The initiative of the president of the Supreme Court of Justice Mihai Poalelunci to involve society in the exercise of justice by creating the Jury Court caused heated debates. Contradictory opinions on the issue were stated in the talk show “Reply” on Prime TV channel, IPN reports.
Mihai Poalelungi said his initiative is aimed at restoring credibility in justice. “We must guarantee transparency and increase credibility in the legal system. These goals can be achieved by involving society in decision-making. That’s why I think that in the difficult cases of increased interest for society, the verdict should be given by a Jury Court,” he explained.
Alina Radu, director of the investigations weekly “Ziarul de garda”, believes that Poalelungi’s initiative is inopportune. “I don’t understand why we should create another institution whose efficiency is questionable. I don’t want this body to be like the Supervisory Board of the National Public Broadcaster “Teleradio Moldova”, whose members are chosen by somebody from somewhere. We have organized and professional civil society and we have media outlets that attend hearings in loud cases,” she stated.
However, the dean of the Faculty of Law of the State University Sergiu Baesu considers such an initiative is welcome. “I think the creation of the Jury Court will help the judiciary a lot. We must study the experience of other states and implement the best variant in our country,” he said.
In the general assembly of judges on March 13, Mihai Poalelungi formulated a set of proposals aimed at remedying the situation in the judicial system. Among the proposals were to set up a Jury Court, to create an internal filter after the Supreme Court of Justice and before the European Court of Human Rights, to divide the Chisinau Appeals Court into two courts – for the capital city and for the central districts, to set time limits for examining court cases, to increase the number of members of the judicial inspectorate from 3 to 15 and to annul the state tax paid when filing a lawsuit so that the given sum is paid by the party that loses the case at the end of the trial.
