and supplementing Ordinance emergency Government Ordinance no. 155/2001 on approval of the management of stray dogs following the decision of the Constitutional Court no. 1/11.01.2012 sent to the Commission for Public Administration Territorial Planning and Ecological Balance and the Legal, discipline and immunities to review, on 18/03/2013.
Ab initio, please note that the two commissions had time to reach you, consider that sufficient and reasonable (about 6 months) for the preparation and submission of the Joint Report.
However, we are aware that the Report is subject to criticism, being superficially prepared, in haste, under the pressure of time and on purpose omitting issues of law and fact, known to members of the Chamber of Deputies which could influence their vote or content of the allowed amendments.
The Legislation knows two great moments:
a) The establishment of social situations which require legal regulation
b) The separation of legal ideal should apply these statements depending on a company's legal consciousness.
Legislative action involves changing trend, innovation of new normative legal solutions, rated as superior as or better than existing regulatory solutions.
Action regulation is subject to strict discipline as do the legislative procedure, the Parliament being held inter alia to respect the Constitution and the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Romania.
To think and act otherwise is to accept abuse, chaos and lack of accountability of the legislative process and pernicious influence on Romanian society and the Romanian state. In culpably, the joint committee of the two major theses in recitals hides Constitutional Court Decision no. 1/11.01.2012 mandatory both in terms of device and accounting considerations and the legal and factual basis for these two committees have submitted Joint Report of the Standing Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies.
Thus, although the findings are cited in the report of the Constitutional Court:
“... the Constitutional Court finds that the wording of Art. 1 section 8 of the law does not meet the requirements of foreseeability required by art. 1 paragraph 5 of the Constitution of Romania, republished. The Court notes that the text of art. 1 section 8 of the Act sets out the proposed solutions regarding the obligation of public authorities to tackle the stray dogs without regard for the order to be applied so that the public authorities responsible for applying the much criticized law will be put in a position to randomly choose one or more of these. However, the proposed solutions of an act can not be applied randomly, the legislature is required to establish the conditions, methods and application of clear criteria and objectives. Thus, based on the much criticized law, the Court noted that the Legislature should establish a priority order on these solutions and the solution euthanizing stray dogs to be applied only as a last resort and only when all other solutions have been consistently applied by local authorities, but have not reached to limit or eradicate this phenomenon - of the importance of providing the order of application of legislative measures, see Decision no. 536 of 28 April 2011, published in Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 482 of 7 July 2011" are omitted other equally important sentence: "Human dignity, from a constitutional point of view, involves two inherent dimensions, namely the relationships between people, which targets the right and duty of the people to be respected and accordingly, to respect fundamental rights and freedoms of their peers (see, to that effect, and Decision no. 62/18.01.2007, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 104 of 12.02.2007) and the human relationship with the environment, including the animal world, which implies, for the animals, man's moral responsibility to care for these creatures in a way to illustrate the nature of civilization achieved."
In this way the proposed and approved amendments but also the spirit and the essence of the law were flawed.
The Constitutional Court states that the euthanasia of stray dogs should be applied only as a last resort and only when all other solutions have been consistently applied by local authorities but have not reached to limit or eradicate this phenomenon (to observe and Decision 536/28.04.2011 of the CFR).
We question the Joint Report due to the absence therein of:
- Ascertaining proper application / inappropriate alternative solutions among which the most important is the sterilization of stray dogs by local authorities;
- Reasons for the improper application of alternative solutions, in terms of justifying the necessity of applying since the beginning of the "final solution"
This Joint Report should have included the amendments allowed for the purposes mentioned above. This omission was intended to protect those involved, responsible and decision makers in local government who have been unable or unwilling for illicit reasons to solve the problem of stray dogs using the legislative framework at hand until the occurrence of the tragic event in September 2013.
There is a preliminary assessment of the impact of proposed legislative changes through amendments to the Romanian society. The only "assessment" was made through the statements of leaders, opinion formers and politicians, transmitted in society and media channels and the deeply unserious idea appeared which stated that the only solution is killing all the dogs as the only solution.
A large amount of people disagree this monstrous idea and are being mocked. In relation to this last category of people among which we count ourselves, we want to show that the law itself, the solutions adopted, produce us a deep sadness.
We believe the law to be promulgated in this form violates human dignity, because the legislature will actually target the mass killing of stray dogs. This explains the different and changing period in which they can be accommodated in shelters, from 30 days to 14 days (art. 4 of the Act) and the ambiguity of formalities that must be met, versus a real opportunity to save their lives. The period of 14 working days is insufficient for evaluating, medical sterilization, control and possibly medical treatment, vaccination, deworming, immunization, micro chipping, knowing that a dog which did not go through these phases can not be given for adoption. Moreover, in the same period, the adopter must prepare necessary documentation (proof of space that results in appropriate conditions for growth and housing of dogs, financial resources for the raising and maintenance of dogs, owners’ or shareholders’ agreement with backyard neighbours, adoption fee-which amount is not known until now). Also, in the same period, the adopter must be effective and create conditions that can not take formal notice of the existence of the dog offered for adoption, its characteristics and the time remaining until his murder.
We conclude that Parliament did not want to take responsibility to use appropriate terms.
Thus, although euthanasia is a method for suppression of life, medical assistance and that sole noble purpose of the subject of further protecting the suffering caused by an incurable disease, the term is used by the legislator wrongly, being violated so binding principles defining the concepts that undertake within the proposed legislative solutions to achieve an explicit configuration of concepts and terms used in the new regulations that have another meaning than the common, to ensure their proper understanding and thus avoid misinterpretation (article 25 of Law 24/2000 republished).
The legal document should be written in a language and style, specific legal regulation, concise, sober, clear and precise to exclude any ambiguity, in strict compliance with the rules of grammar and spelling. The specific terms may be used only they refer to the activity mentioned in the regulation.
Excellence, please note that in:
- art. 7 paragraph 2 of the Act: “Unclaimed dogs will be euthanized and not adopted .....“,
- art.7 paragraph 3 of the Act: "The decision for euthanasia is issued for each dog ....”
- Art. 7 paragraph 4 of the Act: "Pending the euthanasia procedure can be claimed or adopted dogs",
the term euthanasia is used in the wrong way and with its wrong significance.
Correctly and according to the will of the Romanian Parliament in place of the term euthanasia, the term murder or killing should be used. As a related fact, to demonstrate that the euthanasia procedure and how the meaning of this term is described in art. 5 of the law, a careful and impartial observer must be comprised by confusion in understanding and applying the provisions of art. 7 of the law.
The Romanian Parliament should consider that as just this once, to take full responsibility for its intentions. If we wanted to euthanize stray dogs then, unequivocally and correctly, the procedure for suppression of life can only target incurably ill dogs. If the legislature intended the disappearance of all stray dogs, the correct term to be used was killing or murdering.
2. Social peace. Respect for human dignity:
According to art.4 ( 1 ) of the Constitution: "The State foundation is based on national unity and solidarity among its Romanian citizens"
According to Art. 4. (2) of the Constitution of Romania: "Romania is the common and indivisible homeland of all its citizens regardless of race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, religion, sex, opinion, political adherence, property or social origin"
Excellence, please respectfully state that:
- There are many Romanian citizens who are not convinced that killing all stray dogs is a moral and civilized solution;
- There are many citizens of this country who believe that local authorities and the public should respect the obligation to provide correct information to the citizens in public affairs and matters of personal interest (art. 31 paragraph (2) of the Constitution).
Legislative solution adopted without showing reasons which made it impossible to apply alternative methods without showing those responsible for this failure, has divided society and undermined the solidarity that should exist between citizens of the country. We believe you should make an effort on the part of local authorities and public, to convince us that although alternative solutions were applied properly and all involved in the process have acted in good faith and in a professional manner to meet certain standards of life the citizen, there is only the solution. Ignoring the fact that it has never been called into question by the political class, we thoroughly question the existence or absence of a civilized life in Romania.
We can not leave unnoticed the fact that the law to be promulgated enroll in fact in the same note of disregarding the will, aspirations, feelings, emotions of citizens of this country.
We noticed that the activity of "taking" of stray dogs which are on the public domain restarted in force gave way to a recently born satisfaction on the one hand and suffering, on the other.
Moving to another register, dare to take this opportunity to ask the political class as a whole: What explanations does a parent present his child during the capturing of a stray dog, knowing that it will be killed? Probably he will say: “The dog must be killed in order to protect you, the dog can kill you” or he can say: “We live in a country of barbarians and politicians wanted it (this)."
Excellence, your high mission is to identify and use the leverage necessary to reduce as much as possible the shock felt by those who for reasons of education, culture, morality, social status, affection, and relationship with the environment are not prepared to accept the application of such a law, in the form sent for promulgation. The frustration is being reinforced by the lack of liability of policy makers and local government responsible for the present situation.
Excellence, please allow us to conclude, recalling the words of the eminent lawyer and professor Vintilă Dongoroz, which state the following: "A law which asks man not to be human, is absurd and can not be implemented"
With deep consideration.....
The Romanian Constitutional Court will take a decision on this matter
on 25th of September, 2013
On 10th September, 2013 the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted PL912 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals after 14 days, if not adopted. The terminology used was 'eradication'.
The decision to allow euthanasia of ALL homeless dogs in Romania, was taken by the Romanian Parliament, totally ignoring that mass-killing of healthy animals is contrary to:
AND, on top of all:
"Interestingly", though, culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice.
Former senator Marius Marinescu, current President of the Federation for the Protection of Animals and the Environment (FPAM) has challenged the approved law allowing euthanasia of ALL stray animals after 14 days if not adopted before the Romanian Constitutional Court and the Constitutional Court will debate PL912 on 25th of September, 2013. They will decide between life and death of ALL homeless animals in Romania.
In an non-corrupted country it would be absolutely normal and predictable that the Court will maintain its position stated in the Decision taken in January 2012. However, we do not know how big the political pressure over the Court really is and therefore we kindly ask you to sign our petition that sends instant emails to several members of the CCR.
By signing our petition at change.org, the message below will be sent to the CCR:
Subject: please reject the PL912 modification proposal of the Lower House
Honorable Members of the Constitutional Court,
Distinguished Officials,
Madams and Sirs,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted PL912 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young boy under what remains dubious circumstances. However the stray animals were blamed and as a result of the media frenzy and the vote, a state of abuse of animals exists now in Romania. Animals and their owners and protectors are now at serious risk. There is danger now to people and property in addition to the threat to the animals. It must be remembered that many millions of Romanians are animal owners or protectors of the animals. This law has polarized your society and made it dangerously divisive.
As a policy, 'catch and kill' has been identified as a completely unsuccessful control strategy. Also such a wholesale war of attrition against all animals ensures that significant violence will occur against individuals and animals.
We would draw the attention of the Court to the fact that the intention to implement PL912 has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology. Not only have the Romanian Government failed to acknowledge this as a strategy but are assuredly aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed strategy knowing that although there will be significant profits to be made, the net result will be abject failure and the number of animals will not decrease.
On 25th September, the Court has an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous.
Such is the increasing worldwide perception that Romania is neither civilized nor safe, and which will assuredly impact on tourism and commercial investment.
We would appeal to you on 25th September to reject the PL912 modification proposal of the Lower House. The world awaits to rejoice a moment of reality, honesty and vision and a day when respect can be afforded once again to your country.
Thank you.
[Signer's name]
The decision to allow euthanasia of ALL homeless dogs in Romania, was taken by the Romanian Parliament, totally ignoring that mass-killing of healthy animals is contrary to:
- the recommendations of the WHO (World Health Organisation);
- that it contradicts their own Constitutional Court's Decision 1/2012 (that euthanasia is ILLEGAL as a stray dogs management method until all other solutions have been applied properly, uniformly and with responsibility by local authorities);
- that it contradicts the WD 0026/2011 and the "framework"
- the European Council's Convention on the Protection of Pet Animals
- any adequate human moral principles!
AND, on top of all:
- totally ignoring that, after 20 years of killing Romania's straying dogs, this method has proven to be ineffective!
"Interestingly", though, culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice.
Former senator Marius Marinescu, current President of the Federation for the Protection of Animals and the Environment (FPAM) has challenged the approved law allowing euthanasia of ALL stray animals after 14 days if not adopted before the Romanian Constitutional Court and the Constitutional Court will debate PL912 on 25th of September, 2013. They will decide between life and death of ALL homeless animals in Romania.
In an non-corrupted country it would be absolutely normal and predictable that the Court will maintain its position stated in the Decision taken in January 2012. However, we do not know how big the political pressure over the Court really is and therefore we kindly ask you to sign our petition that sends instant emails to several members of the CCR.
By signing our petition at change.org, the message below will be sent to the CCR:
Subject: please reject the PL912 modification proposal of the Lower House
Honorable Members of the Constitutional Court,
Distinguished Officials,
Madams and Sirs,
On 10th September the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament voted PL912 to legitimise a 'catch and kill' policy for all homeless animals. The terminology used was 'eradication'. Since this date media frenzy has been created because of the death of a young boy under what remains dubious circumstances. However the stray animals were blamed and as a result of the media frenzy and the vote, a state of abuse of animals exists now in Romania. Animals and their owners and protectors are now at serious risk. There is danger now to people and property in addition to the threat to the animals. It must be remembered that many millions of Romanians are animal owners or protectors of the animals. This law has polarized your society and made it dangerously divisive.
As a policy, 'catch and kill' has been identified as a completely unsuccessful control strategy. Also such a wholesale war of attrition against all animals ensures that significant violence will occur against individuals and animals.
