Opposition MPs warn about hidden effects of amendments to law on judge status

Members of Parliament Oleg Serebrian and Igor Klipii warn the public opinion about the dangers related to an eventual amendment of the Law on the status and the immunity of judges. The MPs told a press conference on Friday that the essence of the amendments proposed by the Ministry of Justice represents an attempt against the principle of the inviolability of judges. A draft law to this effect is already being discussed in the Parliament’s Legal Committee. If adopted it could become a ticking bomb with unknown effects. According to Oleg Serebrian, the bill provides several amendments to the Law on the status and the immunity of judges, the most critical being the one regarding art. 19. According to the proposed provisions, the general public prosecutor will be entitled to start criminal proceedings against judges without the approval of the Higher Magistrates’ Council, the president or the Parliament. The amended version of the law says that criminal proceedings can be started by the general public prosecutor on the only condition of notifying the Supreme Court of Justice. This means that a judge could one morning wake up hearing the investigators knocking at the door, Serebrian explained. “We all know who is giving orders to the general prosecutor. The judges who will disobey the commands given by phone will obviously be at a higher risk”, Oleg Serebrian pointed out, specifying that the role of the prosecution office in the judicial system of Moldova has been an issue for the Council of Europe for a long time. According to the quoted source, the new edition of the law widens the powers of the general prosecutor, who becomes, in a way, “the head of the judges”. “In the context of the future parliamentary elections, but also of the unclear involvement of the Supreme Court of Justice in the electoral process – the Buteni case – we can easily figure out what the real purposes of these amendments are”, Igor Klipii said. Oleg Serebrian also said that he held discussions with several judges on the issue and they were confused to hear about the proposed amendments. Igor Klipii specified that there has been no answer from the Higher Magistrates’ Court yet, on the opportunity of the draft law, even though there is information confirming that a response is expected. Klipii believes that the Council is now looking for a diplomatic formulation to express its disagreement.