A criminal investigation for illicit enrichment and interference in the execution of justice is set to be opened against Ion Druţă, the President of Moldova’s Supreme Court of Justice. Over the past five years, the magistrate’s immediate family and in-laws have purchased several pieces of real estate in Chișinău valued at over 742,000 dollars – which the authorities claim are creating discrepancies between their assets and declared legal income. What’s more, a search of Ion Druţă’s office revealed memos with strict instructions directing the decisions of the judges responsible for overseeing a number of high profile criminal cases.

A judge since 1994, Ion Druţă was promoted to Moldova’s Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ) in 2016, and became CSJ President in April 2018. However, Druţă recently tendered his resignation after two criminal cases were opened against him: one for illicit enrichment and another for interference in the execution of justice.

According to the Prosecutor General’s Office, the criminal prosecution of Ion Druță was based on analysis from the Information and Security Service (SIS), which looked at the properties Druță’s family members had acquired and found “an essential discrepancy between these assets and [their] declared legal income.” 

Following searches of the judge’s office at the Supreme Court of Justice (conducted while he was abroad) in September, the prosecutors seized cash from unknown sources, an office computer (to verify the relevant information) and documents deemed necessary for investigation.

ZdG’s own investigation was able to identify the properties Druţă’s family members acquired in recent years and obtain access to several incriminating memos  from the magistrate’s office at the CSJ. Here’s what we found. 

Judge’s family acquires over 742,000 dollars in Chișinău real estate 

Officially, neither the judge nor his wife, Lilia Druţă, have made any significant purchases in the last three years. The two live in the Malina Mică neighborhood of Chișinău, in a house built in 2011 and valued at around 228,000 dollars (over 4 million lei). But according to ZdG’s investigation, Druţă’s parents, daughter and in-laws have acquired several valuable apartments and commercial spaces in newly erected buildings in downtown Chișinău. 

Ion Druță’s daughter, Cristina Druță, is one of the owners of Lic-Dana SRL – a pharmaceutical services company that Druță’s mother-in-law, Victoria Ciumacu, co-founded along with a relative by the name of Natalia Turcan in 1999. Cristina Druță took over Natalia Turcan’s share of the company in November 2017.

Although she is just 28 years old, Cristina Druță has been acquiring high end real estate in downtown Chișinău for the past eight years. 

In December 2011 (when she was just 20 years old), she signed an investment contract with a company called Exclusiv Immobil, for the purchase of a 164 square meter commercial space in a complex under construction on downtown Chișinău’s Serghei Lazo Street. Cristina Druță took possession of the space in 2014 when the block was put into operation. 

Located just one street over from the capital’s main street, Ștefan cel Mare Boulevard, the cost of one square meter of commercial space in the area exceeds 1,000 euros. As such, the property Cristina Druță bought on Serghei Lazo Street has an estimated value of at least 164,000 euros. 

• The Boulevard of Incompetence: A Chronology of an Unresolved Issue

Then at age 23 (in August 2014), Cristina Druță signed another investment contract with the construction firm Urbanconstruct, for two apartments located on the fourth floor of a residential block under construction on Independence Street. The properties were signed over to her in December 2015 and shortly afterwards, in February 2016, they were officially registered in her name by the Property Registry. 

The Urbanconstruct company sold the apartments in the block on Independence Street at prices ranging from 670 to 720 euros per square meter. And since Cristina Druță acquired two apartments (one two-floor, 75.7 square meter flat and another one with an area of 42.9 square meters), the estimated cost of the properties is about 80,000 euros in total.

In November 2016, she also purchased a 14.5 square meter storage room in the same apartment block, as well as two parking lots, 15 square meters each. All total, the value of these five properties is estimated in excess of 90,000 euros. 

Judge Druță’s in-laws, Victoria and Pavel Ciumacu, are both in their mid-70s and have been retired for many years. The couple have lived all their lives in Bălți, but in recent years began making large investments in the real estate market in Chișinău.