We would draw the attention of the Court to the fact that the intention to implement PL912 has produced worldwide condemnation and a perception that Romania is a country which introduces medieval practices and governs in a draconian mode. Most of the 'civilized' countries have introduced a 'Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate and Return' policy and now have very few homeless animals on the streets. This is a 21st century methodology. Not only have the Romanian Government failed to acknowledge this as a strategy but are assuredly aware of the costs and profits to be made from implementing the proposed strategy knowing that although there will be significant profits to be made, the net result will be abject failure and the number of animals will not decrease.
On 25th September, the Court has an opportunity to define whether Romania is a country worthy of being called civilized or whether it should be consigned to popular perception of a country unworthy of being considered anything other than barbaric, mismanaged, corrupt and dangerous.
Such is the increasing worldwide perception that Romania is neither civilized nor safe, and which will assuredly impact on tourism and commercial investment.
We would appeal to you on 25th September to reject the PL912 modification proposal of the Lower House. The world awaits to rejoice a moment of reality, honesty and vision and a day when respect can be afforded once again to your country.
Thank you.
[Signer's name]
Thank you!
A brief background of the law regarding the stray’s management
In 2007 a legislative project (known to you as PL912) which regulated the management of all the dogs (strays and with owners) by neutering and returning (catch and return), which had been approved by the Romanian Senate, was blocked for 5 years by the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament. Further on, this chamber has fully and completely modified the law from „catch, spay and return” to „catch and kill”, version in which the law was voted and approved.
Before it was enacted by the Romanian President, the law was contested with the Romanian Constitutional Court.
In January 2012 the Constitutional Court ruled such contestation and it issued a Decision whereby it clearly stated that "the mass killing of the strays may not only be applied as a last resort, exclusively when all other solutions have been accordingly implemented by the local authorities, however such solutions have failed to limit or to eradicate this phenomenon”. As a result, PL912 was resent to the Parliament with the purpose of conformation with the Court’s Decision.
Another difficult year with considerable lobby actions and projects, materials, meetings regarding the legislative implementation of the dog management program by catch, spay and return.
In the hysterical social context presented and created by the media and embraced by the politicians, on 10 September, 2013 PL912 was once again transformed in "catch and kill all", form in which it was voted by the Lower House of the Parliament.
On 14 September, 2013 PL912 was contested at the Constitutional Court based on the fact that it was voted and passed without it being in accordance with the Court’s Decision from 2012!
The contestation was signed by 30 senators, mostly from the political party PP-DD (Dan Diaconescu) and a few senators from the other parties which chose to keep their verticality despite the instructions they were given by their political parties! (Text by Dr Carmen Arsene, FNPA).
Before it was enacted by the Romanian President, the law was contested with the Romanian Constitutional Court.
In January 2012 the Constitutional Court ruled such contestation and it issued a Decision whereby it clearly stated that "the mass killing of the strays may not only be applied as a last resort, exclusively when all other solutions have been accordingly implemented by the local authorities, however such solutions have failed to limit or to eradicate this phenomenon”. As a result, PL912 was resent to the Parliament with the purpose of conformation with the Court’s Decision.
Another difficult year with considerable lobby actions and projects, materials, meetings regarding the legislative implementation of the dog management program by catch, spay and return.
In the hysterical social context presented and created by the media and embraced by the politicians, on 10 September, 2013 PL912 was once again transformed in "catch and kill all", form in which it was voted by the Lower House of the Parliament.
On 14 September, 2013 PL912 was contested at the Constitutional Court based on the fact that it was voted and passed without it being in accordance with the Court’s Decision from 2012!
The contestation was signed by 30 senators, mostly from the political party PP-DD (Dan Diaconescu) and a few senators from the other parties which chose to keep their verticality despite the instructions they were given by their political parties! (Text by Dr Carmen Arsene, FNPA).
ASPA pays 219 LEI for the catching of ONE dog. But according to annexe 2 of the Decision of the General Council of Bucharest, these fees should NOT exceed 70 LEI
According to an article published in the Romania media on 12th of September, 2013 the Authority for the Supervision and Protection of Animals (ASPA) signed 9 contracts with three of the seven companies that participated in the tender.
For each catched dog the municipality will pay 219 LEI, but FOUR PAWS representatives say that the municipality should not pay more than 10 LEI for each dog, including tranquilizer, catching and transport.
219 LEI for the catching of one dog is mega huge. The tranquilizer cost maximum 5 LEI per dog, add 5 LEI for gasoline, makes it 10 LEI. Of course, if they are going to send a car to catch one dog, it would be 10 LEI per car/dog, but given that they put like 10 dogs in one car, this would equal to 100 LEI per car. Kuki Barbuceanu, FOUR PAWS project coordinator, does not understand where the difference between 10 LEI per dog (the real price) and the agreed 219 LEI per dog comes from. He has no explanation...
In fact, the amount paid by the municipality for one dog equals to the price that the municipality would need to pay if the dogs would come by taxi from about 157 km away from the "shelter", given that the taxi price is 1,39 lei/km. 157 km is about the distance from Bucharest to Focsani. However, the two shelters of the city hall are located on Boulevard Pallady, Sector 3, and in the town Mihăileşti Giurgiu county, 25 km from the capital.
The companies that have signed the framework agreement with ASPA for the catching of the stray dogs on the streets of the capital are:
- S.C. ELEN BASIC BUSINESS SRL - founded in 2012 and, according to information published on the website of the Ministry of Finance, has as main activity "Business and management consultancy activities"
- SC BEST MARKETING SRL - founded in 2004 and, according to the Ministry of Finance, has NACE "dental care activities." At the end of 2012 the company had five employees and a loss of 53,400 lei.
- SC Terra Marique Ltd - registered in 2005, according to Ministry of Finance, their main activity, according to CAEN classification, is the "intermediation in the sale of furniture, household goods, hardware and iron mongery"
Moreover, the agreed amount exceeds the provisions of the ASPA General Council Decision governing this issue: the ASPA giving 219 LEI to capture ONE stray is already illegal, because according to Annexe 2 of the Decision of the General Council of Bucharest, the amount of such fees should not exceed 70 LEI.
The 'Intergroup' acknowledges and respects the Romanian Parliament's adoption of the new law, and have expressed serious doubts that the law will be enforced in a civilized and non-cruel way.
11/09/2013
Dear President Basescu,
It is with great sadness and concern that Members of the European Parliament Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals address their second letter to you after their first appeal of last week was ignored.
We acknowledge and respect the Romanian Parliament’s adoption of a law which will allow local authorities to apply euthanasia of dogs that have stayed more than 14 days in a shelter.
The Romanian authorities will have now the duty and responsibility to enforce the law in a civilised and non-cruel way but given the sheer number of stray dogs in Bucharest and the whole of the country we have serious doubts that it will be possible.
We are concerned that it will end in a brutal massacre of dogs and would therefore like inquire if there exists already a strategy on how to apply the euthanasia campaign. If yes, we would like to have the details. Will it include as well dogs that have already been neutered? When and how will it be enforced? We hope that you will be able to provide us this information.
The very large stray dog populations in Romania are the result of bad management practices. Since many years NGOs have called to invest in systematic neutering campaigns and in education programmes for responsible dog ownership. This has been generally ignored and has resulted in the current situation.
The Members of the European Parliament are flooded with messages from concerned people throughout the world who urge us for help in order to avoid a massacre of the Romanian stray dogs.
We call on you and all competent authorities to ensure that uncontrolled killings of stray dogs will be avoided. Even though the European Union has little to say when it comes to companion animals it would be a shame before the international community to admit that cruel mass slaughters of dogs can still happen in the European Union of the 21st century.
Please act now, so that worst can be avoided.
Sincerely,
Dan Jorgensen,
President of the Animal Welfare Intergroup
Source
Maja, Princess von Hohenzollern
writes to President Basescu and the Romanian Constitutional Court
To:
Constitutional Court
of Romania
Palatul Parlamentului, Intrarea B1, Calea 13
Septembrie nr. 2, sector 5,
Bucharest, area code 050725
[email protected]
President of Romania
Traian Băsescu
Palatul Cotroceni,
Bulevardul Geniului nr. 1-3
Sector 6 - Bucuresti - Romania,
Cod postal 060116
[email protected]
09/11/2013
Dear judges, dear president Băsescu,
I hereby protest also on behalf of many animal rights activists and people internationally, against the inhumane, cruel and brutal mass killing of stray dogs in Romania.
I urge you to stop this bloody and enraged slaughter of innocent stray dogs. You rush your country into a bloody massacre of incomprehensible extent to which you shoot thousands of dogs on the street, poison, kill and burn them alive! This provides anywhere abroad for great horror and international protests. Hundred thousands of people from foreign countries have signed protest petitions, Romanian embassies are under boycott and there are many demonstrations in countries all over against the mass murder of stray dogs in your country.
Romania shows, once again, that it is no civilized country and that it has no moral maturity to be a member of the EU. With all respect, but slaying dogs means acting like uneducated people from the Stone Age, which are not adult enough to take responsibility for their own actions. It is not the fault of the stray dogs that they need to lead a suffering life on the street. It is the fault of the people who have thrown them on the street, who have not neutered them and who did not care about them. Instead of taking responsibility for these animals and to decimate the population of the animals in a humane and effective manner with consistent castration and to adopt them, you punish them twice with cold-blooded murder. Between 2004 and 2009 there have been killed an incredible number of 10 million stray dogs in Romania! That is a "genocide" of dogs as it has never happened in the world ever before. You have killed almost as many dogs as the entire population of Romania!
You have thereby committed the greatest crime in dogs and cats in history.
And now you start again with this blood lust. It is no solution to brutally murder the stray dogs.
You have already killed so many and yet the streets are still full. From this you should learn and understand that we can resolve the situation of stray animals only with reason and humane, civilized measures. There are so many NGO`s and great Romanian animal rights activists, who have done excellent work over the last few years and have shown how to deal with neuter & release measures and how to care for the animals. That in the year 2013 once again there is a "euthanasia law" in Europe makes me and many people in the world shocking speechless.
This all happens before the eyes of children and teenager. What kind of people should become of them if they already have to watch as children how dogs are killed and burned alive without any feeling and morality? These children will grow up without any empathy and will develop to cold and unfeeling adults who appreciate neither animals nor people and treat them accordingly. How brutal people deal with each other, can be seen in many places in Romania. You decide how your society will look tomorrow and what image your country will have. Today, Romania is called:”the land of death and the dog killers "and "Dog Auschwitz." Finally you have to stop to abuse on the tax money of your citizens and the tax money of European citizens to cowardly murder of stray animals. Some people in Romania have developed a perfidious business model were the dog hunter`s, municipalities and mayors earning millions of Euro with the murder of stray animals. Stop this abuse of tax money and use the tax money of your citizens and of the EU funds for better social policies, health care and the education of your children. In order to create a civilized society and a country that is respected in the world and also to create a society in which people be friendly with each other. The EU has certainly not been awarded with the “Nobel Peace Prize”, so that you are waging a war against innocent stray dogs and cats.
Sincerely and with great respect to all people who care for animals in Romania
Princess Maja von Hohenzollern
Animal Protector and adoptive mum of 14 stray dogs
Constitutional Court
of Romania
Palatul Parlamentului, Intrarea B1, Calea 13
Septembrie nr. 2, sector 5,
Bucharest, area code 050725
[email protected]
President of Romania
Traian Băsescu
Palatul Cotroceni,
Bulevardul Geniului nr. 1-3
Sector 6 - Bucuresti - Romania,
Cod postal 060116
[email protected]
09/11/2013
Dear judges, dear president Băsescu,
I hereby protest also on behalf of many animal rights activists and people internationally, against the inhumane, cruel and brutal mass killing of stray dogs in Romania.
I urge you to stop this bloody and enraged slaughter of innocent stray dogs. You rush your country into a bloody massacre of incomprehensible extent to which you shoot thousands of dogs on the street, poison, kill and burn them alive! This provides anywhere abroad for great horror and international protests. Hundred thousands of people from foreign countries have signed protest petitions, Romanian embassies are under boycott and there are many demonstrations in countries all over against the mass murder of stray dogs in your country.
Romania shows, once again, that it is no civilized country and that it has no moral maturity to be a member of the EU. With all respect, but slaying dogs means acting like uneducated people from the Stone Age, which are not adult enough to take responsibility for their own actions. It is not the fault of the stray dogs that they need to lead a suffering life on the street. It is the fault of the people who have thrown them on the street, who have not neutered them and who did not care about them. Instead of taking responsibility for these animals and to decimate the population of the animals in a humane and effective manner with consistent castration and to adopt them, you punish them twice with cold-blooded murder. Between 2004 and 2009 there have been killed an incredible number of 10 million stray dogs in Romania! That is a "genocide" of dogs as it has never happened in the world ever before. You have killed almost as many dogs as the entire population of Romania!
You have thereby committed the greatest crime in dogs and cats in history.
And now you start again with this blood lust. It is no solution to brutally murder the stray dogs.
You have already killed so many and yet the streets are still full. From this you should learn and understand that we can resolve the situation of stray animals only with reason and humane, civilized measures. There are so many NGO`s and great Romanian animal rights activists, who have done excellent work over the last few years and have shown how to deal with neuter & release measures and how to care for the animals. That in the year 2013 once again there is a "euthanasia law" in Europe makes me and many people in the world shocking speechless.
This all happens before the eyes of children and teenager. What kind of people should become of them if they already have to watch as children how dogs are killed and burned alive without any feeling and morality? These children will grow up without any empathy and will develop to cold and unfeeling adults who appreciate neither animals nor people and treat them accordingly. How brutal people deal with each other, can be seen in many places in Romania. You decide how your society will look tomorrow and what image your country will have. Today, Romania is called:”the land of death and the dog killers "and "Dog Auschwitz." Finally you have to stop to abuse on the tax money of your citizens and the tax money of European citizens to cowardly murder of stray animals. Some people in Romania have developed a perfidious business model were the dog hunter`s, municipalities and mayors earning millions of Euro with the murder of stray animals. Stop this abuse of tax money and use the tax money of your citizens and of the EU funds for better social policies, health care and the education of your children. In order to create a civilized society and a country that is respected in the world and also to create a society in which people be friendly with each other. The EU has certainly not been awarded with the “Nobel Peace Prize”, so that you are waging a war against innocent stray dogs and cats.
