The checks on the DNA (National Anti-Corruption Department) by the judicial inspection in the CSM (Superior Council of Magistracy) have charted a true map of the institution's political preferences. It was Tudor Chiuariu, Romania's Justice minister, who concluded it. According to the minister, political influence on prosecutors comes most of the times from the Romanian President rather than from the Justice minister, as the latter is more of a link of the former. The official claimed couples like Ion Iliescu-Rodica Stanoiu and Traian Basescu-Monica Macovei were most relevant of it. In the last week's international reunion on prosecutors, democracy of state and of law, minister Chiuariu argued that the report emerging after the checks on the DNA showed "something saddening": "All the principles about which we were told that they were the grounds of the 2005 reform were disregarded. We were told about the random distribution of cases to prosecutors, but the checks show this principle was just words in the DNA. Cases are distributed the way prosecutors in chief please. We were also told about the principle of continuity, according to which it is impossible that a certain case should be taken from one prosecutor and given to another. In fact, the DNA is in the habit of playing ping-pong with cases, taken and given with no respect for legal norms. We were told the DNA was an elite structure. But we have uncovered that DNA prosecutors mistake simple procedural acts." But above all, he claimed, we were told about independence and impartiality. He added: "But they have got nothing to do with the habit of closing certain cases out of the blue, cases against protagonists on a certain political side. They have neither got anything to do with the habit of making up certain cases, although the necessary elements aren't met, and then of keeping them open without drawing the investigation documents. This goes for the opposite political side." According to the Justice minister, one can notice a map of the DNA's political preferences. He developed upon it: "We can see such things used politically, as these days someone is trying to categorize politicians in good and bad, depending on the inquiries the DNA opens. How far can judicial control on political decisions go?" The minister mentioned there were opportunity seizing decisions and political ones: "For instance the government, the local or the district council sets funds for a project and dismisses another project. These are purely political decisions and they can have political effects only: sanction by poll. They may not be checked in legality terms or censored." The minister pleaded that, in order to fight against corruption and economic criminality, there was need to understand certain mechanisms of the political and economic life in democracy: "Or you are ridiculous if you ask for information about a senator's ballot in the Chamber of Deputies." (...) Bogdan GALCA