Place of Prosecutor General is in composition of SSC, opinions

The presidential administration will provide the Constitutional Court with the minutes of the August 10 meeting of the Supreme Security Council (SSC), if this is requested, PAS vice president Vladimir Bolea said after the Prosecutor General’s Office announced that they consider the prosecutor general should be excluded from the composition of the Council for the reason that in the last meeting of SSC, President Maia Sandu pointed to the absence of criminal proceedings against opposition leaders, IPN reports.

Both the President and the Minister of Justice deny the fact that they demanded to take legal action against representatives of the parliamentary opposition in that meeting. The PAS vice president said that to shed light in this case, the presidential administration can furnish the CC judges with the minutes of that meeting.

“The place of the Prosecutor General is in the composition of the Supreme Security Council. We repeatedly stated that corruption is the most serious threat to national security and the Prosecutor General’s Office is an instrument for fighting this scourge,” Vladimir Bolea stated in the program “Secrets of the Power” on JurnalTV channel.

Four his part, Ștefan Gligor, president of the Party of Change, expressed his bewildered at the Prosecutor General’s request to be excluded from SSC. The Prosecutor General is a key figure in this consultative entity.

“If the Prosecutor General does not take part in the meetings of the Supreme Security Council, what’s the purpose of this Council? The prosecution service is the spear point in the fight against corruption and organized crime and it should work hand in hand with SIS as SIS does not have prosecution powers. If these two institutions do not cooperate and do not communicate between them on security issues, if they do not communicate with the President who has the people’s mandate, the state becomes nonfunctional. Stoianoglo wants to show that he ignores the presidential institution,” stated Ștefan Gligor.

Political commentators also consider that the request to exclude the Prosecutor General from the composition of SSC is an attempt by the Prosecutor General to dissociate himself from the presidential administration.

“If the Prosecutor General had been removed from the composition of the Supreme Security Council, this would have been a reason for going to the Constitutional Court. This dispute turns into a guerrilla between the presidential administration and the Prosecutor General’s Office.  Now PGO, in the person of Stoianoglo, tries to isolate itself. This situation can be overcome only if PGO starts to function in accordance with the legal provisions. Stoianoglo should realize the wave of change in society and society’s expectations that the persons who committed acts of grand corruption should be held accountable,” stated Ion Tăbârță.

On September 14, Prosecutor General Alexandr Stoianoglo requested the Constitutional Court to establish the constitutionality of the legal provisions concerning the prosecutor general’s membership in the Supreme Security Council. He made reference to the last SCC meeting of August 10, in which the Council’s president reproached the prosecutor general for the absence of criminal proceedings against a number of persons, including representatives of the current parliamentary opposition, this also asked for a report on a number of pending criminal cases. Stoianoglo considers such an approach is inadmissible and against the law and it affects the principle of separation and balance of powers in the state.

Вы используете модуль ADS Blocker .
IPN поддерживается от рекламы.
Поддержи свободную прессу!
Некоторые функции могут быть заблокированы, отключите модуль ADS Blocker .
Спасибо за понимание!
Команда IPN.