Sincerely and with great respect to all people who care for animals in Romania
Princess Maja von Hohenzollern
Animal Protector and adoptive mum of 14 stray dogs
WSPA's Romania Dog Culling Statement, September 11, 2013
The Plight of Romanian Stray Dogs
is an excellent article written by Dr Rita Pal, independent Medical Journalist. Former Psychiatrist and NHS Whistleblower, and which summarizes the current situation in Romania very well. Below, the article published in 'The Huffington Post' on 8th of September, 2013.
Recently, in Bucharest, a four year old boy was killed by dogs after he entered a fenced off private land - a tragic but common event, world-wide. Yet, bolstered by snapshot statistics from animal welfare authorities claiming "1100 people were bitten by stray dogs in the city", the story has become a international news story. Sadly, the government's failure to robustly manage the stray dog population humanely goes unreported.
Romanian President, Traian Basescu, leapt aboard the publicity bandwagon, declaring"dogs should not be put above humans". Riding the tide of publicity generated by the rabid headlines, he demanded emergency legislation condemning all stray dogs to death. Unfortunately, this inhumane [non evidence based] mass cull of vulnerable, helpless dogs raises questions about his decision-making abilities.
Bucharest Council appears to be operating a lip service referendum, asking residents whether stray dogs unadopted after seven days should be killed. Current legislation only allows the killing of sick strays, although, according to animal welfare groups, unofficial culling continues without any effect.
Interestingly, though, culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice.
Any Dog Rescue states:
"Bucharest in the period 2001-2007 has been spent almost 9 million to kill 144,000 dogs (62 euros per head). In Arad in the 2008-2010 period 2,986 dogs were killed for 308,048 euros, or an average of more than 103 euros per animal, in Slatina in the 2008-2010 period 1,111 dogs were killed by spending 205,500 euros, almost 185 euros per dog, in Brasov in the period 2003-2008 were killed 20,000 dogs, to the tune of 1.45 million euros (72 euros per dog), Constanta in 2008-2010 were killed 20,000 euros for the $ 1.5 million (75 euros per dog). The result is that the massacres of stray dogs has increased. Sterilization instead only costs 20-25 euros per dog"
As he must know, the President should be adhering to a number of directives. The Animal Welfare Conference in 2008 reached a number of conclusions relating to management of dogs in Europe.
The World Society For the Protection of Animals [WSPA] recommends humane, effective methods of management.
1. Promoting responsible pet ownership.
2. Legislative measures against cruelty to animals.
3. Identification and registration of dogs.
4. Neutering of stray and owned animals.
5. Vaccination against rabies and other disease.
WSPA says:
"Killing street dogs is not effective, because it does not address the root of the problem". Indeed, historically, culling dogs has proven completely ineffective."
Romania's most common cause of death is Coronary Heart Disease with no flashing headlines. Dog bites or dog related illnesses don't feature in the top 50 causes of death. According to the WHO, Romania has one of the highest rates of road traffic deaths in Europe, but the President has not banned every vehicle from the roads.
Clearly, therefore, the President's decision is an illogical, futile attempt to capitalise on the media frenzy demonising stray dogs.
The problem began in the 1980s. Nicolae Ceausescu wanted to industrialise the country, forcing the population to vacate the country-side and move into cities. Vast blocks of apartments were built to accommodate them.
Animals were abandoned due to shortage of space. They reproduced, filling the streets with homeless dogs and puppies. The Capital's mayor declared that the fastest way to dispose of strays was to slaughter them. Other cities followed suit.
For more than 20 years, dogs' lives have been ended in the most painful ways - shot, poisoned, hung, burnt or placed into small kennels to die of thirst and hunger - but the problem of stray dogs remains. By 2008, a new animal protection law stated that no healthy animal should be destroyed, instead supporting neutering and spaying as a means of population control. The result has been countless dogs in pounds, who die of diseases, injuries, starvation and thirst. Unofficially, dogs are still being killed by poisons, disappearing from municipal pounds in their thousands, never to be seen again.
Occupy for Animals says:
"Approximately 5 million puppies are born in Romania in rural areas every year, some of them being killed by their owners and the others being abandoned in the streets and the woods, and as long as the dogs with owners will not be sterilized, through coherent programs, Romania's streets will never be free of dogs."
They report that mass culling of dogs has already begun, with the population believing they have a right to kill the animals by any means possible. No stray dog is apparently being spared.
This inhumane behaviour may have catastrophic consequences. America's FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] has found that cruelty to animals regularly appears in the records of serial rapists and murderers. The standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals as a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people. In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States, roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.
A wise President would tackle the problem of stray dogs humanely. His current, completely ineffective approach may have disastrous psychological consequences for Romania.
President Barack Obama once said,
"I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other ... And it's very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals"
and India's Mohandas Gandhi said,
"The measure of a society can be how well its people treat its animals."
With power comes responsibility, and it is time Romania's President made the right decision for all creatures great or small.
Ways you can help.
1. Sign the petition
2. Adopt or Sponsor a dog
Recently, in Bucharest, a four year old boy was killed by dogs after he entered a fenced off private land - a tragic but common event, world-wide. Yet, bolstered by snapshot statistics from animal welfare authorities claiming "1100 people were bitten by stray dogs in the city", the story has become a international news story. Sadly, the government's failure to robustly manage the stray dog population humanely goes unreported.
Romanian President, Traian Basescu, leapt aboard the publicity bandwagon, declaring"dogs should not be put above humans". Riding the tide of publicity generated by the rabid headlines, he demanded emergency legislation condemning all stray dogs to death. Unfortunately, this inhumane [non evidence based] mass cull of vulnerable, helpless dogs raises questions about his decision-making abilities.
Bucharest Council appears to be operating a lip service referendum, asking residents whether stray dogs unadopted after seven days should be killed. Current legislation only allows the killing of sick strays, although, according to animal welfare groups, unofficial culling continues without any effect.
Interestingly, though, culling dogs can be very profitable. The President is therefore asking the tax payer to fund an expensive, non-evidence based, ineffective practice.
Any Dog Rescue states:
"Bucharest in the period 2001-2007 has been spent almost 9 million to kill 144,000 dogs (62 euros per head). In Arad in the 2008-2010 period 2,986 dogs were killed for 308,048 euros, or an average of more than 103 euros per animal, in Slatina in the 2008-2010 period 1,111 dogs were killed by spending 205,500 euros, almost 185 euros per dog, in Brasov in the period 2003-2008 were killed 20,000 dogs, to the tune of 1.45 million euros (72 euros per dog), Constanta in 2008-2010 were killed 20,000 euros for the $ 1.5 million (75 euros per dog). The result is that the massacres of stray dogs has increased. Sterilization instead only costs 20-25 euros per dog"
As he must know, the President should be adhering to a number of directives. The Animal Welfare Conference in 2008 reached a number of conclusions relating to management of dogs in Europe.
The World Society For the Protection of Animals [WSPA] recommends humane, effective methods of management.
1. Promoting responsible pet ownership.
2. Legislative measures against cruelty to animals.
3. Identification and registration of dogs.
4. Neutering of stray and owned animals.
5. Vaccination against rabies and other disease.
WSPA says:
"Killing street dogs is not effective, because it does not address the root of the problem". Indeed, historically, culling dogs has proven completely ineffective."
Romania's most common cause of death is Coronary Heart Disease with no flashing headlines. Dog bites or dog related illnesses don't feature in the top 50 causes of death. According to the WHO, Romania has one of the highest rates of road traffic deaths in Europe, but the President has not banned every vehicle from the roads.
Clearly, therefore, the President's decision is an illogical, futile attempt to capitalise on the media frenzy demonising stray dogs.
The problem began in the 1980s. Nicolae Ceausescu wanted to industrialise the country, forcing the population to vacate the country-side and move into cities. Vast blocks of apartments were built to accommodate them.
Animals were abandoned due to shortage of space. They reproduced, filling the streets with homeless dogs and puppies. The Capital's mayor declared that the fastest way to dispose of strays was to slaughter them. Other cities followed suit.
For more than 20 years, dogs' lives have been ended in the most painful ways - shot, poisoned, hung, burnt or placed into small kennels to die of thirst and hunger - but the problem of stray dogs remains. By 2008, a new animal protection law stated that no healthy animal should be destroyed, instead supporting neutering and spaying as a means of population control. The result has been countless dogs in pounds, who die of diseases, injuries, starvation and thirst. Unofficially, dogs are still being killed by poisons, disappearing from municipal pounds in their thousands, never to be seen again.
Occupy for Animals says:
"Approximately 5 million puppies are born in Romania in rural areas every year, some of them being killed by their owners and the others being abandoned in the streets and the woods, and as long as the dogs with owners will not be sterilized, through coherent programs, Romania's streets will never be free of dogs."
They report that mass culling of dogs has already begun, with the population believing they have a right to kill the animals by any means possible. No stray dog is apparently being spared.
This inhumane behaviour may have catastrophic consequences. America's FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] has found that cruelty to animals regularly appears in the records of serial rapists and murderers. The standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals as a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders. A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people. In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States, roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.
A wise President would tackle the problem of stray dogs humanely. His current, completely ineffective approach may have disastrous psychological consequences for Romania.
President Barack Obama once said,
"I think how we treat our animals reflects how we treat each other ... And it's very important that we have a president who is mindful of the cruelty that is perpetrated on animals"
and India's Mohandas Gandhi said,
"The measure of a society can be how well its people treat its animals."
With power comes responsibility, and it is time Romania's President made the right decision for all creatures great or small.
Ways you can help.
1. Sign the petition
2. Adopt or Sponsor a dog
The Romanian Dog Massacre Begins
by Dr Rita Pal, independent Medical Journalist. Former Psychiatrist and NHS Whistleblower, published in 'The Huffington Post' on 11th of September, 2013
The Romanian Parliament has ruled that all stray dogs will be killed if, after fourteen days, they remain unadopted. The strays' plight was discussed previously on the Huffington Post.
The Romanian Insider recently reported:
"The Chamber of Deputies approved the law which sets a two week day deadline for stray dogs in shelters to be adopted, following which they will be put down.City Hall, however, retains the power to delay the lethal injection.
The law passed by a majority of votes, with MPs from the Democrat Liberal Party (PDL), the Social Democrat party (PSD) and the National Liberal Party (PNL) all in favour of euthanizing stray dogs"
During the debates, the president of the Chamber of Deputies Valeriu Zgonea said none of the NGOs protecting stray dogs had filed a request to attend the vote.
According to sources, animal rights supporter, Senator Marinescu Marius, will now contest the matter at Romania's Constitutional Court.
Meanwhile, although the BBC reported Romanian protests in support of the dog cull , world-wide online protests against the cruel, non evidence based killing spree have gone unmentioned.
Social networks were bombarded with thousands of messages describing peoples' distress at the Romanian government's cruel decision. In protest, thousands have changed their Facebook profile page to show the bright red dog paw "Red Card For Romania".
One campaigner wrote:
"Today, the humanity of the Romanian people died. From now on the morality, conscience, education, civilization, logic and religion do not mean anything for this country. Yes, we live in it. Yes, we did everything we could to change the fate of stray animals: we have sterilized many animals, we gave hours of education in schools, we have created programs for the sterilization and microchip identification with low prices and even free for the stray dogs and dogs with owners, we noticed the police when we came across of a stray abandonment, we organized fairs adoptions trying to wake the people's consciousness up in order to adopt a stray and not to buy one, we have helped animal cases of cruelty or illness /accidents , we hardly have got the permission to spray/neuter and relocate the stray dogs from the authorities in some cities, and also we manage to adopt laws that force the owners of dogs and cats to sterilized and identify them by microchips ... Unfortunately all what we did not helped enough, that was even not considered as a way to control and stop the breeding of stray animals"Although local and international media imply that the Romanian public supports the cull, this is untrue.
The UK's National Canine Defence League [NCDL] wrote:
"Research carried out by Dogs Trust last year revealed that 87% of Romanians disagree with mass euthanasia and see it as an abhorrent practice while 50% of urban Romanian citizens would be willing to donate 1 Euro towards a humane initiative to reduce the street dog problem"
The European Parliament's Intergroup on Welfare and Conservation of Animals doesn't support it either, writing in a so-far unreported document .
"Your call for a systematic mass killing of strays goes against the will of the democratically elected Romanian MEPs. This is something which we consider as profoundly undemocratic and unacceptable in the European Union.
The Members of the Animal Welfare Intergroup undersigning this letter call on you not to promote the legalisation of systematic mass euthanasia of stray dogs. This will cause a horrible and useless massacre of dogs which goes against the values and objectives of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union"
The World Society for the Protection of Animals said in a statement:
"Todays adopted Romanian law for Euthanasia after 14 days, as the main tool to manage the stray dog population breaks a number of conventions including:
- Article 13 of the Lisbon Treaty
- The European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals
- The Written Declaration 26/2011 by the European Parliament on dog population management in the EU - which clearly states that euthanasia, is not effective way of solving the problem"
Ruud Tombrock, WSPA Europe director said:
"The massive culling of dogs lacks compassion and defies values and respect for life we would normally expect from EU members. The European community has the task of protecting those values, and WSPA will rally all parties to act according and call for accountability of those who do not."
Clearly, Romanian politicians have discarded recommendations and a rational decision making process, acting instead on media-driven hysteria, without reference to the evidence in this matter. This reckless, haphazard method will now cost the lives of 64,000 stray dogs in Bucharest alone. Today, the decision affects voiceless, defenceless dogs. Tomorrow, perhaps the same approach will apply to vulnerable people - one aberrant event may be all it takes!
