The Independent Integrity Assessment Commission for candidates for membership of the self-governing bodies of judges and prosecutors (Pre-Vetting Commission) heard two more candidates for membership of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM) on Wednesday 14 December. They are the judge of the Cahul Court, Taraclia seat, Marina Rusu and the judge of the Cahul Court, Centre seat, Mihail Bușuleac.

The video recordings of the hearings of Mihail Bușuleac and Marina Rusu were published on Thursday 15 December by the Pre-Vetting Committee.

According to the Pre-Vetting Commission, Judge Marina Rusu answered questions from Commission members on incidents of ethical and financial integrity, having access to the assessment materials to the extent permitted by law and taking into account the interests of the candidate and the persons or organisations that provided information about her.

Recording of the hearing of Judge Marina Rusu

During the interview, Judge Mihail Bușuleac had the opportunity to clarify the remaining uncertainties regarding his financial and ethical integrity that remained among the Commission members following the written communication during the evaluation period, according to the Pre-Vetting Committee.

Recording of the hearing of Judge Mihail Bușuleac

According to the rules, the decision on the outcome of the evaluation of the candidates will be issued by the Pre-Vetting Commission no later than one month after the end of the hearing.

Marina Rusu: In the fight for transfer to a court in the capital, the judge will go to the ECtHR

Marina Rusu has been a judge at the Cahul Court since February 2012. In 2019, 2020 and 2021, she applied to the CSM to be transferred to a court in Chisinau, where she lives with her husband and six children, but in all cases the requests were refused. In 2019, the judge challenged in court the CSM’s decision rejecting her transfer request. CA Chisinau rejected the application as unfounded. The case reached the CSJ, which declared the judge’s appeal inadmissible.

Marina Rusu on the CSJ’s decision: “I am waiting for the CSJ’s decision and I want to appeal to the ECtHR. When the CSM does not find and does not respond to the needs of judges to be transferred closer to where they live, it is demotivating and unconstructive. I will submit further requests to be transferred. It is not normal for a judge to work in inhumane conditions when 8 hours work and 8 hours are spent on the road”.

The magistrate also challenged the CSM’s decision in 2021 to deny her request for transfer.

In 2020, the Council for the Prevention and Elimination of Discrimination and for Ensuring Equality found that the CSM discriminated against the magistrate on the basis of gender and maternity in the realization of the right to work when hearing judges participating in the competition for transfer to another court of the same level.

In October 2020, the judge was disciplined with a “warning”. The procedure had been initiated following complaints filed by several inmates of Penitentiary No. 1, Taraclia, complaining that the judge was delaying the examination of their applications. Initially, the proceedings were terminated by a decision of the CD on the grounds that no disciplinary offence had been committed. However, Pavel Midrigan, a member of the CD, disagreed, so the decision was challenged and the magistrate was sanctioned. In a decision adopted in November 2021, the CA Chisinau annulled the CSM’s decision on sanctioning the judge, but the CSM appealed to the CSJ.

Marina Rusu: “In the summer of 2020 I filed a statement about my discrimination. The decision of the Council for the Prevention and Elimination of Discrimination and Ensuring Equality followed, finding that I was discriminated against. Then I requested the withdrawal of the mandates of the CSM members who admitted the discrimination, and the Judicial Inspection challenged the decision of the Disciplinary Board 6-7 months after it was issued, the CSM examined and annulled the CD decision and sanctioned me. In my opinion, this happened as an act of revenge”.

According to the declaration of personal assets and interests for 2021, the magistrate’s family owns shares in two apartments: one – of 34.1 square meters, purchased in 2003, and the other – of 83.5 square meters, purchased in 2018 for about 821 thousand lei. At the same time, his family also owns 107 shares in the joint-stock company “Interfond”. The magistrate states that she has debts amounting to 764 thousand lei, having taken out two loans. Last year, the judge had a total salary of about 243 thousand lei.

Mihail Bușuleac: The judge’s actions, exposed in complaints by the prosecutor general

Mihail Bușuleac has been working since 2011 at the Cahul Court. In 2017, for four years, he served as deputy president of that court. He is the son of former Deputy Minister of Justice Mihai Bușuleac.

In 2015, a complaint was lodged with the Judicial Inspectorate in his name. The disciplinary procedure was then terminated on the grounds that no misconduct had been found. In 2016, four complaints were lodged against the magistrate, including one lodged by the then Deputy Prosecutor General Iurie Garaba. The author of the complaint alleged that in 2014 Bușuleac acted premeditatedly to adopt an illegal decision, by which he admitted the request of a citizen of the Russian Federation to obtain Moldovan citizenship by recognition. Disciplinary proceedings against the magistrate were subsequently terminated. The prosecutor’s office challenged the decision of the full SC, but failed to win, with the CSJ ending the case at the end of 2016. In 2017, another referral was made against the magistrate seeking disciplinary action. This time too the disciplinary proceedings were terminated on the grounds that no misconduct had been found.

In 2018, then Prosecutor General Eduard Harunjen asked the CSM to release the consent for criminal investigation of Judge Bușuleac and his colleague from the Cahul Court Dumitru Bosîi, on the grounds that they had delivered a judgment contrary to the law. However, the CSM did not give its consent and Harunjen did not challenge the decision at the CSJ.

According to information from the declaration of wealth and personal interests, in 2021, the magistrate’s family came into possession of a commercial production space with an area of 115.3 square meters, for which the magistrate says he paid 385 thousand lei. Bușuleac also declares four other apartments, one of which was obtained in 1995 through a privatization contract and has an indicated value of 475 thousand lei, one purchased in 2010 for 25 thousand euro, written in the name of his daughter, and another purchased in 2013 for 261 thousand lei. The fourth apartment declared by the magistrate has an area of 74.8 square meters, is purchased in 2016 and is said to be worth about 36 thousand euros.

The judge also declares two cars: a Toyota Prius, manufactured in 2008 and purchased in 2016 for 90 thousand lei and a Daewoo Nexia, manufactured in 2008 and purchased in 2014 for 106 thousand lei. Bousuleac’s salary income last year was 347 thousand lei. The magistrate reports debts of 103 thousand lei. In the accounts, the Bușuleac family keeps 340 thousand lei and 3,785 euros.

28 candidates from among the judges registered in the competition for the position of member of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM). However, 22 of them reached the public hearings stage, after five judges withdrew from the competition and one magistrate did not submit a declaration of assets and personal interests for 5 years.

Ziarul de Garda analysed the activity, wealth and integrity of each candidate and presents the most important information about the judges entered in the competition, who, in a first stage, will go through the integrity assessment procedure, in the context of the Pre-Vetting Law.