On 14 May 2024, Tatiana RĂDUCANU announced her resignation from the Pre-vetting and Vetting Commissions, the bodies responsible for verifying the integrity of judges and prosecutors. More than half of the judges and prosecutors evaluated so far have not passed this verification, and soon the evaluation of anti-corruption prosecutors shall begin.

Ms. Răducanu is a former judge of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ). She is known to everyone as an honest and courageous person, and, as a member of the Superior Council of Magistracy, she was among the few who opposed the efforts of politicians to control the judiciary.

The resignation was announced a few hours after a letter of the Chief Anti-Corruption Prosecutor, Veronica DRAGALIN, appeared on a portal that previously promoted the image of Plahotniuc. The letter, signed on the morning of 14 May 2024, is addressed to people who have not passed the pre-vetting. According to this letter, on 30 April 2024, the Anti-Corruption Prosecution initiated a criminal investigation and suspects Ms. Răducanu of corruption, abuse of power, and affiliation with Veaceslav PLATON and Ilan ȘOR. The suspicion is based on correspondence between two controversial individuals that took place ten years ago. Ms. Răducanu emphasized in her resignation letter that the accusations against her are false.

Publication of the data of a criminal case is illegal. At least one former chief prosecutor is criminally accused of such acts by anti-corruption prosecutors. The initiation of a criminal case targeting a member of the Vetting Commission by anti-corruption prosecutors is also illegal. According to the law, this is the exclusive competence of the Prosecutor General, and the opening of criminal investigation can only take place with the Commission’s consent. A preliminary check of public information would easily establish that the main hypotheses put forward by the Chief Anti-Corruption Prosecutor are not true. Ms. Răducanu voted to lift Judge Colenco’s immunity and did not run for the presidency of the SCM. Addressing the letter to individuals who failed the vetting, just two weeks after the start of the criminal case, without a check of public data and relying solely on discussions between two controversial individuals that took place ten years ago, betrays the true purpose of this move – the blocking by anti-corruption prosecutors of their integrity vetting, a reform with which Veronica DRAGALIN publicly declared she disagrees. This fact is also confirmed by the latest reaction of the Anti-Corruption Prosecution Office.

The vetting of prosecutors and judges was greenlighted by the Venice Commission and is supported by the European Union. This verification is carried out based on clear criteria and fair procedures. Honest individuals have nothing to fear, as confirmed by the new composition of the SCM and CSP and over 10 candidates for the SCJ have passed it.

Vetting largely occurs due to the inaction of anticorruption bodies, including the Anti-Corruption Prosecution, which has led to the flourishing of corruption in the judiciary. Integrity vetting aims to address the problem of corruption in the judiciary, and honest anti-corruption prosecutors cannot be against it.

We encourage prosecutors to efficiently investigate any credible suspicion of corruption or abuse, regardless of the suspect. These investigations can have only one purpose, holding criminals to account and discouraging similar actions. This goal can only be achieved if the investigation is conducted in accordance with the law, and the validity of the accusations is determined in the courtroom, not in the press or on social media.