The head of the Legal Resources Center of Moldova, lawyer Vladislav Gribincea said the trial of ex-Premier Vlad Filat is a symbolic one. It has been five years of the launch of the justice sector reform. In crisis situations, it becomes evident if the reforms produced results. Namely this case showed that not much changed in the law enforcement process.
In an interview for Radio Free Europe, quoted by IPN, the lawyers said that in such circumstances the judges should have held the court proceedings in open sessions so that everyone saw that justice was done in reality, not on paper only. “It’s hard for me to understand why this trial had to be held behind closed doors given that it is the first of the kind. Considerable amounts of public funds were stolen. It is a person who held a very important post in this state and it is a case that, I would say, included a lot of speculations and televised justice,” said Vladislav Gribincea
Asked what can follow after the passing of the sentence by the first court, according to procedures, the lawyer said Vlad Filat’s lawyer or the ex-Premier himself can file an appeal and the case will have to be fully reexamined by the Chisinau Appeals Court. “Afterward, if someone does not agree with the solution of the Appeals Court, they can lodge a challenge with the Supreme Court of Justice. This trial can last for a year or a year and a half,” he stated.
The head of the Legal Resources Center said the way in which the case will be examined further, in a transparent way or behind closed doors, must be decided by the judges of the Appeals Court. But the hearings should not be held behind closed doors as this only fuels speculations that justice is not done and this is actually an execution.
Vladislav Gribincea noted that if they go to the ECHR and the Court ascertains that the trial was non-transparent, but the solution is generally correct, it will award damages only. This will not serve as a reason for reopening the procedures. “But the European Court could also identify much more serious deviations and the consequences of its decision will be of a different kind then. Anyway, I don’t think that an ECHR judgment could be passed sooner than in two-three years,” he stated.
As regards the withdrawal of the Order of the Republic, which was reportedly done with the aim of depriving Vlad Filat of the possibility of being amnestied on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the proclamation of independence, the lawyer said it is normal to withdraw the orders in such cases, but this is not mandatory.
On June 27, Vlad Filat was sentenced to nine years in jail for influence peddling and passive corruption and will have a part of his property confiscated. The sentence was passed by an ordinary court of law after eight months of remand detention. Vlad Filat was arrested following self-denouncing statements made by the mayor of Orhei town Ilan Shor, who said that he gave US$250 million bribe to the former Premier for particular services.