Now, campaigners world-wide - and particularly those on the ground in Bucharest - must steel themselves to face the needless killing of vulnerable dogs. Working tirelessly to find each dog their forever home, they feel powerless to save them from the impending massacre.
One campaigner showed me a picture of a lovely collie. The poster said "This is Flash, he was going to be adopted, what happened to the 14 day rule? Today, he was murdered by the country that breaks its own rules". K. Lunstrum wrote "Flash was going to travel to his new home in October, before he could be taken to a safe place he was found killed today" .
Bucharest is fast becoming a haunting reminder of Auschwitz, a death camp for dogs. Higher authorities in the European Union, bound in red tape, appear unable to prevent this massacre while we watch and wait powerlessly for it to begin - as each playful bark disappears, we ask ourselves, when did we elect politicians to kill the vulnerable?
Rescue Romanian Dogs
1. Any Dog 'il do Rescue
2. Action Aid for Animals
"Romanian Stray Dogs: It Ain't Over 'Till It's Over"
...is the title of yet another excellent and very comprehensive article written by Dr Rita Pal, independent Medical Journalist, former Psychiatrist and NHS Whistleblower, on the current status of Romania's homeless animals. The article has been published in 'Huffington Post' on 18th of September, 2013.
The President of Romania is under fire after enacting a law to cull all stray dogs that remain unadopted after 14 days. [see Plight of Stray Dogs and The Romanian Dog Massacre Begins]
Much of Europe has erupted into protest against the law, while social networks are buzzing with petitions and letters. #Romaniastopanimalabuse was trending on Twitter. In the meantime, rescuers have struggled frantically to find safe havens for their dogs.
The WPSA's Director in Europe, Ruud Tombrock said:
"WSPA is currently pressing relevant parties to act, working with other organisations on a coordinated response to stop the culling before it begins".
Other organisations, including the Humane Society International and more recently PETA followed suit.
In the meantime, the glitterati dispatched letters to the President of Romania and the European Union; long-time animal rights campaigner, Brigitte Bardot, said:
"In 2000, Basescu thwarted our program of sterilization of dogs in Bucharest, it is now responsible for the proliferation of dogs and accidents that result. This tyrant thinks only kill and condemn the dictatorial policy, unbecoming a member of the European Union. We have no moral right to let this animal genocide perpetrated before our eyes, it's like back under Ceausescu" [ Full Letter can be read here]
While the media briefly featured these words, Bardot teamed up with Hollywood superstar and dog lover, Pamela Anderson, to pen a joint letter to the President of the European Union. They wrote:
"With our 2 voices representing millions of others, we speak in behalf of the international public opinion shocked by the unprecedented animal genocide announced in Romania"
Animal rights activist, H.R.H. Princess Maja von Hohenzollern also weighed in, saying of Romania:
"You have committed the greatest crime in the history of animals". She continued, "Romania proves once again that it is a civilized country and has no moral maturity required to be a member of the European Union. With respect, killing dogs supposed to behave like uneducated people of the Middle Ages, who can not take responsibility for their own actions. stray dogs are not guilty because they are condemned to live a life of suffering on the streets of Romania. fault lies with the people who abandon them and throw them in the street, those who do not sterilize their dogs and who do not care about them".
Meanwhile, local Romanian hero and former senator, Marius Marinescu, currently President of the Federation for the Protection of Animals and the Environment, announced immediately after the law was enacted that he will do everything he can to stop its implementation. Now, aided by lawyer Paula Iacob, he has appealed to the Constitutional Court of Romania against the new law, after successfully obtaining the signatures of 25 senators and 50 members of the Chamber of Deputies that are required to begin the process.
The state news agency, Agerpres, quoted Haralambie Vochitoiu, on of the legislators, as saying, "We have to avoid reacting en-masse through collective killing ... we don't want to see tens of thousands of corpses". [Reuters]
The appeal prevents the new law from coming into effect, granting a temporary reprieve before the final showdown and coming as a welcome relief for campaigners.
However, even though it is, for now, unlawful to end dogs' lives, there have been reports of premature culling, a refusal to allow adoptions and a maximised drive to catch dogs. Other reports of obstruction in care have been featured elsewhere in the local media.
In solidarity with campaigners, veterinarians in Timisoara have decided not to assist the municipality in killing of dogs that are not adopted within 14 days. The local paper wrote
"Veterinarians are extremely upset that lawmakers have not considered their opinion. More specifically, they argue that the law was passed too quickly, without the defense of animal rights organizations to react. Same doctors say they will not earn money from euthanasia, which they see as crimes".
The area most affected by alleged premature dog culling is Ploiesti . In June 2013, the town was filled with the bodies of poisoned dogs, as reported by the local media. Its mayor Mr Badescu has been severely criticised by the public via petitions and reports.
While real heroes like Ms Bagdat Oz and her associates in the UK and in Romania work tirelessly until all hours of the night to rescue as many dogs as they can, the biggest problem for private shelters and rescuers is financial. Funding is scarce and therefore all donations are welcome. Click here for a list who would welcome assistance. The situation is quite desperate, as vulnerable dogs need to be rescued before they are taken to public shelters, where the standards of care are extremely poor.
A well co-ordinated, evidence based campaign has been conducted by Occupy For Animals who have kept the pressure up and kept everyone informed of progress. They have mobilised one of the biggest online and offline campaigns to raise the awareness of strays in Romania. People all over Europe have stood in solidarity in this cause.
Much of Europe has erupted into protest against the law, while social networks are buzzing with petitions and letters. #Romaniastopanimalabuse was trending on Twitter. In the meantime, rescuers have struggled frantically to find safe havens for their dogs.
The WPSA's Director in Europe, Ruud Tombrock said:
"WSPA is currently pressing relevant parties to act, working with other organisations on a coordinated response to stop the culling before it begins".
Other organisations, including the Humane Society International and more recently PETA followed suit.
In the meantime, the glitterati dispatched letters to the President of Romania and the European Union; long-time animal rights campaigner, Brigitte Bardot, said:
"In 2000, Basescu thwarted our program of sterilization of dogs in Bucharest, it is now responsible for the proliferation of dogs and accidents that result. This tyrant thinks only kill and condemn the dictatorial policy, unbecoming a member of the European Union. We have no moral right to let this animal genocide perpetrated before our eyes, it's like back under Ceausescu" [ Full Letter can be read here]
While the media briefly featured these words, Bardot teamed up with Hollywood superstar and dog lover, Pamela Anderson, to pen a joint letter to the President of the European Union. They wrote:
"With our 2 voices representing millions of others, we speak in behalf of the international public opinion shocked by the unprecedented animal genocide announced in Romania"
Animal rights activist, H.R.H. Princess Maja von Hohenzollern also weighed in, saying of Romania:
"You have committed the greatest crime in the history of animals". She continued, "Romania proves once again that it is a civilized country and has no moral maturity required to be a member of the European Union. With respect, killing dogs supposed to behave like uneducated people of the Middle Ages, who can not take responsibility for their own actions. stray dogs are not guilty because they are condemned to live a life of suffering on the streets of Romania. fault lies with the people who abandon them and throw them in the street, those who do not sterilize their dogs and who do not care about them".
Meanwhile, local Romanian hero and former senator, Marius Marinescu, currently President of the Federation for the Protection of Animals and the Environment, announced immediately after the law was enacted that he will do everything he can to stop its implementation. Now, aided by lawyer Paula Iacob, he has appealed to the Constitutional Court of Romania against the new law, after successfully obtaining the signatures of 25 senators and 50 members of the Chamber of Deputies that are required to begin the process.
The state news agency, Agerpres, quoted Haralambie Vochitoiu, on of the legislators, as saying, "We have to avoid reacting en-masse through collective killing ... we don't want to see tens of thousands of corpses". [Reuters]
The appeal prevents the new law from coming into effect, granting a temporary reprieve before the final showdown and coming as a welcome relief for campaigners.
However, even though it is, for now, unlawful to end dogs' lives, there have been reports of premature culling, a refusal to allow adoptions and a maximised drive to catch dogs. Other reports of obstruction in care have been featured elsewhere in the local media.
In solidarity with campaigners, veterinarians in Timisoara have decided not to assist the municipality in killing of dogs that are not adopted within 14 days. The local paper wrote
"Veterinarians are extremely upset that lawmakers have not considered their opinion. More specifically, they argue that the law was passed too quickly, without the defense of animal rights organizations to react. Same doctors say they will not earn money from euthanasia, which they see as crimes".
The area most affected by alleged premature dog culling is Ploiesti . In June 2013, the town was filled with the bodies of poisoned dogs, as reported by the local media. Its mayor Mr Badescu has been severely criticised by the public via petitions and reports.
While real heroes like Ms Bagdat Oz and her associates in the UK and in Romania work tirelessly until all hours of the night to rescue as many dogs as they can, the biggest problem for private shelters and rescuers is financial. Funding is scarce and therefore all donations are welcome. Click here for a list who would welcome assistance. The situation is quite desperate, as vulnerable dogs need to be rescued before they are taken to public shelters, where the standards of care are extremely poor.
A well co-ordinated, evidence based campaign has been conducted by Occupy For Animals who have kept the pressure up and kept everyone informed of progress. They have mobilised one of the biggest online and offline campaigns to raise the awareness of strays in Romania. People all over Europe have stood in solidarity in this cause.
While heroic attempts have been made to rescue dogs from all around the world, Romanians have turned up in their droves to adopt dogs from public shelters. The Greeks announced they were not going to accept the President's decision, decided to pack their bags and head down to Romania to help rescuers there rescue dogs.
Ironically, the new law may have come about through a disastrous misunderstanding. Latest news alleges that DNA tests have been unable to connect any of the stray dogs blamed for the death of a four year old boy to the incident. Had the government waited for scientific evidence instead of seeking opportunistic popularity, they may not now be the object of national and international derision.
To read the original article at 'Huffington Post', please click here!
To stay up-to-date on the plight of Romania's homeless animals, and in addition to following OFA's Facebook-page, we would suggest you follow also Dr Rita Pal on Facebook, and on TWITTER.
But maybe it wasn't even dogs who killed the boy...
The circumstances of the death of little Ionut gave reason to a number of questions since the official version had been published. Later, a number of inconsistencies have come to light, and even Romanian MEP Corneliu Vadim Tudor had publicly expressed doubts on the official version of the boy's death.
We have compiled the inconsistencies which have emerged days after the death of the little boy below and we invite you to read them, to watch the video and see the pictures, to read the different statements, and to build up your own opinion...
The following is an excerpt of an email received from Dr Carmen Arsene, president FNPA, received on 10th of September, 2013:
"The case of the 4 year old child killed by dogs is becoming more and more blurry and uncertain for many people who are starting to ask questions and wonder. The child was found approximately 1 km away from the park and in order to get there he would have had to walk a highly difficult road even for an adult! Especially for a child!? He should have passed a steep and then pass homeless people. Furthermore, the majority observes the attitude and behaviour of the parents, which are constantly present in the TV studios, especially the mother who is awkwardly relaxed and untroubled. In order to counter-balance this relaxation, some journalists resort to shocking titles, by expressing their own suffering, by photos. There are more and more details which do not make sense and which do not fit the story. And the grandmother who lost sight of the child is not in any way legally accused or pursued, not even interogated! On the contrary, the entire fault is attributed to the NGOs!!!!!!
A continuous and intense campaign, full of lies, calumnies, accuses, unimaginable scenarios regarding the animal lovers, especially the NGOs, is undertaken by the televisions, especially by “Antena 3” (please, send protests to [email protected] ). The animal welfare NGOs are merely „bastards who steal the state's money”, which have „turned rich by exploiting the strays problem”, which have „done businesses with the mayors for huge amounts of money”, „impostors, fake animal lovers, only ruled by their own interests”. The loss of credibility towards the NGOs has occurred and thus the people are starting to talk about the NGOs like entities for which the „truth” is only now surfacing. Fake statistics, images with „fearsome” strays, interviwes with „terrorized” citizens, have fully occupied the TV broadcasts these days! Fake histories, forged documents are presented to the population!
For 10 days the televisions are debating and are histerically yelling and screaming on the same subject!
A campaign without precedent in Romania, led mainly by Antena 3, hides INCREDIBLE POLITICAL STAKES AND INTERESTS! An unimaginable vizual and psichological pressure! A mediatic destruction which was never met before!
We have managed to defeat a political force by stopping mass euthanasia in 2011! Now their strategy has changed by creating such a public pressure, which, supposedly, will put pressure on the political bodies! The loss of credibility of the NGOs, of the animal lovers, currently represent the priority of the country! Once these occurred, they lead to the meeting of various objectives having collosal financial implications!
They have manipulated the collective mentality in such a way that the people themselves have massacred strays in the streets, people are abusing and hitting them, the public dog pounds are emptied over night, a national dog cathing procedure has begun, the dog catchers even enter the properties of the people. They have entered so deeply in the psyche of the people that the people have started to denigrate each other, to mutilate one another!
The protests against the gold extraction by cyanides in Rosia Montana has brought 10.000 people in the streets, for 9 days. This is a protest without precedent in Romania but still the televisions only rarely present this subject. Nonetheless they are constantly debating the subject of the child killed by the strays!
Only the joint and distructive forces they resorted to in a premeditated manner show us just how high the stake really is!"
Please consider the following statements, ask yourself the following questions, and build up your own opinion:
A journalist and his team took the same "possible path" that little Ionut is supposed to have taken when he left the park. Already the first part of the "possible path" was very difficult for an adult and it took them more than one hour until they landed in front of a very high fence which separated them from the place where the little boy had been found. According to the journalist, a child would have had no chance to walk this path till the end and to even reach the fence. And: why would a child do it?
