The justice minister’s status of lawful member of the Supreme Council of Magistrates (SCM) does not necessarily mean that the executive interferes in the judicial process, Justice Minister Oleg Efrim stated for Info-Prim Neo when asked to comment on the International Commission of Jurists’ conclusion that the justice minister and the prosecutor general should be removed from the Council. “The presence of the justice minister and the prosecutor general is treated critically in the International Commission of Jurists’ report because they, being representatives of the executive power, may exert certain influence on the judiciary by initiating disciplinary procedures against judges. I want to note several major aspects. The fact that the prosecutor general is the representative of the executive is at least disputable given that the Supreme Law treats the prosecution bodies, including the prosecutor general, as a component part of the judicial authority,” said the official. According to Oleg Efrim, the presence of the prosecutor should be considered based on the legislation concerning the status and role of the prosecutor in the law system and this subject is of special interest in the imminent reformation of the prosecution service in Moldova. “As regards the recommendation to exclude the justice minister from the composition of the SCM, I think this is an insufficiently justified position. The minister, as any other member of the Council, can use the right to initiate disciplinary procedures. There are no separate or preferential procedures for him. The relevant decisions are examined by the Disciplinary Board, which is a collegial board, and are validated by the Supreme Council of Magistrates, which is also a collegial board. The judge who does not agree with the disciplinary punishment can challenge the decision in the Supreme Court of Justice,” said the minister. Consequently, any decision to initiate a disciplinary procedure goes through three filters so that the objectivity of the procedure is ensured and possible unwanted interference and influence on the independence of judges are excluded. “The justice minister has only one vote in the SCM, which is evidently not decisive. In most of the countries with self-governing judicial bodies, the justice minister is present as a representative of the authority that promotes states policies in justice,” stated Oleg Efrim He also said that under the bill on disciplinary punishment promoted by the Justice Ministry, the current disciplinary procedure should be reviewed. The justice minister and the prosecutor general will file applications to the Supreme Council of Magistrates, as the ordinary people. The decision concerning the disciplinary punishment will be taken by a new body – the admissibility panel of the Disciplinary Board. Oleg Efrim said the status of lawful members of the Supreme Council of Magistrates for the justice minister and the prosecutor general is granted by the Constitution and any intervention should be done by a law to review the Supreme Law. The foreign experts who analyzed the implementation of the justice reform in Moldova consider that the reform in the justice sector should reduce to a minimum the structural influence of the executive, especially by excluding the justice minister and the prosecutor general from the Supreme Council of Magistrates.