Representatives of the Pre-Vetting Commission say they are about to announce 15 more decisions on candidates for membership of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM) from among career judges. Ziarul de Garda asked the Commission for an explanation of the evaluation process after information was circulated in the public space that the formation of a new composition of the CSM might be impossible in the coming period due to the insufficient number of candidates among judges.

According to the law, the CSM is made up of 12 members – six from the judiciary and six from the non-judge ranks. The Pre-Vetting Commission is currently hearing candidates from the judges.

Victoria Timuș, press officer of the Pre-Vetting Commission, told ZdG that out of the 23 remaining judges in the competition, 21 candidates have been heard so far, with the last candidate (magistrate Alexei Panis from the Chisinau Court) to be heard on Thursday, 12 January. According to Timuș, one candidate from among the judges (magistrate Natalia Clevadî from the Chisinau Court of Appeals) decided not to attend the public hearing. Thus, of the 23 remaining judge candidates in the competition, three candidates passed the evaluation and five candidates received decisions of non-passing. According to Timuș, the remaining 15 decisions will be announced in the near future.

“The Pre-Vetting Commission assesses the integrity of two categories of candidates for membership of the Superior Council of Magistracy – career judges and non-judges. 28 career judges entered the competition, of which five withdrew from the competition. In their case, the Commission issued decisions not to proceed with the evaluation following their withdrawal from the competition.

(…) The second group of candidates for membership of the SJC, who are not judges, are proposed by Parliament. It includes 12 self-employed lawyers, lawyers and representatives of civil society and academia. In the case of both judges and non-judge candidates, the results of the evaluation are announced publicly on the Commission’s website, forwarded to the candidates and to the institutions responsible for organising the competition, which is the Superior Council of Magistracy in the case of judge candidates and the Parliament in the case of non-judge candidates. The new composition of the CSM will be made up of six judges and six representatives of academia and civil society”, said Victoria Timuș.

So far, only three candidates for positions in the CSM have passed the evaluation of the Pre-Vetting Commission – Livia Mitrofan and Maria Frunze from the Chisinau Court, Centre seat, as well as Ioana Chironeț, judge at the Chisinau Court, Ciocana seat.

All five magistrates, who applied for the position of member of the CSM and did not pass the evaluation of the Pre-Vetting Commission, appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ).

According to the law, the decision of the Evaluation Commission can be contested by the evaluated candidate within 5 days from the date of receipt of the reasoned decision by the candidate without prior procedure. Thus, the evaluated candidate may appeal against the unfavourable decision of the Evaluation Committee to the Supreme Court of Justice, where a special panel of three judges and one substitute judge is established. The judges and the alternate judge are appointed by the President of the Supreme Court of Justice and confirmed by decree of the President of the Republic of Moldova.

The Pre-Vetting Commission announced on Wednesday, 4 January that it has completed the evaluation process of five candidates for membership of the CSM from among career judges and has forwarded its decisions to the candidates and the institution responsible for organising the competition. The decisions concern magistrates Iurie Bejenaru and Anatolie Țurcan of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ), Vitalie Stratan and Vladislav Holban of the Chisinau Court of Appeals, central headquarters, and Angela Bostan of the Chisinau Court of Appeals (CA), who, according to the Commission, do not meet the integrity criteria and did not pass the evaluation.

Earlier, Ziarul de Gardă contacted the judges by phone to ask them how they rate the decision, whether they will appeal it in court and whether they will continue to work in the judiciary.