If it took an adult more than 1 hour walking, a child would need even more time, but let's just assume that the two children really managed to reach the place where Ionut was later found in one hour time.... Ionut gets attacked by strays, his brothers runs back to his grand mother. He would have needed at least 2 hours only to make the 2 ways. But it is said that the grand mother left them unsupervised for about 45 minutes...
If the boy had been mauled to death by dogs, he would have screamed. How comes that no-one has heard the boys cries for help although there are a couple of residential buildings and many many houses in close proximity to the place where the boy is supposed to having been killed?
According to the journalist, the coroner had found little Ionut in the yard with his pants down... and, according to the journalist, the only explanation seems to be that the little boy had been caught, perhaps even raped and then thrown over the fence into the yard where his lifeless body had later been found after hungry dogs had started feeding upon him...
According to this report and different other statements, it seems as if the deputies, the ASPA, the police, and forensics are protecting a dangerous pedophile and killer...
In the very first statement of Bucharest ISU spokesman Daniel Vasile, said that "It is a difficult to access area, there are few explanations about this story."
There was also a police officer who said that it would have been impossible for a child to get over such a high fence unless the child had been lifted or thrown over...
We have compiled the inconsistencies which have emerged days after the death of the little boy below and we invite you to read them, to watch the video and see the pictures, to read the different statements, and to build up your own opinion...
The following is an excerpt of an email received from Dr Carmen Arsene, president FNPA, received on 10th of September, 2013:
"The case of the 4 year old child killed by dogs is becoming more and more blurry and uncertain for many people who are starting to ask questions and wonder. The child was found approximately 1 km away from the park and in order to get there he would have had to walk a highly difficult road even for an adult! Especially for a child!? He should have passed a steep and then pass homeless people. Furthermore, the majority observes the attitude and behaviour of the parents, which are constantly present in the TV studios, especially the mother who is awkwardly relaxed and untroubled. In order to counter-balance this relaxation, some journalists resort to shocking titles, by expressing their own suffering, by photos. There are more and more details which do not make sense and which do not fit the story. And the grandmother who lost sight of the child is not in any way legally accused or pursued, not even interogated! On the contrary, the entire fault is attributed to the NGOs!!!!!!
A continuous and intense campaign, full of lies, calumnies, accuses, unimaginable scenarios regarding the animal lovers, especially the NGOs, is undertaken by the televisions, especially by “Antena 3” (please, send protests to [email protected] ). The animal welfare NGOs are merely „bastards who steal the state's money”, which have „turned rich by exploiting the strays problem”, which have „done businesses with the mayors for huge amounts of money”, „impostors, fake animal lovers, only ruled by their own interests”. The loss of credibility towards the NGOs has occurred and thus the people are starting to talk about the NGOs like entities for which the „truth” is only now surfacing. Fake statistics, images with „fearsome” strays, interviwes with „terrorized” citizens, have fully occupied the TV broadcasts these days! Fake histories, forged documents are presented to the population!
For 10 days the televisions are debating and are histerically yelling and screaming on the same subject!
A campaign without precedent in Romania, led mainly by Antena 3, hides INCREDIBLE POLITICAL STAKES AND INTERESTS! An unimaginable vizual and psichological pressure! A mediatic destruction which was never met before!
We have managed to defeat a political force by stopping mass euthanasia in 2011! Now their strategy has changed by creating such a public pressure, which, supposedly, will put pressure on the political bodies! The loss of credibility of the NGOs, of the animal lovers, currently represent the priority of the country! Once these occurred, they lead to the meeting of various objectives having collosal financial implications!
They have manipulated the collective mentality in such a way that the people themselves have massacred strays in the streets, people are abusing and hitting them, the public dog pounds are emptied over night, a national dog cathing procedure has begun, the dog catchers even enter the properties of the people. They have entered so deeply in the psyche of the people that the people have started to denigrate each other, to mutilate one another!
The protests against the gold extraction by cyanides in Rosia Montana has brought 10.000 people in the streets, for 9 days. This is a protest without precedent in Romania but still the televisions only rarely present this subject. Nonetheless they are constantly debating the subject of the child killed by the strays!
Only the joint and distructive forces they resorted to in a premeditated manner show us just how high the stake really is!"
Please consider the following statements, ask yourself the following questions, and build up your own opinion:
A journalist and his team took the same "possible path" that little Ionut is supposed to have taken when he left the park. Already the first part of the "possible path" was very difficult for an adult and it took them more than one hour until they landed in front of a very high fence which separated them from the place where the little boy had been found. According to the journalist, a child would have had no chance to walk this path till the end and to even reach the fence. And: why would a child do it?
If it took an adult more than 1 hour walking, a child would need even more time, but let's just assume that the two children really managed to reach the place where Ionut was later found in one hour time.... Ionut gets attacked by strays, his brothers runs back to his grand mother. He would have needed at least 2 hours only to make the 2 ways. But it is said that the grand mother left them unsupervised for about 45 minutes...
If the boy had been mauled to death by dogs, he would have screamed. How comes that no-one has heard the boys cries for help although there are a couple of residential buildings and many many houses in close proximity to the place where the boy is supposed to having been killed?
According to the journalist, the coroner had found little Ionut in the yard with his pants down... and, according to the journalist, the only explanation seems to be that the little boy had been caught, perhaps even raped and then thrown over the fence into the yard where his lifeless body had later been found after hungry dogs had started feeding upon him...
According to this report and different other statements, it seems as if the deputies, the ASPA, the police, and forensics are protecting a dangerous pedophile and killer...
In the very first statement of Bucharest ISU spokesman Daniel Vasile, said that "It is a difficult to access area, there are few explanations about this story."
There was also a police officer who said that it would have been impossible for a child to get over such a high fence unless the child had been lifted or thrown over...
The circumstances of little Ionut's death are rather strange and it raises many questions. However, there are some assumptions that are supported by the statements of those who first arrived at the scene, statements that were not repeated and remembered.
Razvan Mateescu journalist says on his blog (translated online):
"Beyond the tragedy that happened with little pain Ionut Anghel and his family, there seems to be some doubt on the whole story.
On September 3, 2013 at 5 o'clock news, PRO TV, I noticed a shocking scene. While Catalin Radu Tanase present some conclusions of the investigation directly IML if the child who is said to have been killed by stray dogs behind him and two men have appeared dark.
The left of the screen, dressed in sports attire, took out his penis and began to stir in the air! Catalin has not seen it because it was back and transmitter. But the operator certainly observed scene! There was to be only a gesture that violent and vulgar, some people dementia specific neighborhoods or was someone who wanted to justify that? To show the world how good he is, a kind of "signature"? It may be a lead for investigation! At that moment I could not record the image that in turn, I was amazed by such a gesture. But the newscasters PROTV know what you mean! Reportage was not resumed nor posted on PROTV, instead of being put another similar.
In real social networks is a war of words. Animal lovers quarrel with ... others. Several users noticed that "the parents did not seem very affected, as if hiding something, and the mother had the power to give in the near future more interviews to various TV".
Another suspicion of Internet users is the fact that this child would be found " with his pants down "and Grandma was not, until now, put under accusation of negligence.
And another thing: all on social networks speaking that "the road to the place where the child was found dead is difficult to walk and takes about an hour." If true, it means little grandmother disappeared near a fairly long time, while the woman could act in some way. But he did not.
There are some who argue that it would be "a rape mask" most likely committed by a homeless man, hypothesis supported by some bloggers. Recall that previous years, Linden Park and the surrounding area has been reported repeatedly presence of suspected pedophiles or pedophilia. Police must do their duty.
N u know exactly what happened and maybe we'll never know. Ionut Poor, innocent child, died in torment, cried, struggled, no one heard, no one helped ...'s grandmother blames the dog, and the country was torn in two, there's less and leaves the world in street axes, smoldering hatred, death is like dogs, and politicians rub their hands, and took the opportunity to accuse specific callousness. wonder what's next?
God rest him Ionut!"
Razvan Mateescu journalist says on his blog (translated online):
"Beyond the tragedy that happened with little pain Ionut Anghel and his family, there seems to be some doubt on the whole story.
On September 3, 2013 at 5 o'clock news, PRO TV, I noticed a shocking scene. While Catalin Radu Tanase present some conclusions of the investigation directly IML if the child who is said to have been killed by stray dogs behind him and two men have appeared dark.
The left of the screen, dressed in sports attire, took out his penis and began to stir in the air! Catalin has not seen it because it was back and transmitter. But the operator certainly observed scene! There was to be only a gesture that violent and vulgar, some people dementia specific neighborhoods or was someone who wanted to justify that? To show the world how good he is, a kind of "signature"? It may be a lead for investigation! At that moment I could not record the image that in turn, I was amazed by such a gesture. But the newscasters PROTV know what you mean! Reportage was not resumed nor posted on PROTV, instead of being put another similar.
In real social networks is a war of words. Animal lovers quarrel with ... others. Several users noticed that "the parents did not seem very affected, as if hiding something, and the mother had the power to give in the near future more interviews to various TV".
Another suspicion of Internet users is the fact that this child would be found " with his pants down "and Grandma was not, until now, put under accusation of negligence.
And another thing: all on social networks speaking that "the road to the place where the child was found dead is difficult to walk and takes about an hour." If true, it means little grandmother disappeared near a fairly long time, while the woman could act in some way. But he did not.
There are some who argue that it would be "a rape mask" most likely committed by a homeless man, hypothesis supported by some bloggers. Recall that previous years, Linden Park and the surrounding area has been reported repeatedly presence of suspected pedophiles or pedophilia. Police must do their duty.
N u know exactly what happened and maybe we'll never know. Ionut Poor, innocent child, died in torment, cried, struggled, no one heard, no one helped ...'s grandmother blames the dog, and the country was torn in two, there's less and leaves the world in street axes, smoldering hatred, death is like dogs, and politicians rub their hands, and took the opportunity to accuse specific callousness. wonder what's next?
God rest him Ionut!"
Below, a video showing the path the little Ionut would have needed to walk
to get to the place where he has supposedly killed by dogs
MEP Corneliu Vadim Tudor takes a firm stand and says:
"little Ionut was NOT torn by dogs. The little boy was murdered!"
In an article published in the Romanian news on 6th of September, 2013, Corneliu Vadim Tudor, Member of the European Parliament, said: "The forensic report was concealed - Ionut was raped and killed by one or more persons!"
Vadim Tudor:
În raportul medico-legal s-a ascuns faptul că Ionuț a fost violat.
Vezi cum a fost posibil
Senator Marinescu says: "it was a dog trained for fight!"
Below full translation of the article published on 16th of September, 2013:
The investigation regarding the death of the 4 year old, due to dog bites, on Sept, 2 , 2013, in Parcul Tei, revealed shocking details, which can overturn the present supposition, which stipulated that he was mauled to death by 6 stray dogs.
Inside sources declared for DeCe News, that, based on the data obtained until now, the DNA tests - done on the samples collected after the incident, that the wounds inflicted on the little boy, they did NOT find any DNA from those 6 dogs, accused for his death.
Thus, the theory that the little boy was killed by a dog trained for dog fighting, and then his body was placed where he was found, in order to blame the stray dogs, becomes more and more coherent.
Senator Marinescu: there was a dog trained for fight!
Former Senator, Marius Marinescu, President of FPAM, confirmed for DeCe News, this information, citing Police sources.
He also sustains that this hypothesis will be eventually confirmed and the entire hysteria against stray dogs was useless.
"I have sustained from the very beginning, that the little boy was killed by a dog trained for fighting.
It would have been impossible for the stray dogs to generate all those wounds on his body.
It would have been impossible, that after such attack, those dogs to be so peaceful, stay quiet and wave their tails.
Specialist in dog behavior understood from the beginning that those dogs were NOT GUILTY.
Maybe one of them sniffed the boy while laying on the ground and got stained with blood, but those blood stains on the dog were not the results of biting the child. This was a misinformation campaign to instigate and divide the population.
At this moment the authorities MUST find the owner of the dog trained for fights, and dragged the little boy to the place where he was found." - declared Mr. Marinescu.
The investigation regarding the death of the 4 year old, due to dog bites, on Sept, 2 , 2013, in Parcul Tei, revealed shocking details, which can overturn the present supposition, which stipulated that he was mauled to death by 6 stray dogs.
Inside sources declared for DeCe News, that, based on the data obtained until now, the DNA tests - done on the samples collected after the incident, that the wounds inflicted on the little boy, they did NOT find any DNA from those 6 dogs, accused for his death.
Thus, the theory that the little boy was killed by a dog trained for dog fighting, and then his body was placed where he was found, in order to blame the stray dogs, becomes more and more coherent.
Senator Marinescu: there was a dog trained for fight!
Former Senator, Marius Marinescu, President of FPAM, confirmed for DeCe News, this information, citing Police sources.
He also sustains that this hypothesis will be eventually confirmed and the entire hysteria against stray dogs was useless.
"I have sustained from the very beginning, that the little boy was killed by a dog trained for fighting.
It would have been impossible for the stray dogs to generate all those wounds on his body.
It would have been impossible, that after such attack, those dogs to be so peaceful, stay quiet and wave their tails.
Specialist in dog behavior understood from the beginning that those dogs were NOT GUILTY.
Maybe one of them sniffed the boy while laying on the ground and got stained with blood, but those blood stains on the dog were not the results of biting the child. This was a misinformation campaign to instigate and divide the population.
At this moment the authorities MUST find the owner of the dog trained for fights, and dragged the little boy to the place where he was found." - declared Mr. Marinescu.
Ionut's grandmother made a stunning affirmation!
16th of September, 2013, the old woman who went with the children that day in the park, announced the existence of a witness, who has not yet been found.
This young man could bring some light about Ionut death.
She told the investigators on Friday ( Sept. 13) what happened...
