Resonance files related to corruption acts must be examined promptly, but this speed should not seem the result of political pressure. This is the statement of the anti-corruption expert Cristina Ciubotaru, made in the context of the criticism brought to the way the file in which Vlad Plahotniuc is targeted is examined. In an interview in the December monthly bulletin of the Association for Foreign Policy, conducted together with Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, the analyst emphasizes that the statements of some politicians, who boast in such situations about the speed of the process, seriously undermine trust in justice, reports IPN.
“The crisis of judges and temporary transfers between lower and higher courts lead, in some cases, to delays and retrials of cases, and in others to unusual accelerations, fueled by untempered political discourses. Under these conditions, political interest cannot be excluded from either slowness or haste. The case of Vladimir Plahotniuc, recently examined at a very fast pace, raises legitimate questions, considering that the alleged facts are over 10 years old and concern extremely complex cases, which, if delayed, can be prescribed. It is true that major corruption cases must be examined promptly – “justice delayed is justice denied”, a principle also enshrined in the ECHR jurisprudence -, but the speed should not seem to be the result of political pressure. The statements of some politicians who boast about the speed of the process in which the defendant does not manage “even to read his file” seriously undermine confidence in the independence of justice”, declared Cristina Ciubotaru in an interview.
The expert also speaks about the possible existence of duplicitous actions, referring in this regard to the “Kuliok” case in which the former head of state Igor Dodon is targeted.
“At the opposite pole, the Igor Dodon file, examined by the Supreme Court of Justice, was restarted from scratch after almost three years, due to the replacement of a temporarily transferred judge. Although the restart can be procedurally justified, the inconsistency of changing the judging panels and the political context raise questions. Over the course of the three-year examination, all three judges from the initial panel were gradually replaced, without this having previously triggered the restart of the procedures. The political context also raises questions: Igor Dodon is the leader of the PSRM, a party with which PAS governed in alliance during the period 2019–2021 and with which a new alliance was not excluded even after the parliamentary elections in the autumn of 2025. Under these circumstances, the changes in speed in the examination of the file may have several explanations, including some extrajudicial ones”, added Cristina Ciubotaru.
The expert specifies that the authorities must constantly analyze these sensitive issues, which perpetually arouse suspicions in society.
“What is certain is that the rotation of judges remains one of the most effective methods of delaying cases, especially high-profile ones. This was also demonstrated in the recent documentary made by Recorder journalists about the captured justice system in Romania. Therefore, the discussion about the speed with which major corruption cases are examined in the Republic of Moldova becomes even more sensitive, as those responsible for the ‘gearbox’ of justice should understand very well how these selective accelerations and brakes are publicly interpreted”, further emphasizes Cristina Ciubotaru.
