Angela Popil, lawyer of Domnica Manole, president of the Constitutional Court, came up with explanations after the court’s decision to offer the former judge of the Chisinau Court of Appeal a moral damage in the amount of 800 thousand lei after she was criminally investigated and tried in a case in which prosecutors later dropped the charges.

“Neither the representative of the Prosecutor General’s Office nor the representative of the Ministry of Justice were able to tell the court what, in the opinion of the institutions they represent, the amount of compensation that can be accepted is, leaving this to the court’s own discretion,” she said.

For his part, Eugeniu Rurac, the prosecutor who prosecuted the Manole case and subsequently dropped the charges in court, says the court’s ruling “is completely unfounded in terms of the proportionality of the compensation, but is also misinterpreted on the merits”.

Rurac: “In my opinion, the representatives of the MJ and PG in the trial played a passive role in defending the interests of the state”

“The court decision that Domnica Manole should receive 800 thousand lei from the state budget is illegal! First of all, it is an exaggerated compensation, in line with ECHR and national practice in such cases, where the compensated are awarded much lower amounts. Secondly, the decision is unfounded, and this is because Article 3 of Law no. 1545 on the compensation for damage caused by unlawful actions of criminal prosecution bodies, public prosecutors and courts stipulates that the procedural actions for which a person may be compensated are: detention, searches, arrest, special investigative measures, etc. As far as we know, Domnica Manole was not subjected to any measure of constraint or limitation of rights (she was not even forbidden to leave the country)! At the same time, I would like to draw attention to the fact that in the court’s decision, Judge Petru Harmaniuc used the notion of “criminal liability”, which does not correspond to the provisions of the Criminal Code, which stipulates that criminal liability is the person’s conviction, yet Domnica Manole was acquitted following the prosecutor’s waiver of charges! I therefore consider that the court’s judgment of 8 February is completely unfounded in terms of the proportionality of the compensation, but also that it is misinterpreted in substance.

Finally, I would like to draw attention to the fact that the court did not involve either the prosecutor or the CSM as an intervener in the case, and that the representatives of the MJ and PG in the trial played, in my opinion, a passive role in defending the interests of the state”, Rurac argues.

See below the full press release by lawyer Angela Popil

“The action for the recovery of moral damages and compensation of court costs was formulated and filed in court on 11.08.2022 under the terms of the Law no. 1545/1998 on the manner of compensation of damages caused by unlawful actions of the criminal prosecution bodies, prosecutor’s office and courts.

In the grounds of the action it was alleged that during the period 08.06.2016 – 09.08.2019 she was the subject of the criminal case no. 20169242021 initiated by the Order of the Acting Prosecutor General of the Republic of Moldova, Eduard Harujen of 08.06.2016, being accused of the fact that, acting as a judge of the Chisinau Court of Appeal, she committed actions that undermined the authority and prestige of justice, discrediting the high office of judge, by knowingly pronouncing a decision contrary to the law. Specifically, Ms. Domnica Manole was indicted for the fact that on 14.04.2016, as a judge at the Chisinau Court of Appeal, she pronounced the decision which ordered the annulment of the CEC Decision No. 4608 of 30.03.2016., being charged with committing the offence provided for in Article 307 para. (1) of the Criminal Code – knowingly pronouncing a judgment contrary to the law.

The criminal case was sent to court on 20.04.2018, and the acquittal sentence was pronounced by the Chisinau Court of Buiucani on 09.08.2019, becoming final and irrevocable on 26.08.2019. The sentence of acquittal of Mrs. Domnica Manole was pronounced following the waiver by the prosecutor of the case of the accusation by Order of 04.07.2019.

In the reasoning of the solution contained in the Order of 04.07.2019, the State Prosecutor invoked the provisions of Art. (4) of Law no. 544/1995, according to which judges make decisions independently and impartially and act without any restrictions, influences, pressures, threats or interventions, direct or indirect, from any authority, including judicial, and also referred to the case-law of the Constitutional Court, which states that a judge cannot be held criminally liable for his or her interpretation of the law, assessment of the facts or evaluation of evidence, except in cases of bad faith, it being established that judges of the courts, courts of appeal and the Supreme Court of Justice may be held criminally liable under Art. 307 of the Criminal Code only if it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that there is direct intent to pronounce a judgment, sentence, decision or conclusion contrary to the law (HCC no. 12/2017).

Until the criminal case against Domnica Manole was sent to court, the Superior Council of Magistracy, by Decision No 451/21 of 04. 07. 2017, proposed to the President of the Republic of Moldova the dismissal of Domnica Manole from the position of judge, retaining in the basis of this proposal the arguments of the opinions of the Intelligence and Security Service whose probative value was abolished by the Constitutional Court Decision No 32/2017. The Decision of the Superior Council of Magistracy No 451/21 of 04.07.2017 is in force.

From the date of the judgment of the Chisinau Buiucani Court of 09.08.2019 until the date of this communication, neither the Prosecutor General’s Office nor the Superior Council of Magistracy have reacted in any way in the sense of recognizing guilt in the faulty criminal case against Domnica Manole and her unlawful dismissal as a judge.

With reference to the case of Mrs Domnica Manole, serious criticism has been levelled at the justice system in the Republic of Moldova: Declaration of the EU Delegation to the Republic of Moldova of 12.07.2017, Resolution of the European Parliament of 14.11.2018 on the implementation of the EU-Moldova Association Agreement, Report of the International Commission of Jurists Mission 2019, Memorandum of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of 03.10. 2019, being very clearly underlined that the case of Ms. Domnica Manole is a striking example of political persecution of a judge.

