I would like to help today and donate

Next
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Next
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
CLOSE

Daniela Tarău

CASE STUDY

Daniela Tarău

editor - March 24, 2018 - Pre-trial detention

Daniela Tarău, a Romanian national was arrested in 2001 under charges of affiliation with an organized group committing fraud. The charges were based on her time working at a firm for only three weeks on probation. She always maintained her innocence.  Daniela was issued with an arrest warrant and spent one year and nine months in pre-trial detention.  In detention she faced very difficult conditions including only one fifteen minute shower a week, sharing a bed with another cell-mate, and extremely limited medical care. In May 2002, Daniela’s father died whilst she was still in detention in a penitentiary. She was not allowed to attend his funeral.  Daniela was eventually released in 2002 and finally acquitted in 2009, after filing a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights concerning the infringement of her right to a fair trial and excessive length of detention.

Daniela had monthly review hearings, but the detention orders were often the same. In her first eight month detention location she says that her review hearings were the only time she could see the sun. Despite this, her participation in these hearings was zero. There is also the issue of the limited time given to study the casefile before the hearings- judges have very little time and thus mainly rely on prosecutor’s arguments. Defence lawyers also often have a thirty minute maximum to review the case before the hearing. This makes it very difficult for detention review decisions to be fully and fairly considered.

National courts in Romania often fail to provide substantial reasoning on pre-trial detention orders. Mainly their arguments have to do with the potential danger the suspect or accused poses for society, the flight risk, and the possibility that he might interfere with the investigation. 

If you are a journalist interested in this story, please telephone Fair Trials’ press department on +44 (0) 20 7822 2370 or +32 (0) 2 360 04 71.

Keep up to date

Receive updates on our work and news about Fair Trials globally

Activities in the following sections on this website are supported by the Justice Programme of the European Union: Legal Experts Advisory Panel, Defence Rights Map, Case Law Database, Advice Guides and Latest News. More information about our financial supporters is available here.