Fears grow that trial of Romanian ex-prison chief is a missed opportunity

09 February 2015 by Isabelle Wesselingh, Bucharest (Romania)

The first trial of a Communist-era prison commander charged with crimes against humanity [IJT-168], in a case the media have dubbed “Romania's Nuremberg”, raised great expectations. But after a few months, many people in the country still struggling to reconcile with its past have voiced disappointment.

Interior of Ramincu Sarat prison in Romania (Photo: IICCMER)
Image caption: 
Interior of Ramincu Sarat prison in Romania (Photo: IICCMER)

Alexandru Visinescu’s landmark trial is being handled as an ordinary criminal case. This deprives Romanian society of wider introspection into a dark past, critics say. While there were hasty trials of late dictator Nicolae Ceausescu and a few dozen of his aides in the 1990s, most dealt just with events surrounding the 1989 revolution. Visinescu's case is the first time a Romanian court is hearing about the fierce state repression of the 1950s and 1960s. Many hoped it would finally shed light on a dark period and create a historical record.

On 28 January, the seventh day of hearings began with a documentary-maker telling the court about the plight of former political prisoners. “Many of them are not alive anymore, but the ones I interviewed described Ramnicu Sarat as the most terrible jail,” said Lucia Hossu-Longin, testifying on behalf of some victims' relatives.

Visinescu, the commander of the prison between 1956 and 1963, listened restlessly. The now frail 89 year old is accused of having implemented a “regime of extermination” in Ramnicu Sarat.

Want to read more?

If you subscribe to a free membership, you can read this article and explore our full archive, dating back to 1997.

Subscribe now

Related articles

article
19 February 2007 by Laetitia Grotti

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

article
11 September 2006 by our correspondent in Arusha

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide. 

article
23 October 2006 by Christine Chaumeau

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet. 

article
United Nations Operation in Burundi disarms rebel forces in Mbanda in February 2005 (Photo: Flickr/UN Photo/Martine Perret)
03 June 2015 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

article
06 November 2006 by Pierre Hazan

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.