
N7.T2 – Accountability of Judges and Prosecutors in Montenegro – A Rare Occurrence
08/05/2025
N7.T4 – Closing Chapter 23: What Else Does Montenegro Need to Do in the Area of Judiciary?
08/05/2025N7.T3 – Vetting in Moldova – Three Candidates Rejected in March

HRA NEWSLETTER 7 – TOPIC 3
The vetting process—an initiative for assessing the financial, ethical, and professional integrity of judges and prosecutors, long discussed in Montenegro—is already being fully implemented in the Republic of Moldova.
In March of this year, Moldova’s Judicial Evaluation Commission concluded that two female judges and one judicial inspector, who was a candidate for the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ), failed the vetting process. Conversely, six judges successfully passed the vetting, and one judge, who had previously failed the pre-vetting process twice, received a positive opinion from the vetting commission this time.
To recap, Moldova initiated its vetting process in April 2022, beginning with integrity assessments of candidates for top positions in the Superior Judicial Council, the Superior Council of Prosecutors, and their respective committees. This initial phase was managed by the Pre-Vetting Commission.
Simultaneously, a separate process commenced for vetting judges and candidates for the Supreme Court, along with judges and prosecutors in key positions. This specific phase started in July 2023, while checks for those already in key positions began in May and June 2024.
The decisions made by the Pre-Vetting Commission do not directly impact a candidate’s current position; however, they do preclude individuals from becoming members of either of the two judicial councils mentioned above.
In contrast, failing the main vetting process carries significant consequences. A judge or prosecutor who fails is dismissed from their position. Furthermore:
– They cannot hold the position of judge or prosecutor for a duration of 5 to 7 years after the vetting decision becomes final;
– They forfeit the right to special severance pay granted to judges and prosecutors;
– They lose access to a special pension or severance package reserved for judges and prosecutors;
– However, they retain the right to a general pension or severance based on regular conditions and years of service.
Both the pre-vetting and vetting procedures in Moldova are structured as one-time, extraordinary processes and are not conducted on a regular basis.
HRA NEWSLETTER 7
- N7.T1 – Vesna Medenica Free to Travel Throughout Montenegro; Eight Judges Testify in Her Favor
- N7.T2 – Accountability of Judges and Prosecutors in Montenegro – A Rare Occurrence
- N7.T3 – Vetting in Moldova – Three Candidates Rejected in March
- N7.T4 – Closing Chapter 23: What Else Does Montenegro Need to Do in the Area of Judiciary?
- N7.T5 – Salary Increase for Judges and State Prosecutors
- N7.T6 – The Judicial Council Did Not Allow Judges from the Special Department of the High Court in Podgorica to “Escape”
- N7.T7 – Tensions Between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court: A Joint Meeting as a Possible Solution
- N7.T8 – Human Rights Action Participates in Meeting with Venice Commission
- N7.BN – BRIEF NEWS