Home | Media | News | The judicial review of the decisions of the Superior Council of Prosecutors does not raise constitutional issues
The judicial review of the decisions of the Superior Council of Prosecutors does not raise constitutional issues
On 19 April 2018, the Constitutional Court of Moldova delivered a decision of inadmissibility on the constitutional review of Article 79 (2) of the Law no. 3 of 25 February 2016 on Prosecution. This article provides for the judicial review of the decisions of the Superior Council of Prosecutors to be exercised by the panel of judges examining challenges against the decisions of the Superior Council of Magistrates.
The exception of unconstitutionality underlying this case was raised by the former prosecutor Ivan Filimon, in a pending lawsuit before the Supreme Court of Justice. The author of the complaint claimed that the challenged provisions allow for a judicial review of the decisions of the Superior Council of Magistrates only in law, and thus access to justice and the right of defence of the prosecutors being limited.
The Court mentioned that this conclusion of the author does not derive from the clear text of the law. The Court emphasised that in order to shed light on the issue, when interpreting the law one should consider the entire range of rules of interpretation, particularly the rule providing that In claris non fit interpretatio (When [the law] is clear, it does not need interpretation) and the rule Ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere debemus (Where the law does not distinguish, neither should those who interpret it). The Court mentioned that the wording of the challenged legal text does grant the safeguards of a fair trial to the subjects it refers to.
Given the above-mentioned, the Court declared the complaint on the exception of unconstitutionality of Article 79 (2) of the Law on Prosecution inadmissible.
This is an English language courtesy translation of the original press-release in Romanian language.