Valerian Stan
Nota bene
Secțiunea de Documente/ Alte documente se află în curs de actualizare prin adăugarea altor circa 50 de cauze soluționate definitiv sau în curs de soluționare (constând în acțiuni judiciare pe care le-am deschis începând cu anul 2002 cu scopul de a-mi apăra drepturi legale vătămate de autorităţi publice, dar şi de a testa inclusiv în acest mod respectarea în România a dreptului la un proces echitabil şi a dreptului de acces la justiţie). 


In turn, another minister of Defence, writing in a national newspaper, called me a liar when I spoke publicly about my written denial to command a subunit of troops prepared to intervene "as needed" in November 1990, at the great meeting of the Civic Alliance; this time I was surprised – even very surprised – not only because a high government official was spreading a blatant untruth about me, but rather because the Civic Alliance was demanding an explanation of allegations brought by a minister from the National Salvation Front. Later – with a little bit of luck, I admit – I was going to prove that I was not the one who lied. I realized that the minister had counted, most likely, on the fact that once my written report was "lost" from the archives, there would be no evidence to support my claims. And yet, only now I understand, the minister did not anticipate what would happen. Namely, that the archive departments of the Ministry, which I had addressed to – defiantly, without requiring any approval – would agree with me, and not with their boss. Although the barracks archives can be trusted more or less, the answer was as clear as daylight: the document itself was not to be found in the archives, but my written report appeared in the records of my former unit, with the exact number and "content summary" given by me at the time, back in 19901. Sometimes, "inaccuracies" of this kind were amended – where and when they occurred – other times they were not, as my right of reply was denied. I created this site with just such situations in mind and because I wanted to shine a light in dark places – by including references to various materials on the site.

In the summer of 2002, in an editorial from "Cotidianul" ("The Iron Guards, today"/ “Legionarii, azi”) I was trying to draw attention to one of the main risks caused by the inadequacies of Romania`s political elite, especially the public`s growing acceptance for political radical formulas. It was a period when, at least in Bucharest, "The Iron Guard Movement" was proving to be more active than any time after 1989. I was writing in my article that, ignoring the rise of the "The Iron Guard Movement" did not solve the issue at all, on the contrary. At the same time, I reminded those who wished to reorganize the "Iron Guard Movement" of a few "questionable actions" their predecessors had in the history of Romania. Few days after the publishing of the text, the "22" magazine cherry-picked, in a tendentious way, a few passages, and also commented upon them out of context, suggesting to the reader that I had Iron Guard sympathies. By right of rebuttal, in which I drew attention to the fact that I could appeal to Justice, I requested the entire, uncut publication of my article. Two weeks later, the magazine complied with my request, sadly with the same ill intentions, by publishing only the parts that hadn’t been published the first time, accompanied by even more ill intended comments. The "sleights of hand" and the insinuations of the "22`s" editorial staff were reiterated, shortly after, by Michael Shafir, who did not hesitate to declare me a defender of the Iron Guard (Mr. Shafir wanted to punish me because I had criticized him when – wanting to settle some old scores – he had the lack of inspiration to talk about Paul Goma as a person who "was part of the communist system"). I hope the website, in its current form, will be able to re-establish the truth in such cases.

In the autumn of 2004, the team from "Academia Catavencu" weekly magazine (owned by the businessman Sorin Ovidiu Vântu) took over the editorial control of the newspaper "Cotidianul", a paper I had been a contributor to for over six years. It was the moment when I was completely cut out from our country`s print media. At the same time, the publication`s electronic archive was also eliminated. On this website I posted articles from that period. More information on the saga of the successive removal from several national publications can be found on the “Biography” page.

The sections Biography and Documents contain the information – including a number of documents – that seemed thematically relevant to me. Because they contain a number of detailed biographical facts, I also posted the texts of two legal actions I initiated following defamatory allegations made against me, in two of their volumes, by Romania`s former President, Emil Constantinescu, and by the publicist Dan Pavel.

