Judicial Vetting Commission concludes November hearing session

On the final day of the November hearing session, the Judicial Vetting Commission reviewed four cases: two files referred for reevaluation, one concerning a candidate for the position of judge at the Central Court of Appeal, and another involving a judge who held a leadership position in a trial court over the past five years.

The judges were heard as part of the external evaluation process, either to provide additional clarifications regarding potential integrity concerns identified by the Commission or—where no such concerns were found—to confirm the accuracy and current relevance of the information submitted during the evaluation.

In the case of judge Natalia Mămăligă, candidate for the position of judge at the Central Court of Appeal, the Commission did not identify any financial or ethical integrity concerns. Accordingly, the judge was invited to confirm that the data and information provided to the Commission during the vetting process remain accurate and up to date.

The case of judge Angela Braga, from the Central Court of Appeal, was referred for reevaluation by the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM), which rejected the Commission’s report in the context of a pending criminal case involving the judge. This matter was discussed during the hearing, held partially in a closed session, based on the legal arguments presented by the judge and accepted by Panel C of the Commission.

Regarding judge Igor Chiroșcă, also from the Central Court of Appeal, the case was similarly referred for reevaluation by the SCM. The hearing focused on circumstances related to a potential conflict of interest, and at the subject’s request, part of the session was held behind closed doors.

The hearing of Judge Sofia Ghidirim (Aramă), evaluated in relation to her leadership role over the past five years, focused on potential conflicts of interest and on aspects concerning the correct application of procedural rules in case adjudication. In this instance as well, part of the hearing was conducted in a closed session at the request of the judge.

In the coming period, the Commission will prepare vetting reports for all 11 cases examined during the three-day hearing session. These reports will include recommendations regarding the promotion or non-promotion of the judges within the external vetting process.

‍