Batrincea: The Toughest Conclusion of the Venice Commission in 30 Years of Independence

Vice-President of the Parliament Vlad Batrincea, a member of the PCRM-PSRM Bloc, calls on the parliamentary majority to take into account the recommendations of the Venice Commission, amend the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office and ensure the independence of the Prosecutor General. According to Batrincea, the conclusion of European experts is extremely harsh, and ignoring the recommendations of the Venice Commission will lead to the isolation of Moldova in the international arena, reports ipn.md In his view, the critical opinion of the Venice Commission is a “yellow card” shown both to the parliamentary majority, which promoted and approved amendments to the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office, and to the Constitutional Court judges, who did not notify about these violations. “This is a blow inflicted on populism promoted by those who now govern the Republic of Moldova. This is the toughest conclusion of the Venice Commission in 30 years of independence. And the Constitutional Court also received a “no vote” from partners, from the Council of Europe experts. Because the decisions adopted by the parliament are entirely political and create political instruments of control over the Prosecutor’s Office. The Republic of Moldova risks being isolated and subjected to sanctions, because now it’s not about the structures of the European Union, but about the European structures determining the legal principles for the whole continent,” Batrincea explained during the program “Acces Direct” on NTV Moldova. According to Batrincea, as a result of amendments to the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office, political control over the Prosecutor General’s Office was introduced. The deputy from the PCRM–PSRM Bloc pointed out that the unlawful change in the composition of the Supreme Council of Prosecutors created the conditions for the removal of Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo from office. “The removal of the Prosecutor General, the prosecutor of Gagauzia from the Supreme Council of Prosecutors, the removal of Dumitru Pulbere from the Superior Court of Justice was criticized on the grounds that he has reached retirement age, although the law provides that the person already holding the position works until the expiration of their term of office. In addition, it’s about Alexandr Stoianoglo’s illegal removal from office. According to the law, if the Prosecutor General is removed, his powers are transferred to one of his deputies. The conclusions of the Venice Commission are quite clear: the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office has to be revised as soon as possible, it is necessary to restore the independence of the Prosecutor’s Office, to return the adequate Supreme Council of Prosecutors makeup by re-including the Prosecutor General in it,” Vlad Batrincea said. In the conclusion of the Venice Commission on the Law on the Prosecutor’s Office, it is noted that the changes were made to the legislation too hastily, without a broad discussion with the participation of civil society. The Commission also criticized the change in the Supreme Council of Prosecutors makeup, which, according to European experts, “gives the impression that any parliamentary majority can change the Supreme Council of Prosecutors makeup in its own interests.” The experts of the Venice Commission recommended to register the activities of the Supreme Council of Prosecutors in the Constitution in order to avoid possible illegal changes to the law. In addition, European experts recommend changing the current procedure for evaluating the Prosecutor General’s performance, providing much clearer criteria for this process. Point