Update: Romania’s ruling party leader goes to EU Court of Justice over anti-fraud body report

Liviu Dragnea, the leader of the Social Democrat Party (PSD), has taken legal action against the European Commission over a report of the European Anti-Fraud Office OLAF that found him involved in EU funds fraud, Ziare.com reported. The case Dragnea v Commission T 738/18 was registered with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CURIA) on December 11 of last year. The details of the case are not public. Sources told Ziare.com that Dragnea could no longer challenge the OLAF report as the period to do this had expired. However, he chose to challenge the negative answer he received from the European Commission to a complaint he made concerning the report. Dragnea is alleging that OLAF did not respect his right to be heard and the presumption of innocence when the report was drafted, according to Ziare.com. UPDATE: A European Commission spokesperson told local Mediafax that it had been notified about the legal action undertaken by Liviu Dragnea. The Commission said it would not comment on the case in order to respect the independence of European courts. “We have been notified by the Court on this legal action [case T738/2018] and we will analyze it. We respect both the independence of OLAF and of the European courts. As it is the case with such procedures, the Commission will submit the observations in due time. The Commission will not comment on the case in order to respect the independence of European courts,” Christian Wigand, a spokesperson for the European Commission, told Mediafax. In November of 2017, OLAF announced that its investigation contributed to the Romanian National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) accusing Dragnea of EU funds fraud, of creating an organized criminal group, and of misusing his position for personal gain while he was the president of the Teleorman County Council. Following two investigations, OLAF found “evidence suggesting collusion between the beneficiary of the funds, public officials and the contractor, including falsification of documents during the procurement procedure.” OLAF also said