A lawyer has been convicted of influence peddling and using false official documents. Details from PG

Magistrates of the Chisinau Court, Buiucani seat, pronounced on Thursday, November 24, the sentence in a criminal case referred to justice by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (PA), concerning the actions of a lawyer from Chisinau municipality, who demanded and received money to exert influence on judges and prosecutors in a criminal case.

Thus, by that judgment, the court found the defendant guilty of committing the offence of influence peddling and she was released from criminal punishment in connection with the expiry of the statute of limitations. At the same time, according to the Prosecutor General’s Office, the defendant was found guilty of committing the offence provided for in Article 361 para. (1) of the Criminal Code, which refers to the possession and use of false official documents, and a fine of 30,000 lei and the deprivation of the right to practice law for a period of 4 years.

The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office started the criminal case in December 2016, after receiving a referral regarding the claim of the sum of 1500 euros and the advocate’s support of influencing the judges of the Rascani Court and the prosecutors of the Rascani Prosecutor’s Office in order to support and apply the amnesty act on the petitioner’s son, with the reduction of the sentence term in the unexecuted part and his early release. From the sum of 1500 euros claimed, on 8 February 2017, the sum of 600 euros was forwarded to the lawyer’s office under the control of the prosecution officers.

“At the same time, in order to attribute a legal character to the receipt of undue funds, the defendant made a legal assistance contract that showed signs of forgery, later found by the evidence administered in the criminal case (…). The defense requested the acquittal of the defendant on the grounds that her actions do not meet the elements of the offenses provided for in Articles 326 and 361 of the Criminal Code. The position of the prosecution coincided with that of the court as a result of the evidence submitted, which fully confirms the guilt of the defendant,” a statement by the Public Prosecutor’s Office said.

The criminal prosecution on this criminal case lasted 6 months and the trial lasted 4 years.