The judges of the Chisinau Court of Appeal (CA) admitted the request of the lawyers of the suspended Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo, who challenged the constitutionality of Article 31/1 of the Law on the Prosecutor General’s Office, which provides for the evaluation of the Prosecutor General’s performance. Thus, Stoianoglo’s case has been referred to the Constitutional Court (CC) and the High Court is due to rule on it.

In a comment to Ziarul de Gardă, CA spokesman Ion Bocan said that the court’s decision was issued on 14 June and was sent to the High Court last week.

“(…) The petitioner Alexandr Stoianoglo’s request to lift the exception of unconstitutionality was admitted and the matter was referred to the CC for a decision on lifting the exception of unconstitutionality under Article 135(1)(a). The decision was issued on 14 June 2022 and last week the court clerk sent to the Court the conclusion and the petition drawn up by the petitioners (…),” said Bocan.

Iurie Mărgineanu, one of Stoianoglo’s lawyers, says the defenders challenged Article 31/1 of the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office, which provides for the evaluation of the performance of the prosecutor general. The lawyer considers that the suspended prosecutor general’s performance must be evaluated on the basis of “rules laid down by law”.

“From the given article we raised the exception of paragraph 5, which states that the evaluation procedure shall be carried out on the basis of a regulation approved by the Supreme Council of Prosecutors. The regulation has been challenged. Within the regulatory act it was challenged at the Court of Appeal and we raised this exception. The Venice Commission refers that the evaluation criteria must be laid down in the law, but not by separate regulation. It must be clear, admissible, so that the person who accedes to the position of public prosecutor can see what criteria will be applied to him when he is evaluated, if the evaluation is supposed to be carried out. So, in this situation, if the Venice Commission considers that this article, this evaluation procedure, this evaluation regulation, should not be a regulation, but should be a clear rule laid down in the law, we consider that the constitution is violated (…)”, said Mărgineanu.

Sorina Ștefârță, presidential spokeswoman, told ZdG that the head of state will not sign the decree dismissing the suspended prosecutor general, Alexandr Stoianoglo, before there is a court decision on the case.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has informed the government in Chisinau of the request of the suspended Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo and asked for an explanation of the case in which he is being investigated for passive corruption, false statements, abuse of office and exceeding his official duties. The information was made public by Victor Munteanu, one of the suspended Prosecutor General’s lawyers, on 28 June.

Subsequently, Dumitru Obada, Moldova’s government agent before the ECHR, told Ziarul de Gardă that the authorities in Chisinau will formulate an official position responding to the ECHR’s requests on the case of suspended Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo by September. According to Moldova’s government agent to the ECtHR, the authorities in Chisinau are currently assessing the High Court’s request.

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

Details from the Evaluation Committee report
The evaluation of Stoianoglo’s work was completed at the end of April, and a report 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 assigned 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 during his tenure.

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

Suspended Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo, who is subject to a pre-trial detention order in the form of provisional release under judicial supervision, is under investigation for passive bribery, false statements, abuse of office and exceeding his official duties.