Lawyer accuses MPs of shrinking from correctly applying Constitution

Veaceslav Turcan, the lawyer that asked the Parliament to impeach the President of Moldova for interfering in the activity of the judicial system, accuses the MPs of evading examining this subject, Info-Prim Neo reports. Late last year, Veaceslav Turcan requested the Supreme Court of Justice to issue an interlocutory decree ordering that the Parliament initiate the impeachment of President Vladimir Voronin for the reason that he exerts pressure on the judiciary. At a news conference on December 27, the lawyer said that during the hearing of a case in which he represented the defence, the judge, in the presence of people attending the trial, said several times that the President of Moldova is monitoring the given case and he is regularly called to report on the development of the case. As the Court refused to issue an interlocutory decree, on January 4, 2008 Veaceslav Turcan filed petitions describing the interferences of the Moldovan head of state to the Head of Parliament Marian Lupu, to parliamentary groups and non-affiliated MPs The petition was sent to the parliamentary commission for appointments and immunities for examination. The lawyer said that later he was informed that the MPs did not submit proposals for the President’s impeachment. But under the present legislation, the head of state can be dismissed by the vote of 2/3 of the MPs. He was also informed that the Superior Council of Magistrates will examine the judge’s assertions about the interference of the President in the activity of the judiciary system. “Consequently, the circle has closed. The reality is that the Superior Council of Magistrates has already examined a similar petition and made no decision, only supplemented the legal case with additional materials. It is hard to imagine that the things will be different this time,” Veaceslav Turcan said. According to the lawyer, the fact that the MPs sent the petition to the same court for examination can be described as avoidance to correctly implement the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova and the national legislation, and unwillingness to deal with this case. “We are astonished not by the inaction of the ruling party, but by the inaction of the Opposition that did not react to the happenings and seems disinclined to challenge the legality of the President’s actions as it should in a democratic state and a state of law, in compliance with the law,” the cited source stressed. Veaceslav Turcan levelled the accusations of interference in the judicial system at the chief of state after one of his clients, a former police officer accused of murder to order, was indicted. Turcanu said that the prosecution bodies repeatedly violated the legislation while investigating his client and that there are proofs confirming that the accused was brought into the country from Ukraine with violations of the extradition procedure and was subjected to torture at the police department. The legal case was examined three times by the Court of Appeals Chisinau and three times by the Supreme Court of Justice. On March 1, 2007 the defendant was acquitted and set free after serving four years in jail.