Given the public lynching to which Ms Domnica Manole was subjected in the period from the date of indictment to the acquittal (3 years), putting Ms Domnica Manole in a position to prove her innocence, having been publicly accused of committing an offence which was principally aimed at pronouncing a judgment based on her own conviction as a judge and which was subsequently quashed simply because the judges of the higher court gave a different interpretation to the provisions of the substantive law applied in the case, the serious interference in the private life of Mrs Domnica Manole and her family, including the silence and lack of reaction of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Superior Council of the Magistracy after the acquittal sentence was handed down, justified the bringing of an action in court to claim moral compensation for the suffering and public humiliation to which Mrs Domnica Manole was subjected in her capacity as a judge.

With the initiation of the criminal proceedings, Ms Manole Domnica was subjected to unprecedented persecution for the decisions she took as a judge in the Chisinau Court of Appeal. However, the criminalisation of a judge by the adoption of a decision can be accepted only when the judge cannot in any way justify his own conviction and the conclusion drawn in the judicial act found to be unlawful, but the judge concerned cannot be held criminally liable for pronouncing a judgment based on his own motivated conviction.

With reference to the case concerning compensation for non-material damage, it should be noted that the case was heard in a public hearing attended by representatives of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Ministry of Justice, and while the Ministry of Justice made a reference to the case in which it acknowledged that Ms Domnica Manole’s action in the part referring to her right to claim non-material damage was well-founded, objecting only to the amount requested (without explaining the reasoning behind the objection), the Public Prosecutor’s Office made no reference to the case and supported the position of the Ministry of Justice without further comment.

Neither the representative of the Attorney General’s Office nor the representative of the Ministry of Justice was able to inform the court what, in the opinion of the institutions they represent, the amount of compensation that could be accepted was, leaving this to the court’s discretion.

It is the right of the Prosecutor General’s Office and the Ministry of Justice to appeal the judgment of the Chisinau Centre Court of 8 February 2023, and the appellate court is to assess the merits and legality of the conclusions reached by the trial court in the judgment.

On 8 February this year, the Chisinau Court of Appeal, Centre Court, partially admitted the application for a writ of summons filed by the lawyer of the President of the Constitutional Court (CC), Domnica Manole, against the Ministry of Justice.

Thus, the court ordered the recovery of the sum of 800 thousand lei for the benefit of the magistrate, from the state budget, by way of non-material damage, caused by “unlawful actions of the prosecution body and the public prosecutor’s office as a result of the unlawful prosecution under Article 307(2) of the Criminal Code”. (1) of the Criminal Code, actions that resulted in the acquittal of Domnica Manole by the sentence of the Buiucani Court of 9 August 2019, final and irrevocable of 26 August 2019, on the charge of committing the offence provided for in Art. 307 para. (1) of the Criminal Code, as a result of the waiver of the state prosecutor to the accusation in the court hearing”.

According to the operative part of the 8 February judgment, delivered by Judge Petru Harmaniuc, another 4 500 lei will be paid to the CC President as legal aid expenses incurred in the examination of the civil case.

“For the rest, the claim for compensation of the excess of the moral damage awarded by the present judgment, as well as for the recovery of the amount exceeding the amount of the legal aid expenses awarded to the plaintiff in the present proceedings, is rejected as unfounded,” the document reads.

Domnica Manole sought compensation for non-material damage estimated at the sum of 1 000 000 lei, caused by “the unlawful actions of the criminal prosecution authorities, the public prosecutor’s office and the courts, materialised in the unlawful prosecution, with compensation for the legal aid expenses incurred in the examination of the present civil case in the sum of 5 000 lei”.

The judgment may be appealed to the Chisinau Court of Appeal within 30 days from the date of delivery of the judgment.

Domnica Manole was acquitted in the case in which she was accused of delivering a decision against the law in the “referendum case” in the summer of 2019. The magistrates’ decision then came after the prosecutor on the case, Eugeniu Rurac, dropped the criminal charges.

According to Rurac, the statements of a defence witness and the conclusions of experts were the basis on which the prosecution dropped criminal charges against magistrate Domnica Manole.

Domnica Manole was prosecuted for adopting a decision contrary to the law, namely the pronouncement on 14 April 2016, as a judge at the Chisinau Court of Appeal, of a decision annulling the decision of the Central Electoral Commission (CEC) of 30 March 2016 rejecting the organisation of a referendum proposed by the “Dignity and Truth” Platform and obliging the institution to initiate that republican referendum.

Shortly afterwards, Eduard Harunjen, then acting Prosecutor General, obtained the CSM’s agreement to start criminal proceedings against the magistrate.

On 4 July 2017, after examining the additional advisory opinion of the Intelligence and Security Service (SIS) regarding the Chisinau Court of Appeal judge Domnica Manole, the Superior Council of Magistracy decided that she was not compatible with the status of judge and dismissed her from her post.

Although, after Domnica Manole’s appeal to the Constitutional Court, the judges of this institution decided that the verification by the Intelligence and Security Service of candidates for the position of judge, as well as of judges, is unconstitutional, the magistrates of the courts of the Republic of Moldova, up to the CSJ, rejected Domnica Manole’s appeal against the Superior Council of Magistracy and the Intelligence and Security Service for the annulment of two decisions dismissing her from the system.