She said that after minutes after their grandchildren disappeared, a young man appeared with the eldest boy, Andrei, whom he found next to Bamboo Club.
This young man is considered a key witness in this investigation but he can not be found - he ran away from police, without giving any statement.
Even more, a very bizarre element surfaced during the investigation. In the area where they found Ionut's lifeless body, they found, alongside their toys (water guns) a new ball, which did not belong to them.
Please see:
http://www.rtv.net/dezvaluiri-bomba-despre-moartea-copilului-ucis-de-cainii-maidanezi-in-capitala_98181.html#ixzz2f5it20Rt
and: http://www.rtv.net/dezvaluiri-bomba-despre-moartea-copilului-ucis-de-cainii-maidanezi-in-capitala_98181.html
This young man could bring some light about Ionut death.
She told the investigators on Friday ( Sept. 13) what happened...
She said that after minutes after their grandchildren disappeared, a young man appeared with the eldest boy, Andrei, whom he found next to Bamboo Club.
This young man is considered a key witness in this investigation but he can not be found - he ran away from police, without giving any statement.
Even more, a very bizarre element surfaced during the investigation. In the area where they found Ionut's lifeless body, they found, alongside their toys (water guns) a new ball, which did not belong to them.
Please see:
http://www.rtv.net/dezvaluiri-bomba-despre-moartea-copilului-ucis-de-cainii-maidanezi-in-capitala_98181.html#ixzz2f5it20Rt
and: http://www.rtv.net/dezvaluiri-bomba-despre-moartea-copilului-ucis-de-cainii-maidanezi-in-capitala_98181.html
Shocking images taken a short time before Ionut was killed:
Ionut and Andrei were running in the park completely unsupervised.
Below full translation of an article published on 18th of September, 2013:
Cancan has entered in the possession of some mind-blowing images that NOBODY saw until now. The surveillance cameras in the Parcul Tei caught the last moments pf play of the little boys, before they entered on that deserted private property.
These images have a strong emotional impact. With Ionut Anghel, 4 years old and Andrei, 6 years old, in a moment of happiness, playfulness, a moment which did not predict the tragedy which was about to unfold. Strangely enough, the grandmother is missing from these images. One of the surveillance cameras in Parcul Tei, has captured the two little boys, running alone on a quite large surface of the park, without being supervised at all.
1. first video:
It is 9:21 am. Andrei, the oldest one, is running in front. He runs quite fast on the main alley, alongside the fountain. A bit too fast for his little brother, only 4 years old, who was left behind.
The little one comes into the cameras angle, almost one minute (NOTE from OFA: it's exactly 14 seconds - Andreij: 09:21:05 - Ionut: 09:21:19) after his brother who is already far ahead. The little one runs as fast as he can but he can not catch his brother, he stops a bit disoriented at the intersection between two alleys, not knowing which direction to take. Eventually, he can see his brother or it is his brother who calls him and, a little bit uncertain, he starts running again.
Video 2 + 3:
In these images, the boys are headed towards the opposite side of the park - not the one people supposed they exited. It is likely that they continued to run, until they went all around the fountain and at the end they got to the place where the playing ground met the fenced yard, with a hole, the fence which will open a "new world", a world where, being small, uncertain, maybe also tired, they got lost.
In the minutes which follow, the parc gets more and more animated. Parents, grand-parents come with the children or grandchildren, mothers with strollers, young people holding their hands. The boys' grandmother stood in the area where they got in the park, and based on witnesses testimonies, it is not the same she declared on TV, but the area which is situated, in relation with the center of the park, in a complete opposite direction. Much further from the paying ground.
From 9:23 am, the boys do not appear anymore on any of the surveillance cameras placed in the cetre of the parc and which cover a large section of the main alley. The grandmother can not be seen either. Not even after 10:30, when supposingly she realised that the boys are missing and she started looking for them.
Only around 11:20, the two security guards appear in the view of the camera, they must have been observing the park from their observation places. They take position in the central area and start looking around. We must mention that the park is very well maintained and guarded - in the play guard and on the main alleys. There were cases when children got lost in the park but they were found very soon after. The Parcul Tei is not a complicated park, and all its areas are large, with wide openings. Thus, from 11:20, the two security guards take the central position and watch the children playing. It could be a coincidence, put it is also possible that the grandmother called them, because she could not find her grandchildren.
Video 4:
11:36 - 2 hours and 15 have passed since the little boys have been caught by the camera. At 11:36, the camera nr.1, placed right at the entry in the park shows Andrey (the 6 years old ) he walks very fast in the company of a tall man, with dark hair. The young man wear Bermuda pants, a shirt with white and red squares, Addidas and holds the boy by his hand. They enter the park, he sees the guards and goes straight to them, and the images are from the interior of the park, taken by camera nr.4, same camera which showed the boys running around at 9:21
Video 5:
The young man, considered "a key witness" points towards the little boy. The boy remains a bit behind and waits, and the guards show to the man the direction where the grandmother might be. One very interesting aspect to be mentioned here...
Where the young man stopped to talk to the guards, there is a dog, laying down in the sand, most likely belonging to one of the men who stopped to talk with the others. The boy does NOT seem scared and sits close to the dog, waiting for the people to end the conversation.
Video 6:
The three men (two guards and the "key witness") and Andrei (the 6 years old boy) start walking toward the other side of the park. Towards the bench where the grandmother was sitting even in the moment they arrived in the park. The view towards that area is very bad, but one can distinguished the three man giving the boy to the grandmother. The same camera shows the man who brought back Andrei, living after only three minutes.
This is the young man about who the grandmother said, that he told her that he found the boy close to the Bamboo Club (on Tuzla street) and told her that the next time she should take better care of him. It is obvious that the boy (Andrei) did not tell the man who found him, that he has a brother who was a victim of dogs and remained on the deserted terrain. We (cancan) supposed that the man would have called the police or would have gone to retrieve the other little boy too.
But this young man took this boy by his hand and brought him back in the park to his grandmother, where he told him that his grand mother is waiting for him. Based on the declaration given by the grandmother, she did not find right from Andrei away what happened with Ionut, and that only after he calmed down he told her that Ionut was killed by dogs.
Besides the questions which already exists regarding this case, many more start to appear. How much time did it actually pass from the moment the kids disappeared and the moment that the grand mother realized that they did not return to the bench where she was sitting. How is it possible that a 4 years old child - who could barely run, with his small legs - to cover such a long path, through bushes, an area which even adults avoid? Who could have these two kids climb down such a steep ditch, almost 3 meters high, and in a 45 degree angle, and then to find themselves lost in a sort of forest, full of noises, trash and dead birds?
How come the security guards from Laguna Tei, (it is the private property quoted as having sheltered the stray dogs - Laguna Tei is on Tuzla street nr. 50) let Andrei get out on the street using the gate, and did not ask him who did he get there?
Who is actually the man who brought Andrei back ? What he would have to say, might be very useful in this investigation.
Tomorrow (Sept 2 ) we will come back with more images and more details. Who can recognize the "key witness" and can help us get in touch with him, please contact us at [email protected] or tel: 0741 226 226. (Malina Pana)
Link to original in Romanian
Please click on the pictures below to enlarge....
Cancan has entered in the possession of some mind-blowing images that NOBODY saw until now. The surveillance cameras in the Parcul Tei caught the last moments pf play of the little boys, before they entered on that deserted private property.
These images have a strong emotional impact. With Ionut Anghel, 4 years old and Andrei, 6 years old, in a moment of happiness, playfulness, a moment which did not predict the tragedy which was about to unfold. Strangely enough, the grandmother is missing from these images. One of the surveillance cameras in Parcul Tei, has captured the two little boys, running alone on a quite large surface of the park, without being supervised at all.
1. first video:
It is 9:21 am. Andrei, the oldest one, is running in front. He runs quite fast on the main alley, alongside the fountain. A bit too fast for his little brother, only 4 years old, who was left behind.
The little one comes into the cameras angle, almost one minute (NOTE from OFA: it's exactly 14 seconds - Andreij: 09:21:05 - Ionut: 09:21:19) after his brother who is already far ahead. The little one runs as fast as he can but he can not catch his brother, he stops a bit disoriented at the intersection between two alleys, not knowing which direction to take. Eventually, he can see his brother or it is his brother who calls him and, a little bit uncertain, he starts running again.
Video 2 + 3:
In these images, the boys are headed towards the opposite side of the park - not the one people supposed they exited. It is likely that they continued to run, until they went all around the fountain and at the end they got to the place where the playing ground met the fenced yard, with a hole, the fence which will open a "new world", a world where, being small, uncertain, maybe also tired, they got lost.
In the minutes which follow, the parc gets more and more animated. Parents, grand-parents come with the children or grandchildren, mothers with strollers, young people holding their hands. The boys' grandmother stood in the area where they got in the park, and based on witnesses testimonies, it is not the same she declared on TV, but the area which is situated, in relation with the center of the park, in a complete opposite direction. Much further from the paying ground.
From 9:23 am, the boys do not appear anymore on any of the surveillance cameras placed in the cetre of the parc and which cover a large section of the main alley. The grandmother can not be seen either. Not even after 10:30, when supposingly she realised that the boys are missing and she started looking for them.
Only around 11:20, the two security guards appear in the view of the camera, they must have been observing the park from their observation places. They take position in the central area and start looking around. We must mention that the park is very well maintained and guarded - in the play guard and on the main alleys. There were cases when children got lost in the park but they were found very soon after. The Parcul Tei is not a complicated park, and all its areas are large, with wide openings. Thus, from 11:20, the two security guards take the central position and watch the children playing. It could be a coincidence, put it is also possible that the grandmother called them, because she could not find her grandchildren.
Video 4:
11:36 - 2 hours and 15 have passed since the little boys have been caught by the camera. At 11:36, the camera nr.1, placed right at the entry in the park shows Andrey (the 6 years old ) he walks very fast in the company of a tall man, with dark hair. The young man wear Bermuda pants, a shirt with white and red squares, Addidas and holds the boy by his hand. They enter the park, he sees the guards and goes straight to them, and the images are from the interior of the park, taken by camera nr.4, same camera which showed the boys running around at 9:21
Video 5:
The young man, considered "a key witness" points towards the little boy. The boy remains a bit behind and waits, and the guards show to the man the direction where the grandmother might be. One very interesting aspect to be mentioned here...
Where the young man stopped to talk to the guards, there is a dog, laying down in the sand, most likely belonging to one of the men who stopped to talk with the others. The boy does NOT seem scared and sits close to the dog, waiting for the people to end the conversation.
Video 6:
The three men (two guards and the "key witness") and Andrei (the 6 years old boy) start walking toward the other side of the park. Towards the bench where the grandmother was sitting even in the moment they arrived in the park. The view towards that area is very bad, but one can distinguished the three man giving the boy to the grandmother. The same camera shows the man who brought back Andrei, living after only three minutes.
This is the young man about who the grandmother said, that he told her that he found the boy close to the Bamboo Club (on Tuzla street) and told her that the next time she should take better care of him. It is obvious that the boy (Andrei) did not tell the man who found him, that he has a brother who was a victim of dogs and remained on the deserted terrain. We (cancan) supposed that the man would have called the police or would have gone to retrieve the other little boy too.
But this young man took this boy by his hand and brought him back in the park to his grandmother, where he told him that his grand mother is waiting for him. Based on the declaration given by the grandmother, she did not find right from Andrei away what happened with Ionut, and that only after he calmed down he told her that Ionut was killed by dogs.
Besides the questions which already exists regarding this case, many more start to appear. How much time did it actually pass from the moment the kids disappeared and the moment that the grand mother realized that they did not return to the bench where she was sitting. How is it possible that a 4 years old child - who could barely run, with his small legs - to cover such a long path, through bushes, an area which even adults avoid? Who could have these two kids climb down such a steep ditch, almost 3 meters high, and in a 45 degree angle, and then to find themselves lost in a sort of forest, full of noises, trash and dead birds?
How come the security guards from Laguna Tei, (it is the private property quoted as having sheltered the stray dogs - Laguna Tei is on Tuzla street nr. 50) let Andrei get out on the street using the gate, and did not ask him who did he get there?
Who is actually the man who brought Andrei back ? What he would have to say, might be very useful in this investigation.
Tomorrow (Sept 2 ) we will come back with more images and more details. Who can recognize the "key witness" and can help us get in touch with him, please contact us at [email protected] or tel: 0741 226 226. (Malina Pana)
Link to original in Romanian
Please click on the pictures below to enlarge....
"Grandma was sitting on a bench with someone,
drinking beer from and smoking"
said a witness for PRIM TV
September 19, 2013 - In an article published by EXCLUSIV NEWS.ro, a witness says having seen little Ionut's grandmother sitting on a bench with someone. that she was smoking and drinking bear, instead of supervising her grandchildren!
Below, full translation of said article:
Aurica Anghel, Ionut's grandmother, the little boy mauled to death by dogs (or a dog) near Parcul Tei Bucharest, was smoking and drinking bear on a bench, instead of supervising her grandchildren.
Instead of supervising her grandchildren whom she took for a day in the park in Parcul Tei Bucharest, Aurica Anghel was sitting on a bench, smoking and drinking bear. This is the testimony of a woman who saw the grandmother that day (Sept.2, 2013).
"She was sitting on a bench with someone, drinking bear from and smoking" the witness said for Prim TV.
This hypothesis is also confirmed by the images captured that day on the 4 surveillance cameras placed in the park, which also show that the children were running at will in the park yet the grandmother can not be seen anywhere. Based on the images published recently in Cancan.ro, Aurica Anghel left the children unsupervised for approximately two hours. The two were seen running around 9:20, all alone, without the grandmother being around them. The grandmother appears in the images only 2 hours later.
Andrei, the older brother is captured around 11:36 in the company of a man who brought him back to the park, entering by the main entrance.
