Two other reasoned decisions on the non-promotion of the integrity assessment of two judges, candidates for positions in the CSM, have been published

Judges Stanislav Sorbalo and Natalia Clevadi, candidates for positions in the CSM, have accepted the publication of the decisions of the Pre-Vetting Commission on non-promotion of integrity assessment. The decisions were made public on Tuesday 7 January.

Stanislav Sorbalo, a judge at the Balti Court of Appeals, central seat, applied for membership of the CSM and the Disciplinary College of Judges and was heard by the Commission, while Natalia Clevadi, a candidate for the CSM, requested to be assessed without taking part in the public interview.

According to the reasoned decisions, the Commission found that the two magistrates did not meet the criteria of ethical integrity and/or the criteria of financial integrity, as serious doubts were found in this respect.

The Pre-Vetting Committee decided that magistrate Stanislav Sorbalo does not meet the integrity criteria, as serious doubts were found as to the candidate’s compliance with the ethical integrity criteria and he did not pass the assessment.

In 2008, the President of the CSM requested the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Stanislav Sorbalo, which resulted in the decision of the Disciplinary Board of 23 December 2008 to sanction the judge with a “warning” for violation of the obligation of impartiality and a serious breach of judicial ethics. The decision was based on the fact that the candidate had issued an order on 15 August 2008 declaring unlawful the searches of the office and home of a lawyer who had represented the candidate in another criminal case in 2007.

In the case of Natalia Clevadî, a judge in the Chisinau court, the commission established:

Wealth imbalance for 2016;
non-compliance with reference to the deposit of 38,000 euros in the candidate’s bank account in 2011;
undervaluation and non-payment of tax related to the capital increase following the sale of an apartment;
The Commission decided that the magistrate did not meet the integrity criteria as serious doubts were found about Natalia Clevadi’s compliance with the criteria of ethical and financial integrity and she did not pass the assessment.