Why the Head of the European Prosecutor’s Office Visited Moldova

Christian RUSSU

“Fierce fighter against corruption” Laura Kovesi continued the series of pre-election visits of high European officials to Moldova and, of course, chose to ignore all the problems in Moldovan justice under the current government   

Laura Codruta Kovesi, the famous head of the European Prosecutor’s Office, visited Chisinau this week. Some people, strangely enough, expected her to make some high-profile revelations to the media, although in fact she is one of the Brussels bureaucrats. But of course, nothing of the sort happened, and no awkward questions followed. Therefore, the only feeling one could get when listening to Kovesi’s sterile speeches was complete bewilderment. Judge for yourself. If we chronologically analyze what this person said about our country and the authorities, we will find that we are moving back to the future. In early 2021, Maia Sandu appealed to Brussels seeking urgent help from European prosecutors and personally from Kovesi because of the “emergency situation” with corruption in Moldova. The following year, Madame Prosecutor comes to us, blessing the then Minister of Justice Sergiu Litvinenco and Sandu to continue extraordinary measures during the so-called “justice reform”. A year later, Kovesi said that her Moldovan colleagues needed to work more actively with her agency to investigate offences involving the embezzlement of European funds. Later she confirms that our country is involved in such crimes, which are investigated by the European Prosecutor’s Office. And the other day in Chisinau, she said that in the future, there might be cases of embezzlement of EU funds in Moldova, which is why it is necessary to establish close cooperation. That is, three and a half years ago, the Moldovan authorities had an urgent need for the support of European prosecutors in the fight against corruption, including in terms of embezzlement of European aid. European officials and prosecutors ostensibly joined in, backed the “justice reform” and signed a cooperation agreement. As time passes, we hear that for Moldova the risks of embezzling Eurofunds are only emerging, and therefore there is need to start working together. Kovesi held protocol meetings in Chisinau. She was photographed with Maia Sandu and Dorin Recean, and speaking to students and future justice officials she admitted that European funds are subject to corruption all over Europe, a problem that has only worsened in recent years. This message was supposed to lower the degree of self-criticism in the Moldovan justice system and all those involved in it, because, as it turns out, embezzlement is not only Moldova’s problem. At the same time, questions prepared by the pro-government media about corruption risks in connection with the actions of criminal oligarchic groups striving for power were responded with pat answers that did not go beyond the official rhetoric of the ruling regime. The behavior of the well-trained media in dealing with Kovesi is also strikingly different. If two years ago journalists boldly demanded a reaction to the facts of corruption among the members of the PAS government (for example, about Ala Nemerenсo’s solid residence in Romania), now no one even tried to ask awkward questions, although there are plenty of occasions. It goes without saying that no criticism of the illegal dismissal of Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo was received from the former Romanian prosecutor either at the outset of Maia Sandu’s mandate or now. At the same time, there are similarities in the situation with Kovesi herself. In 2018, she was removed from office by decree of the current president, Klaus Iohannis, based on a Constitutional Court ruling. A year later, she filed a lawsuit with the ECHR and won, just as Stoianoglo, but he never received any support from Brussels officials. On the contrary, he became disrespected by the ambassadors of the EU member states accredited in our country. By the way, it is symbolic that Kovesi’s presidential ambitions were also much talked about last year. In theory, the rating and image of a victim of political struggle could put her in the lead of the upcoming presidential race. The former prosecutor herself denied having any such plans, but the Romanian elections are still almost three months away. What is the difference between Stoianoglo and Kovesi? In Romania, she acted as the EU’s battering ram against intractable local elites, launched high-profile criminal cases against high-ranking officials, and provoked political crises. Years later, one can see purely mercantile intentions behind the halo of a fierce fighter against corruption: mopping up the justice system and transferring financial flows from the corruption schemes of the local political elite towards Brussels. Kovesi’s years-long legal battle against former Romanian premier Victor Ponta ended up with nothing. The latter was acquitted by the country’s judicial authorities for lack of corpus delicti. The case of Ponta and other members of the Bucharest elite was recognized as political, but no one laid challenge to Kovesi and no one will do it. In general, the visit of the European Prosecutor to Moldova lacked any substance, at least in what the public could see. In fact, she, like others, played the role familiar to the Moldovan electorate as a propagandist of the current government in Chisinau, only slightly hinting at its shortcomings. Along with other European politicians and officials, Laura Codruta Kovesi is playing her part within the electoral campaign of Maia Sandu. But this part is one of the most toxic for the voters, because the public perception of corruption has only increased, and the conviction that the main organizer and beneficiary of corruption is the current government is undeniable. Kovesi was drawn in to slightly improve the image of the so-called “justice reform” and other efforts of Sandu and PAS to “fight corruption” among the population, even if her own image as a fierce fighter against corruption suffered.