Liubovi Brînza has resumed her role as a judge at the Chișinău Court of Appeal. The decision was made during a meeting of the Superior Council of Magistracy on Wednesday, August 9th, when the requests of judges Liubovi Brînza and Svetlana Tizu regarding their reinstatement in their positions were examined.

“The partial request of Judge Liubovi Brînza regarding her reinstatement and restoration of all previous rights is accepted. The suspension of Judge Liubovi Brînza from her position is annulled (…) Liubovi Brînza is instructed to resume her role as a judge at the Chișinău Court of Appeal,” decided the members of the Superior Council of Magistracy.

This decision can be contested at the Chișinău Court of Appeal within a period of 30 days.

Regarding Svetlana Tizu, the Superior Council of Magistracy decided to pause on the matter until another session, to allow the council members to further analyze the case. This is because Svetlana Tizu did not submit a request for reconfirmation of her judge position after the expiry of her initial term of appointment.

The Court of Appeal in Comrat partially overturned the verdict of the Chișinău District Court, Buiucani headquarters, dated March 17, 2021, in a corruption case where five judges were acquitted.

Thus, the panel of judges consisting of Dmitrii Fujenco, Andrei Mironov, and Ștefan Starciuc granted the appeal made by the suspended judge from the Chișinău Court of Appeal, Liubovi Brînza, on June 28, 2023. The Court of Appeal in Comrat decided to acquit her, based on Article 325, paragraph (3), letter a1) of the Criminal Code (conventionally named Scarlat episode), “due to the lack of evidence of the offense.”

On April 21, the Chișinău District Court, Buiucani headquarters, published the reasoned verdict regarding the acquittal of the judges Galina Moscalciuc, Svetlana Tizu, Liubovi Brânză, Ludmila Ouș, and Victoria Hadârcă, the five judges indicted in the corruption case filed in October 2018.

In the detailed decision of the Chișinău District Court, spanning 416 pages, it is stated that the five judges indicted in the case are innocent. The judges declared that after analyzing the presented evidence and considering their correlation, they reached the conclusion that the acquittal of the five judges was necessary due to the lack of evidence of the offense.