MAKE and the BURSA newspaper have definitively defeated Bogdan Drăgoi in court

The use in a press article of words such as "mediocre", "scheming liar", "common thief", "a bastard", "manipulator", "embezzlement", "master of the capital market", "group", "concerted action", "abuse and prison", when strictly reporting certain factual situations, is part of the range of expression modes allowed to the press in a democratic society and cannot be sanctioned, the Bucharest Court of Appeal decided in a case in which Bogdan Drăgoi sued the BURSA newspaper over more than 100 published articles related to the activities of SIF1, SIF4, and SIF5, out of which the plaintiff claimed 28 were clearly defamatory and insulting.

The Bucharest Court of Appeal definitively rejected the appeal filed by Bogdan Drăgoi against the BURSA newspaper, finding that the articles published about his activity in SIF1, SIF4, and SIF5 did not exceed the limits of free expression. The ruling reaffirms a previous decision by the Bucharest Tribunal and is based on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

Drăgoi requested damages of 100,000 euros and the removal of more than 100 articles from the BURSA website. He claimed that 28 of the articles contained offensive expressions such as "common thief", "scheming liar", or "a bastard", accusations like "embezzlement", and expressions meant to "gravely damage his dignity".

MAKE explains: "This was a strategic attack. Bogdan Drăgoi did not dare to challenge the substance or correctness of the articles published by BURSA (for example, he did not challenge the idea that the SIFI share transactions, through which he manipulated the net asset value of SIF Banat Crişana, could have been removed from the calculation if SIFI had been delisted from AERO).

Instead, he calculated that he could dismantle our accusations by obtaining a defamation ruling based on the style of expression.

Well, he didn't get it, no matter how hard he tried.

He is left to prove, for example, that he did not manipulate the net asset value of SIF Banat Crişana, which, in my opinion, he cannot do because we have all the evidence of the manipulation."

The court concluded that these expressions, though harsh, do not constitute defamation but are part of a legitimate journalistic discourse, especially in the context of a public interest debate on the capital market. The expressions are not presented as proven facts but as critical opinions, ironies, or speculative hypotheses.

• What BURSA and MAKE wrote about

- The article series focused on:

- The controversial SIFI share transactions, which allowed Bogdan Drăgoi to manipulate the net assets of SIF Banat Crişana.

- The conflict of interest between Drăgoi's executive roles and the power networks around the SIFs.

- Concerted efforts to gather votes.

Harsh criticism of the ASF, accused of turning a blind eye to potential abuses.

The polemic style, with strong expressions, was consistent: MAKE signed satirical texts in which he called Drăgoi "the absolute master of the capital market” and "a bastard who must be held accountable”.

All these were examined in court in the context of the press's freedom to report on matters of public interest.

The court acknowledged the satirical style, the polemical tone, and the provocative wording in the BURSA articles, which are allowed in a democratic society. The judges emphasized that the press has the right to exaggerate or shock, as long as it does not present false facts as absolute truths.

MAKE explains: "Bogdan Drăgoi thought that if he said I called him a "scheming liar', I would be convicted of defamation, but he overlooked the context in which the expression appears.

The court paid attention and realized that, although there is no judicial confirmation of his scheming, the suspicion is plausible, and the term "scheming liar' can be part of the universe of that article. That was also my reasoning, and it applied to the other incriminated terms as well."

The court notes: "The expressions used... are part of the arsenal permitted to the press in a democratic society. The plaintiff's dissatisfaction is not sufficient to conclude that the limits of freedom of expression were exceeded.”

The BURSA newspaper's legal defense was provided by Dănescu and Associates law firm. Bogdan Drăgoi was represented by Stoica and Associates.

The court ordered Bogdan Drăgoi to pay the legal costs (which he is delaying payment of).

This decision is a clear reaffirmation of the role of the press in a democracy: to inform, to criticize, to ask uncomfortable questions-even when the tone is harsh or satirical.

The contested articles targeted how Drăgoi may have used his leadership position in the SIFs to amass power, control votes, manipulate net assets, and influence decisions of the Financial Supervisory Authority. Although the language was severe, the courts found that it fell within the bounds of legitimate journalistic expression and did not show bad faith.

Through this ruling, the Romanian judiciary aligns with European standards on press freedom, confirming that critical, satirical, and even vehement expression is protected as long as it contributes to public interest debate.

• Quotes from the incriminated articles

◄ About market manipulation and the net asset value of SIF1:

"SIF Banat-Crişana reports a net asset inflated by millions of lei, based on illiquid shares (SIFI) traded two or three times a month, just to boost the price.”

(BURSA, September 14, 2020)

"Why would Drăgoi care that he's manipulating the market, as long as the ASF is asleep or, worse, assisting him?”

(BURSA, November 17, 2020)

◄ About concentration of power in the SIFs:

"Bogdan Drăgoi and his gang no longer run SIF1. They are SIF1. It's no longer an investment fund, it's a feudal court.”

(BURSA, April 6, 2021)

"Mr. Drăgoi bought his voting rights with the shareholders' money. He votes for his own sinecures with their assets, but in others' names.”

(BURSA, July 2, 2021)

◄ About the ASF and lack of reaction:

"If the ASF doesn't see the blatant conflict of interest between Drăgoi and SAI Muntenia Invest, then we ask: what is the Authority supervising anymore?”

(BURSA, March 3, 2022)

◄ About the language assessed by the court:

"A scheming liar with technocrat pretensions.”

(BURSA, October 21, 2021)

"A common thief, hidden under a tie and financial jargon.”

(BURSA, May 10, 2022)

"A serial embezzler, with institutional protection.”

(BURSA, June 6, 2022)

"This bastard really thinks we're all stupid?”

(BURSA, August 4, 2022)

"The Drăgoi group - a mix of imposture, power, and ASF's silence.”

(BURSA, November 17, 2021)

◄ About the impact on the capital market:

"Who would want to invest in a market where one man decides everything, without transparency and without real regulation?”

(BURSA, January 13, 2022)

These quotes - though sometimes harsh, ironic, or satirical - were deemed by the Bucharest Court of Appeal to fall within the limits of journalistic freedom of expression, especially as they relate to facts or suspicions about public money management, investor assets, and market oversight - subjects of major public interest.