Bogdan Olteanu - the death throes stage of the National Bank of Romania

When I think of "Bogdan Olteanu", a list of names comes to my mind, a list that I reproduce in no particular order: Mugur Isărescu, Dinu Patriciu, Alina Gorghiu, Lucian Isar, Sorin Ovidiu Vîntu, Călin Popescu Tăriceanu, Daniel Zamfir, Gheorghe Piperea.

My mind involuntarily associates those names with him, just like it associates me with them, because I had some face to face encounters with them, but this reunion of names does not necessarily mean that their owners all play a part in this unbelievable, unheard of incident, where a deputy governor of the NBR currently in office is about to get arrested for his acts of corruption committed prior to being appointed to that position (because as an NBR employee, he has superimmunity, according to the law).

This incident deals a deadly blow to the prestige of the National Bank of Romania, a prestige which is already in its death throes stage, after the mistakes of positioning and communication it made in its relationship with the public, in the debates which have preceded the passing of the Law of giving in payment, occasions when Bogdan Olteanu was the primadonna brought forward for the televised debates.

The impression left by Bogdan Olteanu was that he would have liked to defeat his interlocutor, the initiator of the law of giving in payment, deputy Daniel Zamfir, by gathering his wits, his way with words and his knowledge to compromise the latter's qualifications, in the eyes of the public.

But that was a mistake.

The issue of the law of giving in payment should not have been treated by the National Bank of Romania as a conflict with the clientele of the banking system (even though this is how the banks perceived it, blinded as they were by their immediate interest), but as public pressure to change the mentality that governs the banking services - a reorganization which would cost far less than the ones involved by the depth of the changes which the financial crisis happening in Europe and elsewhere presages.

Isărescu and Olteanu should have been wise enough to understand.

The Central Bank should have, first of all used its means of action to prevent the conflict, and once it started, it should not have avoided, in a cowardly manner the opportunities for direct debate with the supporters of the giving in payment law - such as the conference organized by BURSA, in cooperation with the Chamber of Deputies - but to instead seek out that kind of occasions and thank the organizers.

Essentially, the NBR, through governor Mugur Isărescu, deputy governor Bogdan Olteanu and the tens of former journalists that now serve as their banking infantry, mobilized its entire army to snuff out a peasants' revolt.

And i, the funny thing is that they actually lost, in spite of all that.

The allegations of corruption now hovering over Bogdan Olteanu could very well serve as "Qvod erat demonstrandum" ("which is what had to be proved"), casting the shadow of corruption on the entire National Bank, which were mistakenly positioned in relation to the banks' customers.

The absolute independence of the NBR, the extraordinary immunity that the employees of our National Bank enjoy, the lack of transparency when it comes to the salary revenues of the members of the management (despite the law that requires them to make those salaries public), the arrogant and often stupid behavior of most of their spokespersons are aggravating factors, which led to the public's loss of confidence in this institution, which had, for tens of years, under the guidance of Mugur Isărescu, won our confidence, through balance, competence and moderation.

In this context of suspicion, of lack of trust, with a European law which has been adopted in Romania as well, which stipulates that in certain circumstances, banks are allowed to legally seize depositors' money - the call of the small Ecologist Party (PER) - "Romanians, withdraw your money from banks!" - could push the banking system to the edge of the precipice.

Or even into the abyss.

Dinu Patriciu (may he rest in peace!) described Bogdan Olteanu that he was "scum" (this horrible characterization actually put a damper on the suspicion that in fact it was Patriciu who backed him for the NBR, so he could find out in advance what the NBR was going to do with the exchange rate).

Rumors have lent credence to the idea that by promoting Bogdan Olteanu as deputy governor of the NBR, the National Liberal Party wanted to get rid of him.

Is that really how it works?

If these claims are true and the accusations of the National Anticorruption Department are true, then people of this moral fiber are enjoying the superimmunity of the National Bank of Romania and its statute of absolute independence?

Has Bogdan Olteanu been a good boy during his term as a deputy governor?

Is that really how these things work?!

BURSA reported that the DNA was investigating Bogdan Olteanu a year and a half ago.

Semnul mirării!