A Deputy Requested the Prosecutor General to Reinvestigate the Videos from the Meeting Between Dodon and Plahotniuc
A deputy from the Dignity and Truth Platform Party submitted another request to the General Prosecutor, Alexandr Stoianoglo. The deputy requested the Prosecutor’s Office to investigate the criminal case initiated based on the videos from the meeting between President Igor Dodon and the country’s tycoon, Vladimir Plahotniuc. The video features Dodon receiving a black plastic bag allegedly with cash from Plahotniuc.
Previously, the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office began examining the videos, but the institution decided not to open an investigation, stating that the deeds of the persons concerned in the records do not meet the elements of any crime.
On July 20, Iurie Reniță, a deputy from the Dignity and Truth Platform Party parliamentary faction, ACUM Bloc, announced in a Facebook post that he submitted another request to the Office of the Prosecutor General related to the black plastic bag case.
In the same Facebook post, Reniță mentioned that if Prosecutor General, Alexandr Stoianoglo, will not accept the request, then he will address the European prosecutor, Laura Codruță Kövesi.
„In addition to my first Appeal of July 1, 2020, regarding the need to cancel the Refusal Ordinance in initiating the criminal investigation on file no. 20209249042 (Dodon, Plahotniuc, and Serghei Iaralov, a close friend of Plahotniuc) I present you another REQUEST. I addressed this request to Alexandru Stoianoglo. If the indisputable arguments presented in this request will again be ignored then I will send this document (detailed and very well-argued) to Mrs. Laura Codruța Kövesi, Chief Prosecutor of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Considering that Moldova is an associated country of the European Union, the intervention of the European Prosecutor’s Office in our indisputable acts of corruption, with the involvement of high state dignitaries, is necessary,” mentioned Reniță.
On June 24, the Office of the Prosecutor General concluded the criminal trial initiated based on two denunciations. The Office of the Prosecutor General examined the undercover video presented on May 18, 2020, by deputy Reniță and the new video presented on June 5, 2020, by deputies Reniță and Lilian Carp, vice president of the Action and Solidarity Party. The institution also examined the anonymous letter with the so-called receipts for money.
During the criminal trial, the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office heard both whistleblowers. The institution mentioned that the author of the anonymous letter with the alleged receipts did not respond to the summons to appear with the promised details in the press. At the same time, the institution examined Carp’s allegations that the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office allegedly held for a long time the video recordings that were examined during this criminal trial. The Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office stated that Carp’s allegations were not confirmed.
As a result of the examination of the material accumulated during the criminal trial, the institution decided not to start the criminal investigation on the grounds that the deeds of the persons concerned in the records do not meet the elements of any crime.
The institution also mentioned that during the criminal trial, it was not possible to establish the contents of the black plastic bag, and the person who filmed the video, which is a determining fact for the criminal investigation and the submission of a criminal accusation.
The Prosecutor’s Office stated that it established the judicial truth based on legal evidence, while the possibilities to administer other evidence were exhausted at the moment. The institution added that the current decision may be reviewed. And the criminal proceedings may be resumed, if in the future, the Prosecutor’s Office will be provided with certain relevant information or evidence that would affect the validity of the current decision.
Thus, the respective criminal case was closed as a result of the analysis of the factual circumstances and the assessment of the legal evidence.