These images are in flagrant contradiction with what the grandmother has previously declared, that she only lost view of her grandchildren for a couple of seconds. She said that it is not her fault for what happened because she was always watching them and that she does not understand how she lost track of them...
"It was just a fraction of a second. I am not guilty because they are like the mercury, these kids. I should have gone after them immediately, but I was waiting for them to return. They told me: "Grandma, we are here, we play here... and I moved from bench to bench... they moved away to play, I moved on another bench... I moved on three occasions. I have no idea how they disappeared, because I did not know that park very well" said the woman visibly moved by the pain and by the fact that she did not understand how such a thing could have happened. Ionut's grandmother thinks that all stray dogs must be killed:
"Let them all be killed, none should be spared, let them make soap out of them" - declared the grandmother to the media.
The man who brought back Andrei, at 11:36, is probably the key to this tragedy, and can unveil many mysteries in the case of Ionut's death.
As soon as the man, holding Andrei's hand, enter in the park he goes towards the closest security guard and asks him about the whereabouts of the grandmother. While the man talks with the guards, pointing toward Andrei, the boy remains a bit back and even sits next to a dog who was sitting there. Interesting how the boy is not afraid of the dog. After a couple of seconds, the guards, Andrei and the man who brought him back, go toward the grandmother. The man leaves the park after three minute. He is the one who the grandmother said that he admonished her for because he said that he found the boy (Andrei) next to Bamboo Club which is even farther than the place where Ionut was later found, and told her that next time she should take better care of him.
It is very probable that Andrei did not tell this man what happened with Ionut, and the grandmother said that the boy did not tell her immediately what happen, only after he calmed down a bit.
Watching the images showing Ionut who could barely run, with small steps, an inevitable question arises: how did they get to end up so far from the park, in an area full of bushes, trees, weeds, trash, without his grandmother looking for him? How come that even the security guards in the park did not see the children exiting the park?
These images show, without any doubt, that the grandmother is the main responsible for Ionut's death.
(NOTE: based on the 211 call, apparently the grandmother called the police at 12:22 pm)
Below, full translation of said article:
Aurica Anghel, Ionut's grandmother, the little boy mauled to death by dogs (or a dog) near Parcul Tei Bucharest, was smoking and drinking bear on a bench, instead of supervising her grandchildren.
Instead of supervising her grandchildren whom she took for a day in the park in Parcul Tei Bucharest, Aurica Anghel was sitting on a bench, smoking and drinking bear. This is the testimony of a woman who saw the grandmother that day (Sept.2, 2013).
"She was sitting on a bench with someone, drinking bear from and smoking" the witness said for Prim TV.
This hypothesis is also confirmed by the images captured that day on the 4 surveillance cameras placed in the park, which also show that the children were running at will in the park yet the grandmother can not be seen anywhere. Based on the images published recently in Cancan.ro, Aurica Anghel left the children unsupervised for approximately two hours. The two were seen running around 9:20, all alone, without the grandmother being around them. The grandmother appears in the images only 2 hours later.
Andrei, the older brother is captured around 11:36 in the company of a man who brought him back to the park, entering by the main entrance.
These images are in flagrant contradiction with what the grandmother has previously declared, that she only lost view of her grandchildren for a couple of seconds. She said that it is not her fault for what happened because she was always watching them and that she does not understand how she lost track of them...
"It was just a fraction of a second. I am not guilty because they are like the mercury, these kids. I should have gone after them immediately, but I was waiting for them to return. They told me: "Grandma, we are here, we play here... and I moved from bench to bench... they moved away to play, I moved on another bench... I moved on three occasions. I have no idea how they disappeared, because I did not know that park very well" said the woman visibly moved by the pain and by the fact that she did not understand how such a thing could have happened. Ionut's grandmother thinks that all stray dogs must be killed:
"Let them all be killed, none should be spared, let them make soap out of them" - declared the grandmother to the media.
The man who brought back Andrei, at 11:36, is probably the key to this tragedy, and can unveil many mysteries in the case of Ionut's death.
As soon as the man, holding Andrei's hand, enter in the park he goes towards the closest security guard and asks him about the whereabouts of the grandmother. While the man talks with the guards, pointing toward Andrei, the boy remains a bit back and even sits next to a dog who was sitting there. Interesting how the boy is not afraid of the dog. After a couple of seconds, the guards, Andrei and the man who brought him back, go toward the grandmother. The man leaves the park after three minute. He is the one who the grandmother said that he admonished her for because he said that he found the boy (Andrei) next to Bamboo Club which is even farther than the place where Ionut was later found, and told her that next time she should take better care of him.
It is very probable that Andrei did not tell this man what happened with Ionut, and the grandmother said that the boy did not tell her immediately what happen, only after he calmed down a bit.
Watching the images showing Ionut who could barely run, with small steps, an inevitable question arises: how did they get to end up so far from the park, in an area full of bushes, trees, weeds, trash, without his grandmother looking for him? How come that even the security guards in the park did not see the children exiting the park?
These images show, without any doubt, that the grandmother is the main responsible for Ionut's death.
(NOTE: based on the 211 call, apparently the grandmother called the police at 12:22 pm)
Romanian criminologist Dan Antonescu:
"the images posted in the media do not change the course of the penal investigation. Maybe of the moral one"
September 19, 2013 - In an interview published in the Romanian media ADEVARUL, the Romanian criminologist Dan Antonescu: "the images posted in the media do not change the course of the penal investigation. Maybe of the moral one".
Below, full translation of said article.
Dan Antonescu, specialist, criminologist and blogger for "The Truth", says that the images captured by the surveillance cameras in Parcul Tei, where Ionut, only 4 years old lost his life, after being mauled by dogs, on Sept.2 , 2013 do not change the foundation of the investigation.
After the images surfaced in the media, asked about the possibility that they will change the path of the investigation about the death of Ionut, Dan Antonescu sustains that: "the images confirm the fact that two young children, one 4 and one 6 years old, have been left unsupervised for a very long period of time" continuing to say that their existence are not relevant for the penal investigation, because the cause of death is known. The images are relevant though, for a moral investigation." Here we discuss only about a moral investigation. The penal one will continue its course, and the verdict will be established by the prosecutor or by a tribunal.
But a moral investigation would be more important, I think. A child must be supervised all the time, if you take him out (without talking about accidents which can happen at home - if you take your eyes off him, he might pour a pot with boiling water on him, or climb at a window - there were situations when children have fallen in a hole in the backyard, or a barrel with water) even more in a park... to leave him unsupervised for two hours...."
The criminologist also insisted on the fact then when there are two children of different age, when they are in an open space, the eldest one tends to hide for the younger one to try to find him.
"Only after almost two hours, people started to panic and to look for the boys. In the first image we can see how the eldest one is running while the little one looks disoriented and does not know where the brother is and when he saw him he ran after him. It is obvious that the eldest one - although 6 years old - did not have the proper judgement and capability to take care of the little one."
The question raised by Dan Antonescu in this situation is "how it was possible for this tragedy to unfold, when the children went in the Park with the grandmother? How can anybody who take their grandchildren for a walk in a park, to leave them unsupervised. If you feel that you can not take care of them, that you can not face the level of energy they have, just say it simply: I can not take care of them. But, to get to the park and to sit untroubled on a bench for a long period of time, and after that they were missing... all agitation is in vain. If you do not see them for one minute, you have to react. This child, in all this period of time left unsupervised could have been the victim of a traffic accident, to fall in a sewage , because thugs stole so many lids from the sweades in that area, he could have been kidnapped... anything could have happened. The tragedy happened because of dogs and now we turned against them. No, we should not have so many stray dogs, or any at all, but I repeat I do not want to bring here the stray dogs problem, but the problem of LACK OF SUPERVISION. "
The man who brought the boy back (Andrei ) back did a civic act.
About the videso showing the man who brought back Andrei, Dan Antonescu said that he did a civic act. "That man did the right thing, a civic gesture and I do not suspect him of anything or hidden intentions. That man brought the boy back. But, I can not say the same thing about the other people who saw these children wondering alone on the street - these were not abandoned children, one could very welll see that they belonged to somebody, that they somehow got lost from the grandmother, or parents... Those people could have stopped the children and ask them what are doing on the street, or in other parts of the park - because I must underline that they where not at the children playground - those people could have stopped them"
Asked if the images which surfaced in the media are known by the investigators, the criminologist declared that, in general, in an investigation all the documentation and images are taken by the Police very rapidly.
"This system; Big Brother - as we called it in the beginning, help a lot the investigators. It is normal that the investigation starts with the images from the surveillance cameras in the park, to pin point the time and the location"
Below, full translation of said article.
Dan Antonescu, specialist, criminologist and blogger for "The Truth", says that the images captured by the surveillance cameras in Parcul Tei, where Ionut, only 4 years old lost his life, after being mauled by dogs, on Sept.2 , 2013 do not change the foundation of the investigation.
After the images surfaced in the media, asked about the possibility that they will change the path of the investigation about the death of Ionut, Dan Antonescu sustains that: "the images confirm the fact that two young children, one 4 and one 6 years old, have been left unsupervised for a very long period of time" continuing to say that their existence are not relevant for the penal investigation, because the cause of death is known. The images are relevant though, for a moral investigation." Here we discuss only about a moral investigation. The penal one will continue its course, and the verdict will be established by the prosecutor or by a tribunal.
But a moral investigation would be more important, I think. A child must be supervised all the time, if you take him out (without talking about accidents which can happen at home - if you take your eyes off him, he might pour a pot with boiling water on him, or climb at a window - there were situations when children have fallen in a hole in the backyard, or a barrel with water) even more in a park... to leave him unsupervised for two hours...."
The criminologist also insisted on the fact then when there are two children of different age, when they are in an open space, the eldest one tends to hide for the younger one to try to find him.
"Only after almost two hours, people started to panic and to look for the boys. In the first image we can see how the eldest one is running while the little one looks disoriented and does not know where the brother is and when he saw him he ran after him. It is obvious that the eldest one - although 6 years old - did not have the proper judgement and capability to take care of the little one."
The question raised by Dan Antonescu in this situation is "how it was possible for this tragedy to unfold, when the children went in the Park with the grandmother? How can anybody who take their grandchildren for a walk in a park, to leave them unsupervised. If you feel that you can not take care of them, that you can not face the level of energy they have, just say it simply: I can not take care of them. But, to get to the park and to sit untroubled on a bench for a long period of time, and after that they were missing... all agitation is in vain. If you do not see them for one minute, you have to react. This child, in all this period of time left unsupervised could have been the victim of a traffic accident, to fall in a sewage , because thugs stole so many lids from the sweades in that area, he could have been kidnapped... anything could have happened. The tragedy happened because of dogs and now we turned against them. No, we should not have so many stray dogs, or any at all, but I repeat I do not want to bring here the stray dogs problem, but the problem of LACK OF SUPERVISION. "
The man who brought the boy back (Andrei ) back did a civic act.
About the videso showing the man who brought back Andrei, Dan Antonescu said that he did a civic act. "That man did the right thing, a civic gesture and I do not suspect him of anything or hidden intentions. That man brought the boy back. But, I can not say the same thing about the other people who saw these children wondering alone on the street - these were not abandoned children, one could very welll see that they belonged to somebody, that they somehow got lost from the grandmother, or parents... Those people could have stopped the children and ask them what are doing on the street, or in other parts of the park - because I must underline that they where not at the children playground - those people could have stopped them"
Asked if the images which surfaced in the media are known by the investigators, the criminologist declared that, in general, in an investigation all the documentation and images are taken by the Police very rapidly.
"This system; Big Brother - as we called it in the beginning, help a lot the investigators. It is normal that the investigation starts with the images from the surveillance cameras in the park, to pin point the time and the location"
Dead dogs used for fights, partially incinerated, found in ParculTei Bucharest
September 20, 2013 - DCNEWS released pictures of dead dogs used for fights found in Parcul Tei.
One hypothesis which circulates nowadays after the tragic accident which took place in Parcul Tei, when a little boy has been mauled to death by dogs (or a dog) is that he might have been killed by a dog used in dog fights. People living in that area declared that they know about these activities organised by thugs on the deserted terrains near the park.
A man who live in that area, contacted DeCe News to tell about the horrible experience he had when he found 4 dead dogs, partially incinerated and thrown in the lake. Outraged but what he saw, he took some photos with his mobile phone. He sustains that these cadavers are the proof that in the area illegal dog fights take place and that those dogs are trained to kill.
Based on his declaration two of the dead dogs were Pit Bulls and had deep wounds most likely resulted from bites during the fights.
"Months ago, when the lake was drained, walking on the lake side, from the direction of streetcars 16 and 36, I got on am empty area, a vacant land. I walked for about 100 feet. On the bottom of the drained lake there was a dead Rottweiler with lots of bites on him. It was not the first time that I saw something like this in that area.
Continuing my walk, after approximately 200 feet my attention got by the partially incinerated bodies of two Pit Bulls. I was also impressed by the multiple marks of deep bites. Walking even farther, I saw another big dead dog with the same marks of bites." said the man.
A man who live in that area, contacted DeCe News to tell about the horrible experience he had when he found 4 dead dogs, partially incinerated and thrown in the lake. Outraged but what he saw, he took some photos with his mobile phone. He sustains that these cadavers are the proof that in the area illegal dog fights take place and that those dogs are trained to kill.
Based on his declaration two of the dead dogs were Pit Bulls and had deep wounds most likely resulted from bites during the fights.
"Months ago, when the lake was drained, walking on the lake side, from the direction of streetcars 16 and 36, I got on am empty area, a vacant land. I walked for about 100 feet. On the bottom of the drained lake there was a dead Rottweiler with lots of bites on him. It was not the first time that I saw something like this in that area.