An article I wrote recently, "Activitatea publică consemnată în presă" / "Public activity in the media", published on the Documente/ Alte documente page, has both biographical relevance as well as helping correlate the information from various sections of the website.

Over time, I have been systematically vilified by people from various governmental and civil society groups – from Vadim Tudor to Emil Constantinescu, from Ion Iliescu to Gabriel Andreescu, Dan Pavel or Ioan T. Morar. In the autumn of 2005, for example, journalists from "Cotidianul" wrote that, while I was head of the Government’s Control Body, after a medical exam carried out at the Bucharest Municipal Hospital, I "backed down" from criticising the activity of the hospital`s director Sorin Oprescu, member of PDSR [Social Democracy Party of Romania]. The journalists also wrote that, a year later, I was a patient of the Municipal Hospital`s Manager, who understandably gave me proper treatment in exchange for "backing down". These allegations are dirty lies and insinuations from beginning to end. I sent the necessary reply to the chief editor - Carol Sebastian (subsequently proven to be a collaborator of the "Securitate"). It was not published and there was no statement in the newspaper about this. The former BBC journalist was acting in the same way as Vadim Tudor, who, two years before, also refused to correct similar fake allegations – he wrote in "Romania Mare" that I used my position in the Government to facilitate my son`s transfer from one school to another. Another example, from the autumn of 2005, is the text "On the climax of absurdity. A with Gabriel Andreescu"/ "Pe culmile absurdului. In

cu Gabriel Andreescu", rejected by the editorial staff of the magazine "Timpul" from Iaşi. Gabriel Andreescu, one of the magazine`s contributors, described me to his readers as an unscrupulous person, cruel and ungrateful, a "dogmatic orthodox" and so on and so on... To sustain his allegations, my former colleague didn`t hesitate to use well-known fake information (for example that my father was an orthodox priest). Over time, there have been countless examples in which publications with "high ethical standards" denied me the right of rebuttal (for example: the magazines 22, România literară, România Mare, Timpul, the newspapers Cotidianul, Evenimentul zilei, Libertatea, România liberă etc.). The section Publicistica presents to those who are interested, my answers which were denied by the previously mentioned magazines and newspapers.

One of the public issues I systematically dealt with, was the profoundly corrupted and abusive behaviour of the State`s high officials. I have had to defend myself at least five times in court for publicly criticizing these people; I hope the correlative information published on the Documente page will be useful, inclusively to those who are involved in future legal cases involving State officials suing persons who criticize them for their public activity and behaviour.

The pages Biografie and Argument from the site are translated into English and, beside these, a series of materials which I have considered to be more relevant in relation to the more general topic, which is more consistently treated there: the situation from Romania (rule of law, fundamental rights and liberties etc.) during the pre-adhesion, respectively during the post-adhesion at the European Union (EU) and at the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)2.

Finally, with the purpose of defending my constitutional and legal rights violated by the public authorities and institutions, but also because I wanted to see (test) whether the right to a fair trial and access to justice are respected in Romania, between 2002 and 2020, I have initiated a number of 40 contentious administrative matters and civil trials; I have made this more substantially and systematically after Romania joined the European Union. The outcome of these trials can be found on the page Documente/ Alte Documente, starting with the document „Cauza Stan împotriva Serviciului Român de Informaţii".


  1. For details on the page Publicistica 2009, see "Complici împotriva adevărului "/"Accomplices against truth". (and right to rebuttal refused by Libertatea)
  2. The page Documente/ Analize, studii, rapoarte, manuale contains “Analysis on government transparency and integrity (June 2001)” and “Analysis on access to public information (April 2002)”; the page Documente/ Alte documente contains “Open letter to ambassadors in Romania of EU and NATO countries (February 2000)” and “Letter to ambassadors in Romania of some EU and (or) NATO countries (February 2010)” –  these two documents also include my point of view on the modality in which EU and NATO could have proven to be more efficient in order to improve the situation in Romania; the page Publicistică contains “Intolerance and extremism: a scrutiny” – 2004, “Romanian Grey” (I) and (II) – 2005 and „Romania: deep fog” (I) and (II) – 2006.