FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG THE PRE-VETTING PHASES: THE UNSEEN FACE OF JUSTICE REFORM that, in fact, these are the members of political parties from Moldova who cannot be appointed(Law 180 of July 7, 2023). First, they could not even appoint two international members out of three, and when they understood the mistake, they“interpreted” the law that it was possible. Post-factum. When will they understand in Moldova that the laws are not retroactive?” The reaction of the Vetting Commission, which took over the functions of the Pre-Vetting Commission, was that mem­bers who were not part of political parties in the Republic of Moldova are not in incompatibility, given the interpretation made by Law 180 of 07.07.2023. 137 This explanation, howev­er, does not take into account the fact that Law 180/2023 is subsequent to the appointment of the members in question to the Commission, and the interpretation laws do not apply retroactively. 138 5.8 Destruction of evaluation materials – intention to cover up politically motivated crimes? More than two years after the vote on Law 26/2022, on 31 July 2024, the PAS MP Vasile Gradinaru proposed to the Parliament the approval of an amendment, whereby the SCM and the SCP are to destroy all materials gathered by the Pre­Vetting Commission immediately after the completion of the evaluation. The proposal generated jokes and controversy, as it came at a time when new confirmations were obtained that the Secretariat of the Pre-Vetting Commission employs sev­eral persons connected to the Parliament, the Government, and the presidency. The impression has been created that the proposed amendment was, in reality, aimed not at protecting the personal data of the subjects of the evaluation but at hiding the traces of possible abuses committed during the evaluation, with the involvement of politicians. completion of the external evaluation of judges and prosecutors. However, the proposal was rejected by Parliament. Even so, the author of the given initiative, Vasile Gradinaru, believes that a le­gal provision is needed whereby the SCM and the SCP could“destroy” the in­formation submitted by the external evaluation commissions.[...] The Association of Judges of the Republic of Moldova expressed its deep con­cern and vehement disagreement with the controversial amendment. The As­sociation described it as“a serious violation of the fundamental principles of the rule of law and transparency in decision-making”. “The erasure and destruction of information gathered during the evaluation process prevents the authenticity of the evidence from being verified and jeop­ardizes the possibility of investigating abuses and errors committed during the process. The destruction of documents accumulated in the evaluation process prevents access to information that is essential for justice and society, making it impossible to verify the correctness and legality of the evaluations at a later stage,” reads a statement by the Judges’ Association. The organization under­lines that the removal of the documents compromises the right of defence of those evaluated, who will not be able to effectively challenge the decisions of the Evaluation Commission without access to the relevant information. “The adoption of this amendment sets a dangerous precedent for the manip­ulation and destruction of evidence in other legal contexts, undermining pub­lic confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. The amend­ment contradicts the recommendations of the Venice Commission, which emphasizes the importance of preserving evidence and documents to ensure transparency and accountability in the evaluation and justice processes,” the Judges’ Association further stresses.” 140 Conclusions of Chapter IV.‘Changing the rules of the game during the game’ − Frequent amendments to Law 26/2022 and changes in the pre-vetting procedure have eroded confidence in the evaluation process, creating an unstable and discriminato­ry legislative system. − The legislative changes that favoured the Pre-Vetting Commission had a negative impact on the rights of can­didates, who faced changing rules and difficulties in de­fending their integrity. CASE STUDY 19. MP Vasile Gradinaru introduces the amendment on the destruction of the Pre-Vetting Commission’s materials, which makes it impossible to verify the correctness and legality of the assessments Politik.md,“Controversial amendment stipulating the destruction of information accumulated by the Pre-Vetting Commission upon completion of the evaluation process of judges and prosecutors, rejected by Parliament – Vasile Gradinaru: We will return to the topic in the autumn”, 31 July 2024 139 Parliament has made several amendments to the Law on the selection of can­didates for membership of judges’ and prosecutors’ self-administrative bod­ies and the Law on the external evaluation of judges and prosecutors. The ini­tial version of the draft included an amendment that provoked discussions in the public space, especially among lawyers. The amendment provided for the destruction of all information gathered by the Pre-Vetting Commission upon − The legislative interventions have not only undermined the principles of the rule of law and transparent decision-mak­ing but have also undermined the credibility and objectiv­ity of the whole evaluation mechanism. Lessons learnt − A correct and fair process of extraordinary evaluation re­quires a stable, clear, and predictable legislative framework. − The legal framework for the evaluation of actors in the field of justice must guarantee the transparency of deci­sion-making, the accountability of the evaluating body, and the fundamental rights of those evaluated. 137 https://realitatea.md/nu-s-a-aflat-la-sefia-unui-partid-din-moldova-comisia-vetting-reactioneaza-la-dezvaluirile-judecatorului-turcan/ 138 Art.72 alin.(6) din Legea 100/2017 cu privire la actele normative. 139 https://politik.md/controversatul-amendament-care-prevede-distrugerea-informatiilor-acumulate-de-comisia-pre-vetting-la-finalizarea-procesu­lui-de-evaluare-a-judecatorilor-si-procurorilor-respins-de-parlament/ 140 https://politik.md/controversatul-amendament-care-prevede-distrugerea-informatiilor-acumulate-de-comisia-pre-vetting-la-finalizarea-procesu­lui-de-evaluare-a-judecatorilor-si-procurorilor-respins-de-parlament/ 46