OPINION on the criminal investigation against the suspended Prosecutor General

During Alexandr Stoianoglo’s mandate of Prosecutor General and even before this term, several events and incidents created the impression of a relationship and common interests between him and the defendant Veaceslav Platon. The respective information becomes even more serious since Veaceslav Platon was released from prison at the express request of the Prosecutor General and his wife is so far listed as beneficiary of two companies of Veaceslav Platon.

There is a lot of misinformation and hasty opinions on these and other topics related to the case. In this context, Pavel GRECU, expert in justice and human rights, member of the Justice Expert’s Group (GEJ) within the Institute for European Policies and Reforms (IPRE) developed a case analysis.

Throughout the proceedings that took place between October 5th-15th, 2021, several topics were discussed in the public domain, including: whether it was possible for the prosecutor to diligently and legally initiate the criminal investigation in just two hours and if it was necessary, the fact that the case was based only on evidence deriving from the public sources, an incident in which the prosecutor in the case did not allow a confidential discussion of the suspended Prosecutor General with his lawyers in the court premises, the defence’s claim that the simple submission of the request for suspension of the SCP’s decision of October 5th suspended the decision of the SCP to appoint the prosecutor Furtună and, thus, all the procedural acts drawn up afterwards would have been illegal, respectively, as well as the fact that the law does not provide for a special procedure for criminal prosecution of the General Prosecutor.

According to the author, some aspects of the criminal process, such as the speed of initiating criminal proceedings, lightning detention or the inability to create the necessary conditions for confidential discussions of lawyers with Alexandr Stoianoglo in the court, raise questions in society about compliance with criminal proceedings and  the rights of the accused person.

In order to eliminate doubts as to the involvement of the politics in the criminal case or as to the fairness of the proceedings, the criminal investigation body and the courts should show exemplary diligence in this case, ensure compliance with criminal proceedings and fundamental rights, so that, on the one hand, they are observed in substance, and on the other hand, the society is convinced that justice is done in this case.

It is important that the law enforcement bodies do not create situations that would determine that these proceedings are discontinued for procedural reasons, since this will not bring any clarity in the accusations brought against Alexandr Stoianoglo and they will exist perpetually.

Since the case of the suspended Prosecutor General is of major importance, it is natural that the entire society monitors the proceedings and expresses its views on its development. Often, these opinions are based on news titles, quotes or excerpts from events, presented without any context, and as a result they may lead to a wrong impression of what has really happened, as for example when several individuals, organizations and institutions commented on the failure to observe the right to confidential meetings with the lawyer, without mentioning that this was an isolated case and that on the same day the confidential discussion with lawyers took place.

Thus, it is important that on the one hand, prosecutors communicate to the society as many details as possible in regard to developments in the case and explain the confusing aspects, and on the other hand, those who inquire about this case to do so from primary sources or search for full statements of persons in order to get a better impression of what is happening.

For more details see the opinion here.

This opinion was developed within the project “Justice Expert’s Group”, implemented with the financial support of the Justice and Human Rights Department of the Soros Foundation-Moldova.The content of the publication represents the opinion of the Justice Expert’s Group and does not necessarily reflect the position of the Soros Foundation Moldova.