In February 2010, the couple signed an investment contract for a 184.6 square meter commercial space in a block on Serghei Lazo Street in Chișinău. This is the same block where Druță’s daughter made an investment in 2011. They took possession of the space – with an estimated market value of approximately 200,000 euros – in August 2014. 

In April 2016, following an exchange contract, Judge Druță’s in-laws took possession of two other properties in a residential block built by Basconslux Company on Melestiu Street. The properties are located in the immediate vicinity of a block the same company built for the employees of the prosecutor’s office. 

Although the property is not yet operational, the market price of the two spaces (one 164.8 meters square and the other 20 meters square) has an estimated market value between 100,000 and 150,000 euros. 

Pavel and Victoria Ciumacu also own three other properties on Chișinău’s Independence Street (purchased between 2002 and 2004) which were leased to the Hungarian network of pharmacies Gedeon Richter.

The judge’s own parents, Serghei and Ana Druță (aged 77 and 69 respectively), also purchased an apartment in Chisinău a few years ago, despite living in Inești village, in Moldova’s Telenești district. According to residents of the village, the retired couple settled there permanently a few years ago, after Ana Druță returned from Italy, where she had lived and worked for several years.

The couple signed an investment contract for the construction of an 80 square meter apartment in April 2016, located on Chișinău’s Melestiu Street, in the block built for the employees of the prosecutor’s office. Ion Druță’s parents officially took possession of the property in December 2016, when it became operational. Its market price is between 45,000 and 50,000 euros.

According to Eugen Rurac, the prosecutor overseeing the criminal case against Ion Druță for illicit enrichment, the criminal prosecution is almost complete.

“In a short while, the case will be sent to the court. We are still waiting for several answers from abroad. Depending on how soon these answers will arrive, the case will be sent to court at the end of November, early December,” he said.

However, Druță’s family members have not been invited in for hearings, because their status in the case has yet to be determined

“As witnesses, they have the right not to make statements, and we have not yet made the decision as to whether they appear as accomplices. So, they haven’t been heard yet,” Rurac explained.

Druță, on the other hand, has already had a hearing. 

“He stated that the goods were purchased with his relatives’ income from abroad and that he is not the beneficiary,” the prosecutor said. 

Criminal case #2: interference in judicial autonomy

Judge Ion Druță is also at risk of being investigated in another criminal case for interference in the execution of justice. The case is based on several documents that law enforcement officers found when Druță’s office was searched in September. The memos found in his office contained strict instructions directing judges to adopt particular decisions in a number of high profile cases.

ZdG was able to access a number of the incriminating documents from the magistrate’s office, which revealed explicit instructions for the judges handling the case against businessman Valentin Eșanu, a case involving an assassination attempt on Moldova’ richest oligarch, former Democratic Party leader Vlad Plahotniuc, as well as the case against alleged drug trafficker Oleg Pruteanu (alias Oleg Borman). 

One such memo on Valentin Eșanu dated October 5, 2018 contained details of cases targeting the businessman who became known to the public after declaring several times that the criminal cases in his name were fabricated. 

The end of the document stated: “based on the above, it is proposed: to reject the lawyers’ requests to connect the active cases. To expedite the examination of the case at Ciocana District Court, Chișinău, featuring only Valentin Eșanu, and issue, within a maximum of two months, a final sentence of imprisonment.” 

Following the change of government in June 2019, Valentin Eșanu was released after almost two years in prison for various offences including tax evasion and attempted obstruction of justice. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) included him on a list of politically persecuted individuals while he was in detention. 

A similar document, dated October 4, 2018, references the case of the alleged assassination attempt on Vlad Plahotniuc. The document called for the “expedited examination of the case, leading to a decision allowing the prosecutor’s appeal and the conviction of the defendants Zabolotnii Valerian, Melnic Igor, Sevcenco Dmitrii, Chirov Stepan, Cojocari Ivan and Dragulea Vasile on all charges.” 

At the time, the criminal case was under examination at the Chișinău Court of Appeal. Over a month and a half later, on December 18, 2018, all of the defendants in the case received harsher penalties, at the prosecutors’ request. 

