Moldovan president's statements at news briefing on justice field

The parliament on December 29 adopted the Law No. 333, aimed at enhancing transparency in administering the judicial system and the Prosecutor's Office, and strengthening the integrity of judges handling corruption cases.

I have seen various reactions to this initiative and I want to share my perspective, especially in the context of recent developments in the justice system. In recent years, we have made many efforts to clean up and reform the judiciary, in order to ensure more effective conditions for combating corruption.

I believe we can say that, in some areas of justice, things have begun to work better, improvements have been made, partly because some judges and prosecutors perform their duties honestly, in accordance with the law, not evading responsibility.

However, unfortunately, there are still areas in the system where justice actors continue to collaborate with criminals and strive to maintain elements of the old, corrupt system.

It is enough to look at the duration of files’ examinations, especially high-profile ones. I want to bring just a few examples from publicly available information: one case involving an organized crime group has been in court for 11 years, with only 4 years left before the statute of limitations expires, as happened with the Laundromat case. Another case, also concerning an organized crime group accused of drug trafficking, has been in court for 7 years; another case of embezzlement of foreign assets has been in court for 11 years; another similar case has been in court for 9 years.

Cases on bank fraud and money laundering - a case concerning scams at the Banca de Economii (Savings Bank) has been in court since 2013, with other bank fraud cases from 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022. In one case, in 3 years only 3 witnesses were heard; in another case, during 5 years, only 5 witnesses were heard. You can draw your own conclusions, but to me, these examples represent clear evidence that some judges deliberately delay cases’ examinations, possibly to gain illicit advantages.

What is happening with these cases? Who is holding such behaviors accountable? I have not seen strong reactions on behalf of self-administration bodies. The Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM) should have taken a more serious stance on these cases.

When we started the cleanup process in the system, we hoped that, if we conducted extraordinary evaluation in key justice institutions, the regular evaluation would later complement this effort. We see this is not happening sufficiently. The schemes of sabotage and corruption in the justice system have not disappeared.

We are receiving increasingly concerning signals about the sabotage and evasion by some judges from the lower courts in examining cases important to the country, relying on the fact that they will not be subject to the vetting process, i.e., extraordinary external evaluation.

Due to the irresponsibility of some actors within justice, there are significant risks that there will be no resolution in some episodes of the bank fraud case.

We cannot helplessly regard these abuses. We must move forward with firm measures, in order to have an integral and efficient justice system, ensuring that the fight against corruption yields results.

Therefore, I believe the legislative initiative passed by the parliament yesterday is appropriate.

The parliamentary initiative proposes including in the extraordinary evaluation process judges from the first instance, specifically those who since 2017 have been examining or have examined cases of corruption and related acts of corruption.

I believe we should go further, especially since the 2025 Enlargement Report of the European Commission recommends amending the legislation, in order to provide for mandatory external evaluation of all judges specialized in anti-corruption, including those from the specialized collegium in the first instance, by the relevant external evaluation commission. In this regard, I urge the parliament, Justice Ministry, Superior Council of Magistracy and other responsible authorities to analyze within a working group and urgently initiate measures regarding:

Justice reform is very important for the work of the state and for our process of joining the European Union. If the measures taken so far prove to be insufficient, we must move forward, correct, accelerate and amplify this reform. And that is what we will do.

Another issue I want to address – a widely monitored and discussed issue in society in recent days, is about individuals awaiting sentence leaving the territory controlled by the constitutional authorities before it is pronounced. The Transnistrian region is increasingly being used for evading the serving of the sentence. And the procedures for declaring a convicted person wanted are ineffective, because they involve terms that jeopardize the possibility of locating the person and thereby losing the chance to bring them to justice.

In this regard, I ask the government to improve the existing framework and undertake necessary legislative measures, in order to prevent convicted individuals from evading the serving of sentence, including by simplifying the procedure for declaring a person wanted once the sentence and arrest measure are pronounced for the purpose of executing the sentence.

In conclusion, I want to recognize and appreciate the effort of the honest people in the system, judges and prosecutors who do their work responsibly, despite pressures on behalf of corrupt groups. But it is necessary that all judges and all prosecutors behave correctly at all institutions and at all levels. Therefore, the reforms will continue.