Continuing my walk, after approximately 200 feet my attention got by the partially incinerated bodies of two Pit Bulls. I was also impressed by the multiple marks of deep bites. Walking even farther, I saw another big dead dog with the same marks of bites." said the man.
Corpse of a Pit bull used in dog fights found
September 22, 2013 - Below full translation on an article published by CLICK!
Reporters from "Click!" returned yesterday (September 21) to the place where the little boy was found dead, and found the dead body of a dog used in dog fights.
Shocking discovery. Will this photo change anything of what we knew about his death? We were stunned to find, less than 100 m (200 feet) a dead pit bull on the banks of the lake. The veterinarians called at the site said that he died almost 3 weeks ago, the same period of time when the tragedy happened.
People can not accept the tragedy which took place on Sept 2, 2013 and they started talking. Under the protection of anonymity they talk more and more often about dogs raised to be aggressive near a restaurant in the park. Someone who is very familiar with that area declared for Antena 1 that Ionut could have been attacked by those dogs, belonging to the owner of the restaurant. His statements have been reinforced by other persons who called us. We went there to verify the information. People in the park pointed towards the same restaurant. "There are big and bad dogs there. We are afraid to even walk alongside their fence", said the people.
People who were fishing next to that place said the same thing. We went around the garden but we did not see any dog. Only some hen in the yard. Since the moment we approached the fence we have been followed and pictures of us were taken all the time. At one point in time, the man who was following us announced the employees of the restaurant that we were there. People from the restaurant do not want to recognize that there are dogs over there. "It is abhorrent. We had two dogs but they were poisoned" said Mirela Matrusu, the manager of the restaurant. Asked when did this happen she mumbled something and only after we insisted she said with half a mouth "about 4-5 months ago, but I do not know what breed they were?"
Afterwards a fisherman called us to see a dead dog. Few minutes after us Kuki Barbuceanu, from Vier Pfoten, appeared too because he was also announced about the discovery of the mysterious cadaver. "It is a Pit Bull. One can see that he was used in dog fights. He is dead for about three weeks. It is very strange. It is the same period when the child died. I want to take it to have an autopsy done, but I do not know if we can find something because of the state of the body.". Maybe our discovery will let the prosecutors look in other direction too, because they say that the stray dogs killed Ionut.
Testimonies from people who know what takes place in Parcul Tei: "Three weeks before Ionut died, two dogs got out from the restaurant yard and followed two children who they bit and chased up to the children playground. The dogs belong to the owner of the restaurant.The surveillance camera which can focuses towards the soccer field, is missing since then. From 42 cameras only 6 are working. The Boss of the security guards forbade them to talk about this" declared a witness for Antena 2, who wants to remain anonymous.
"I go very often in that park and I know the dogs from the restaurant. Many times I imagined what would happen if those dogs would escape. They were very big and aggressive. If one passed by that garden they started barking very angry. It would not be impossible that this is the truth about Ionut's death. The Boss of the security guards spend many evenings in that restaurant" wrote to us Mariana "It is not the stray dogs who attacked Ionut, that is a place where they train dogs for fights. I got lost one time and I took a short cut and I saw how they pushed the dogs to attack one another. They were two big and black dogs. I started runnng, although I am an adult " said one woman who also wanted to remain anonymous.
Reporters from "Click!" returned yesterday (September 21) to the place where the little boy was found dead, and found the dead body of a dog used in dog fights.
Shocking discovery. Will this photo change anything of what we knew about his death? We were stunned to find, less than 100 m (200 feet) a dead pit bull on the banks of the lake. The veterinarians called at the site said that he died almost 3 weeks ago, the same period of time when the tragedy happened.
People can not accept the tragedy which took place on Sept 2, 2013 and they started talking. Under the protection of anonymity they talk more and more often about dogs raised to be aggressive near a restaurant in the park. Someone who is very familiar with that area declared for Antena 1 that Ionut could have been attacked by those dogs, belonging to the owner of the restaurant. His statements have been reinforced by other persons who called us. We went there to verify the information. People in the park pointed towards the same restaurant. "There are big and bad dogs there. We are afraid to even walk alongside their fence", said the people.
People who were fishing next to that place said the same thing. We went around the garden but we did not see any dog. Only some hen in the yard. Since the moment we approached the fence we have been followed and pictures of us were taken all the time. At one point in time, the man who was following us announced the employees of the restaurant that we were there. People from the restaurant do not want to recognize that there are dogs over there. "It is abhorrent. We had two dogs but they were poisoned" said Mirela Matrusu, the manager of the restaurant. Asked when did this happen she mumbled something and only after we insisted she said with half a mouth "about 4-5 months ago, but I do not know what breed they were?"
Afterwards a fisherman called us to see a dead dog. Few minutes after us Kuki Barbuceanu, from Vier Pfoten, appeared too because he was also announced about the discovery of the mysterious cadaver. "It is a Pit Bull. One can see that he was used in dog fights. He is dead for about three weeks. It is very strange. It is the same period when the child died. I want to take it to have an autopsy done, but I do not know if we can find something because of the state of the body.". Maybe our discovery will let the prosecutors look in other direction too, because they say that the stray dogs killed Ionut.
Testimonies from people who know what takes place in Parcul Tei: "Three weeks before Ionut died, two dogs got out from the restaurant yard and followed two children who they bit and chased up to the children playground. The dogs belong to the owner of the restaurant.The surveillance camera which can focuses towards the soccer field, is missing since then. From 42 cameras only 6 are working. The Boss of the security guards forbade them to talk about this" declared a witness for Antena 2, who wants to remain anonymous.
"I go very often in that park and I know the dogs from the restaurant. Many times I imagined what would happen if those dogs would escape. They were very big and aggressive. If one passed by that garden they started barking very angry. It would not be impossible that this is the truth about Ionut's death. The Boss of the security guards spend many evenings in that restaurant" wrote to us Mariana "It is not the stray dogs who attacked Ionut, that is a place where they train dogs for fights. I got lost one time and I took a short cut and I saw how they pushed the dogs to attack one another. They were two big and black dogs. I started runnng, although I am an adult " said one woman who also wanted to remain anonymous.
The key witness has been interogated by the prosecutors
September 23, 2013 - below the full translation of an article by Ștefan Sandu, A. M. PRESS
The so-called key witness in the death of Ionut Anghel has been interrogated Monday, by the prosecutors, about how he found Andrei and what happened next.
After the meeting with the prosecutors he did not want to talk to the media and only answered yes or no, but he said that "he found Andrei where the media said he found him, almost 1 km away from his grandmother. "The boy was crying. That's all". His lawyer, Marius Socae gave a bit more details saying that Andrei did not tell the man anything about the existence of a brother and all he said was "I want back to grandma."
The lawyer also outlined that his client found out about the existence of a brother only when the grandmother asked where is the little one."
This is the moment my client found out about the existence of a second child" based on what the lawyer said, this man returned to the place where he found Andrei to look for the other boy, and because he did not find any he called a security guard, who gave him the number when he brought Andrei back, and told him that he did not find the other child where he found Andrei. The lawyer said that his client called the Police to let them know who he is, two weeks ago but he received the invitation to the prosecutors only Saturday afternoon.
The so-called key witness in the death of Ionut Anghel has been interrogated Monday, by the prosecutors, about how he found Andrei and what happened next.
After the meeting with the prosecutors he did not want to talk to the media and only answered yes or no, but he said that "he found Andrei where the media said he found him, almost 1 km away from his grandmother. "The boy was crying. That's all". His lawyer, Marius Socae gave a bit more details saying that Andrei did not tell the man anything about the existence of a brother and all he said was "I want back to grandma."
The lawyer also outlined that his client found out about the existence of a brother only when the grandmother asked where is the little one."
This is the moment my client found out about the existence of a second child" based on what the lawyer said, this man returned to the place where he found Andrei to look for the other boy, and because he did not find any he called a security guard, who gave him the number when he brought Andrei back, and told him that he did not find the other child where he found Andrei. The lawyer said that his client called the Police to let them know who he is, two weeks ago but he received the invitation to the prosecutors only Saturday afternoon.
Instrumentalisierung der Medien durch rumänische Politiker:
eine Klarstellung
The love of gold and the fear of dogs
Following the death of little Ionut, the four-year-old boy, who has been supposedly mauled to death by 5 stray dogs on a private, fenced property, more than 1 km away from the park where the grand mother had lost sight of him and his older brother, was followed by a campaign without precedent in Romania, and which, led mainly by Antena 3, hides INCREDIBLE POLITICAL STAKES AND INTERESTS! A campaign with an unimaginable visual and psychological pressure! ...A mediatic destruction which was never met before!
A continuous and intense campaign, full of lies, calumnies, accuses, unimaginable scenarios regarding the animal lovers, especially the NGOs, is undertaken by the televisions, especially by “Antena 3” (please, send protests to [email protected]). The animal welfare NGOs are merely „bastards who steal the state's money”, which have „turned rich by exploiting the strays problem”, which have „done businesses with the mayors for huge amounts of money”, „impostors, fake animal lovers, only ruled by their own interests”. The loss of credibility towards the NGOs has occurred and thus the people are starting to talk about the NGOs like entities for which the „truth” is only now surfacing. Fake statistics, images with „fearsome” strays, interviews with „terrorized” citizens, have fully occupied the TV broadcasts these days! Fake histories, forged documents are presented to the population!
Since little Ionut's death, the televisions are debating and are hysterically yelling and screaming on the same subject! And ONLY on this subject!
The protests against the gold extraction by cyanide in Rosia Montana has brought 10.000 people in the streets, for 9 days. This is a protest without precedent in Romania but still the televisions only rarely present this subject. Nonetheless they are constantly debating the subject of the child killed by the strays!
Only the joint and destructive forces they resorted to in a premeditated manner show us just how high the stake really is!
A continuous and intense campaign, full of lies, calumnies, accuses, unimaginable scenarios regarding the animal lovers, especially the NGOs, is undertaken by the televisions, especially by “Antena 3” (please, send protests to [email protected]). The animal welfare NGOs are merely „bastards who steal the state's money”, which have „turned rich by exploiting the strays problem”, which have „done businesses with the mayors for huge amounts of money”, „impostors, fake animal lovers, only ruled by their own interests”. The loss of credibility towards the NGOs has occurred and thus the people are starting to talk about the NGOs like entities for which the „truth” is only now surfacing. Fake statistics, images with „fearsome” strays, interviews with „terrorized” citizens, have fully occupied the TV broadcasts these days! Fake histories, forged documents are presented to the population!
Since little Ionut's death, the televisions are debating and are hysterically yelling and screaming on the same subject! And ONLY on this subject!
The protests against the gold extraction by cyanide in Rosia Montana has brought 10.000 people in the streets, for 9 days. This is a protest without precedent in Romania but still the televisions only rarely present this subject. Nonetheless they are constantly debating the subject of the child killed by the strays!
Only the joint and destructive forces they resorted to in a premeditated manner show us just how high the stake really is!
FACT IS:
While Romania's populace is occupied blaming and killing strays because of the tragic death of little Ionut - who was probably not even killed by strays - their Government is moving forward with their plans to give the go-ahead for the construction of Europe's biggest gold mine and to sign away Romania's most valuable natural asset!
After the project had been on halt for the past 14 years because of vicious opposition from anti-mining activists and the successive Romanian governments being reluctant to give the go-ahead amid such heated environment, the Romanian government approved a draft law last week that sets out a course for development of the mine, and which now needs to be approved by parliament which is set to vote on the project later this month.
Ex-culture minister and Democratic Liberal Theodor Paleologu agrees, saying, "The project is technically dubious, the law behind it is against the constitution because it ignores property laws as well as the interests of the Romanian state, and it has corrupted many politicians."
It is, indeed, true that many Romanian politicians in recent years have done a surprising turnaround on the project, including head of state Victor Ponta, who, while a member of the opposition, was a vocal critic of the plans.
Current Prime Minister Victor Ponta (who is married to Dacaina Sarbu, Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals) won a convincing victory in last year’s election, and has majority control over parliament which has allowed him to be far more aggressive than his predecessors in approving large capital projects that can boost the economy. One of his priorities is Rosia Montana.
But - of course - Rosia Montana Gold Corporation denies having bribed any politicians....
According to the already approved draft law, Gabriel would hold 75% of the mine, with the state holding the balance (25 %). Rosia Montana is the largest gold resource on the continent.
While Romania's populace is occupied blaming and killing strays because of the tragic death of little Ionut - who was probably not even killed by strays - their Government is moving forward with their plans to give the go-ahead for the construction of Europe's biggest gold mine and to sign away Romania's most valuable natural asset!
After the project had been on halt for the past 14 years because of vicious opposition from anti-mining activists and the successive Romanian governments being reluctant to give the go-ahead amid such heated environment, the Romanian government approved a draft law last week that sets out a course for development of the mine, and which now needs to be approved by parliament which is set to vote on the project later this month.
Ex-culture minister and Democratic Liberal Theodor Paleologu agrees, saying, "The project is technically dubious, the law behind it is against the constitution because it ignores property laws as well as the interests of the Romanian state, and it has corrupted many politicians."
It is, indeed, true that many Romanian politicians in recent years have done a surprising turnaround on the project, including head of state Victor Ponta, who, while a member of the opposition, was a vocal critic of the plans.
Current Prime Minister Victor Ponta (who is married to Dacaina Sarbu, Vice-President of the European Parliament's Intergroup on the Welfare and Conservation of Animals) won a convincing victory in last year’s election, and has majority control over parliament which has allowed him to be far more aggressive than his predecessors in approving large capital projects that can boost the economy. One of his priorities is Rosia Montana.
But - of course - Rosia Montana Gold Corporation denies having bribed any politicians....
According to the already approved draft law, Gabriel would hold 75% of the mine, with the state holding the balance (25 %). Rosia Montana is the largest gold resource on the continent.