The Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) should abandon the position of victim that is waiting for instructions from the other two state powers and should start to be really independent, suggest judges who are members of the Public Association “Voice of Justice”. In a news conference at IPN, the judges enumerated a number of subjects that, according to them, should be included in the agenda of the General Assembly of Judges.
According to judge Victoria Sanduța, president of the Administration Board of “Voice of Justice”, during the last mandates the SCM tacitly renounced a wide range of powers related to the self-management of the judiciary and built its position depending on the political conjuncture and the parliamentary majority. This is further inadmissible as the SCM is an apolitical body and is obliged to be independent.
Victoria Sanduța noted the SCM, as a judiciary self-managing body, should undertake a pro-active role and should submit the proposals and initiatives of persons and those concerning the management of the judicial system, should have a permanent dialogue with society and own capacity to credibly clean up the system. This should be also done by holding the General Extraordinary Assembly more often than once a year so as to be able to discuss priorities related to the self-management of the judiciary system.
According to the judge, the recent legislative proposals that refer to the work of the SCM didn’t take into account the Venice Commission’s opinion and the international standards on the independence of the judiciary. According to the Universal Charter of the Judge, the Council should be independent from the political class and most of the members should be judges elected by mates. There can also be other persons from civil society, not yet politicians.
Victoria Sanduța noted the hurried amendment of the legislation by insisting on the possibility of choosing the SCM president from among law professors is suspicious. The law professor chosen SCM president should renounce the post of professor as the post of SCM president is a managerial one.
She added that the judges have a very heavy workload. A judge has to examine over 1,500 cases. The SCM didn’t take enough measures to reduce the judges’ workload, but this is essential for ensuring the quality of justice.
Judge Ion Malanciuc, a founding member of the Administration Board of “Voice of Justice”, said the General Assembly of Judges should discuss the conviction of Moldova by the ECHR in a number of cases and the impact on the judicial system and should also address the “political cases” started against judges, the process of assessing judges and the extent to which this matches its goal.
Founding member Marina Curtiș stated that the agenda of the General Assembly of Judges should also include the transfer of judges and the disciplinary punishment of judges.
Judge Mihai Murguleț, a member of “Voice of Justice”, noted the Assembly should also discuss judges’ denouncements about the attempts to influence the solutions in cases handled by these, the superficial way of examining denouncements and the consequences suffered by denouncing judges.
The General Assembly of Judges was to take place on March 13, but was put off owing to the risk of infection with COVID-19.
