Policy Dialogue #Justice4Moldova on Amendments to Law No. 3/2016 on the Prosecutor’s Office

Over the past three years, Moldova’s Law on the Prosecutor’s Office has undergone several amendments. Among the most significant are those adopted based on recommendations from the Venice Commission to ensure a balanced and independent evaluation of the Prosecutor General and to establish evaluation criteria for this position.

The latest proposed amendment to the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office dates from April 2024. This bill aims to amend Article 55 of Law No. 3/2016 by introducing paragraph (11) and revising paragraph (4), intending to allow suspended prosecutors to engage in income-generating activities during their suspension.

In this context, the Institute for European Policies and Reforms (IPRE) organized a Policy Dialogue session on Tuesday, June 11, 2024. During this session, conclusions and recommendations from the Position Note on the mentioned bill, developed by the Justice Expert Group (GEJ) within IPRE, were discussed.

At the event’s opening, Petru Istrati, a GEJ Member, presented the main topics addressed in the analytical note, emphasizing IPRE’s support for the proposed bill. This conclusion is mainly based on two reasons: (1) the obligation to comply with Constitutional Court decisions, and (2) the need to eliminate a legislative omission/disproportionate regulation that could lead to human rights violations (e.g., right to work, right to privacy). Additionally, GEJ recommends the bill’s author consider completing Article 55, paragraph (11), with the phrase “and the prohibitions provided in Article 15, paragraph (2), letters f) and i)”. Furthermore, GEJ suggests amending Article 55 of Law No. 3/2016 to stipulate that the suspension period of a prosecutor under Article 55, paragraph (1/1) of Law No. 3/2016 should not count as work seniority in the prosecutor’s position.

Angela Popil, another GEJ Member, stated: “We believe that excluding or exempting temporarily suspended prosecutors from the compatibility rules provides protection for their economic and social rights. Compared to the judicial system, where suspended judges, except those under criminal investigation or ongoing investigations, retain their salary and social rights, this is not applicable to prosecutors. The Constitutional Court

highlighted this in its decision allowing suspended prosecutors to engage in remunerated activities. This reduces financial pressure on prosecutors, enabling them to maintain a necessary standard of living during their suspension. Removing these incompatibilities also avoids double penalization and improves respect for human rights for these prosecutors.”

Stanislav Copețchi, State Secretary of the Ministry of Justice of Moldova, added: “The Ministry has always been concerned with ensuring the independence and impartiality required of prosecutors in a democratic society, supporting citizens. The incompatibilities enshrined in the law aim to highlight the state’s legislative intent to prioritize these inherent qualities. Following the Constitutional Court’s unprecedented suggestion that current legal provisions harm prosecutors’ social guarantees, the Ministry quickly initiated amendments to the Prosecutor’s Office law. This process involved extensive consultations, and the content of received opinions largely aligns with today’s analytical note. The bill is broadly supported, with some stakeholders emphasizing specific recommendations for improvement.”

Diana Lupașcu, representing the Superior Council of Prosecutors (CSP), mentioned: “On April 30, 2024, the Council members reviewed the provisions of the Prosecutor’s Office bill and supported its approval. The Council considered the Constitutional Court’s findings, Venice Commission recommendations, and practices from other countries, such as Romania. It is essential to note that the CSP’s opinion was formed after proposing amendments to this law following Constitutional Court decision 21 of 2023. Regarding the inclusion of the work seniority period for suspended prosecutors, this remains a sensitive topic as legislators must consider the outcomes if a prosecutor is reinstated. This issue needs careful consideration, and CSP will address it upon request.”

Gheorghe Borș, Interim Chief Prosecutor of the Policies and Project Management Section of the General Prosecutor’s Office, stressed: “The General Prosecutor’s Office has provided a comprehensive opinion, referencing legislation from other states. Our analysis found that some prosecutors have been suspended for up to 8 years, which is problematic as they cannot engage in other activities besides prosecuting. This bill is excellent and regrettably delayed.”

For more details, you can watch the event’s video recording on privesc.eu here.