Head of State: We cannot stop justice reform just because we don’t have 61 votes

Justice reform cannot be halted because Parliament has not found 61 votes to appoint a new member to the Prosecutors’ Evaluation Commission. This view was expressed by head of state Maia Sandu, who argued for the need to reduce the required number of votes in order to unblock the situation.

“In this Parliament there are not 61 MPs who support the justice reform. (...) In the previous legislature there were, because the parliamentary majority ensured 61 votes and then it was not a problem. Now they do not exist. So what do we do? Because there are not 61 votes, do we block ourselves and stop the justice reform? No. The same mechanism applies to the appointment of the members of the Superior Council of Magistracy (CSM). This mechanism was coordinated with the Venice Commission. So first you try with 3/5, with 61 votes. If there are no 61 votes, you don’t stay without members, you move to a simple majority,” Maia Sandu said.

The President explained that applying this mechanism is necessary to unblock the situation and to continue the justice reform.

“If 61 votes were not found, it is natural, just as with the appointment to the CSM, to have an unblocking solution so that members can be appointed to this commission. Today there are no 61 votes and therefore we cannot stop the justice reform because there are not 61 votes. Fifty-one votes, a simple majority, is sufficient,” the head of state added.

Last week, Parliament examined the draft decision on appointing a new member to the Prosecutors’ Evaluation Commission. The draft did not garner the necessary number of votes, being supported by only 53 MPs, while at least 61 votes were required.

At the same time, on Thursday the legislature passed a bill introducing a subsidiary measure for appointing members to the external evaluation commissions of judges and prosecutors. According to the author of the amendment, the proposal will eliminate a legislative vacuum and is necessary to avoid harming the external evaluation process, especially in the context of time constraints.