Suspended Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo has been relieved of his duties. The decree was signed by President Maia Sandu on Tuesday 26 September and comes into force on the same day.

According to a press release issued by the Presidency, “given that a decision by the courts on the legality of Alexandr Stoianoglo’s dismissal by the Superior Council of Prosecutors (SCP) is delayed, the signing of the decree comes in the context of the European Union’s recommendations to ensure the replacement of the Prosecutor General’s office and the Republic of Moldova’s obligations to fulfil the conditions of the justice system”.

“Following the examination of the report of the Evaluation Commission of the Prosecutor General (suspended de jure from office), Alexandr Stoianoglo, drawn up on 5 May 2022, the Superior Council of Prosecutors, by Resolution No. 1-92 of 23 May 2022, in accordance with Art. 311 para. (8) and para. (9) of the Law No. 312016 on the Prosecutor’s Office, awarded the qualification “unsatisfactory” to Alexandr Stoianoglo’s work during the term of office of the Prosecutor General and proposed to the President of the Republic of Moldova the dismissal of Alexandr Stoianoglo as Prosecutor General. In the light of the above, and pursuant to Articles 88(j) and 94(2) of the Rules of Procedure (l) of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, as well as Art. 58 para. (7) of the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office (…)”, the document states.

A year ago, the prosecutor appointed by the Superior Council of Prosecutors, Victor Furtuna, informed about the termination of the criminal proceedings against Alexandr Stoianoglo, accused on three counts.

Specifically, the former prosecutor general is accused of committing the offences of:

• abuse of office, “committed in the interest of a criminal organization, manifested by the release from detention of the convicted Veaceslav Platon and illegal waiver of the prosecution”, as a result of which a damage in the amount of more than 869 million lei was allegedly caused to the national public budget (Art. 47, 327 para.(3) of the Criminal Code);
• passive bribery, “manifested by receiving and accepting goods and advantages in any form not due to him from Veaceslav Platon”, in the amount of about 63 million lei (Article 324 of the Criminal Code);
• false declarations, characterised by the intentional non-inclusion in the declaration of assets and personal interests of the fact that his wife, as of 5 January 2021, is one of the beneficial owners of a company registered in Ukraine (Article 352/1(2) of the Criminal Code)

At the same time, the Prosecutor General’s Office (PG) announced at the time that the criminal prosecution is also terminated against two prosecutors from the Prosecutor’s Office for Combating Organized Crime and Special Cases, who are accused of having acted jointly and in concert with the suspended Prosecutor General in the release from detention of the convicted Veaceslav Platon and the unlawful waiver of prosecution (art. 327 (3) of the Criminal Code).

Alexandr Stoianoglo was arrested on 5 October 2021. He was under investigation for passive bribery, false statements, abuse of office and exceeding official duties. He rejected all charges and pleaded not guilty.

On 23 May this year, after more than three hours of debate, the PSC approved the report of the Evaluation Commission and gave the suspended Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo an “unsatisfactory” rating.

The evaluation of Stoianoglo’s work was completed at the end of April and a report on his work was approved by the Evaluation Commission in early May. The members of the Evaluation Commission gave scores from 0 to 10 for each performance indicator attributed to Stoianoglo.

The Commission’s 130-page report reviewed the work of the suspended Prosecutor General. The members of the Evaluation Commission note in the report that during his tenure as Prosecutor General, Alexandr Stoianoglo allegedly tolerated “the apparently lawful activities of his own employees, prosecutors who were involved in the faulty and unlawful handling of disciplinary proceedings, criminal cases that were subsequently dismissed by court decisions or closed due to lack of facts”. Another conclusion of the report is that files of major public interest were examined superficially or by redirecting referrals to other actors who did not have the institutional powers to initiate criminal investigations.

The report also states that Stoianoglo did not implement any “viable policies” on human resources while in office.

The final evaluation score awarded to Stoianoglo by the committee is – 2.19 points, which corresponds to “unsatisfactory”.