Another memo, also dated October 4, 2018, references a case under the management of the Prosecutor’s Office for Combating Organized Crime and Special Cases (PCCOCS). The case in question was against Oleg Pruteanu (a.k.a Oleg Borman), Roman Slutu, Ion Corcodel and Alexandr Onișciuc, who were tried for illegal drug trafficking and other crimes. 

• The Borman Case and the Absence of Țuțu and Plahotniuc Cases

“Given the fact that the ‘Borman’ case is a complex one and with many participants, and both the PCCOCS prosecutors and the police and prosecutors from other countries, including the E.U., worked to accumulate evidence, a more efficient involvement of the court is required,” the note read. “Based on the foregoing, it is proposed: to appoint court sessions in the ‘Borman’ case on a daily basis, for a maximum period of time, and, in case lawyers chosen by the defendants are absent, lawyers from the office should be invited for the examination of the cases; to adopt a decision allowing the prosecutor’s appeal and condemn Zaharov Anton on all the prosecution charges.”

Igor Hlopețchi, one of the lawyers of the defendants from the “Borman” case, confirmed for ZdG that in October 2018 there were several attempts to organize sessions on consecutive days, as well as prosecutors’ appeals to expedite the case. However, the lawyers objected, appealing to the Constitutional Court and so no sentenced has been issued in this case up until today.

That being said, according to information from the court portal, Anton Zaharov, whose case was examined separately in the “Borman” case, was sentenced to 20 years in prison in April 2019, after the judges Oxana Robu, Igor Mânăscurtă and Alexandru Spoiala allowed the prosecutors’ appeal. 

In doing so, they suspended Zharov’s initial sentence (issued under Judge Grigore Manoli), which was just three years in prison. 

A final memos references several cases under examination by the CSJ, including the Baștovoi case, involving a former deputy incriminated for 180,000 dollars in damages to gas magnate Anatol Stati’s company.  Sources close to the investigation told ZdG that there were, in fact, many more memos containing similar instructions in other high profile cases. 

“Mr Druţă pleads innocent.”

Although the criminal proceedings have been initiated against Ion Druță for interfering in the execution of justice, this requires the consent of the members of the Superior Council of Magistrates (CSM) to lift the judge’s immunity repeatedly.

“The criminal case is not open yet. The startup agreement was requested. The documents were found during the searches in the presence of the CSJ representatives and the criminal investigation group,” confirmed prosecutor Eugen Rurac, avoiding giving details on the subject.

That being said, a notification regarding the lifting of immunity of “a judge” was filed at the Superior Council of Magistrates (CSM) Chancellery on October 22, 2019.

“Unfortunately, I can’t provide any names nor can I reveal the content [of the notification]. In this case, several judges are targeted, said interim President of the CSM, Dorel Musteață, without identifying the judges in question.

The CSM has now postponed its meeting for the second week in a row, after the last one was cancelled due to a lack of quorum. Apparently, the member Parliament appointed to the CSM, Ion Postu, has missed the last two sittings.

“He called us and announced he couldn’t come. We phoned him to agree on another time but he did not answer. This creates the impression that the CSM meetings are being intentionally boycotted, in an attempt to make the CSM unproductive,” Musteață said.

Meanwhile, Ion Druță’s lawyer, Alexandru Tabarcea, says they still don’t know the details of the potential case for interfering in the execution of justice. 

“At this moment, we do not know the details. The Prosecutor General’s request for the lifting of immunity is required. We have no details about the criminal procedure, because at the present stage there is only a criminal procedure and no criminal case, respectively, we do not know anything about the suspicions or accusations alleged against Mr Druţă. As for the memos with instructions, we did not examine them, so we know nothing about their content,” Druță’s lawyer said. 

His client is, however, pleading innocent in the case against him for illicit enrichment.“Mr Druţă pleads innocent. He presented his position in front of the criminal prosecution body. Obviously, the particular goods were purchased by the members of his family. The accusation bases its assumptions only on the fact that the members of his family hold real estate; thus the criminal act exceeds the presumption of innocence stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Code. As such, we are going to prove that he is not the owner nor the beneficiary,” Tabarcea said.