The Chişinău District Court has acquitted ex-judge Domnica Manole in the so-called “referendum case.” In the examination of the criminal case, the prosecutor found no evidence of the ex-magistrate’s intention to issue a decision contrary to the law. This finding was based on three witness statements, including that of the current Minister of Internal Affairs, Andrei Nastase, who said he had not met Manole before she examined the referendum file.

On 7 July, 2019, a panel of judges from the Chişinău District Court decided that Domnica Manole, a former judge from the Chişinău Appeals Court (CAC), did not violate criminal law in April 2016, when she annulled the Central Electoral Commission’s decision to refuse the organization of a national consultative referendum by the Dignity and Truth Platform Party (PPDA). The case prosecutor, Eugeniu Rurac, facilitated the acquittal sentence at the hearing on 4 July, by proposing the court issue an order for the complete dismissal of the case.

The evidence examined in court persuaded the prosecutor

According to the information in the Ordinance, the prosecutor Eugeniu Rurac motivated his decision by the fact that, during the examination of the criminal case, several new elements appeared. In the Ordinance on waiving the accusation, the prosecutor noted that the experts and the witness Andrei Nastase, were appended and examined. Also the written opinion of the specialist and professor Nicolae Osmochescu, but also the decision of the Disciplinary College attached to the SCM found no disciplinary deviations in the actions of Judge Domnica Manole. 

The prosecutor stated that “the questions raised by the participants, especially regarding the examples of the co-authoring elements or the technical and stylistic coincidence of the documents submitted, the experts referred to examples of the introductory part of the judgment, not to the motivating part her, mentioning that in order to be able to give an appreciation to the circumstances of the motivating part, it is necessary to have repeated expertise, where the commissioning officer is to be tasked to establish the co-authoring exclusively on the motivating part of the decision. “

Năstase declared he did not influence Manole “either directly or indirectly”

Prosecutors suspected that the new Minister of Internal Affairs, Andrei Nastase, had written Domnica Manole’s reasoned decision in the “referendum case.” He appeared before the court on July 3 and communicated that he was not acquainted with judge Manole before participating as a representative of the Initiative Group for the constitution referendum in April 2016. Nastase claimed that “the lawsuit was written and motivated personally by him.” He also stated that he had not influenced the judge, directly or indirectly, in any way in the adoption of the decree, nor did he influence the textual statement of the decision of 14 April 2016.

The prosecutor’s and ex- judge’s declarations

“The Ordinance is reasoned and motivated, therefore, there couldn’t be another decision than acquittal. There are no grounds to appeal this decision,” prosecutor Eugeniu Rurac said at the end of the hearing. “Both Mrs Manole’s accusation and the indictment and order to withdraw the accusation, in my view, were perfectly legal and grounded in evidence. I do not see any political issues in this,” the prosecutor added.

Four consecutive hearings on Manole’s case took place after the change of government, mainly in the month of July. During one of the sessions, Manole and her lawyer requested an expedited examination of the criminal case.

“This day is directly related to the return of democracy, the change of government. This decision is evidence that the law enforcement authorities are no longer in captivity, and the fear that dominates the judiciary system has begun to disappear,” said Manole. Unlike the prosecutor, she believes there is a direct link between her acquittal and the change of government.

How Judge Manole’s case became a criminal case

Under Andrei Nastase’s leadership, the Initiative Group on organizing a constitutional Republican referendum filed a lawsuit on 4 April 2016, demanding that the CEC’s decision against holding a referendum be canceled. The file was distributed to the judge Domnica Manole, who canceled the CEC’s decision and ordered the institution to initiate the referendum. 

The following day, CEC representatives appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Justice. Thus, judges at the Supreme Court overturned Manole’s decision as “illegal.” Subsequently, the CEC addressed the General Prosecutor’s Office and the Superior Council of Magistracy, requesting an investigation into the actions of the judge.

The examination of the criminal case continued and it was put on trial. Meanwhile, based on a notice from the Security and Intelligence Service (SIS), Manole was dismissed as a judge. She then joined the PPDA and in the February parliamentary elections she ran for a deputy mandate as part of the ACUM Bloc, formed out of the PPDA and the Solidarity and Action Party (PAS). She ran both in the national constituency and in an uninominal constituency, but she didn’t get to Parliament. 

This article is part of the project “Strengthening the Rule of Law and Ensuring Transparency of the Judicial System” implemented by A.O. “Lawyers for Human Rights” with the support of the National Endowment for Democracy, which in no way influences the subject and content of the published investigations.