USAID's Open Justice Project in Moldova — Quarterly Report, January 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020

QUARTERLY REPORT JANUARY 1, 2020 – MARCH 31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

April 30, 2020

DISCLAIMER

This document was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Millennium DPI Partners, LLC. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

QUARTERLY REPORT JANUARY I, 2020 – MARCH 31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by:

Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

Project Address: 27, Armeneasca str., 2nd floor Chisinau, Moldova MD 2012 E-mail: [email protected] USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... i LIST OF ACRONYMS ...... iii ABOUT THE PROJECT ...... iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OF THE QUARTER ...... 4 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 4 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 5 SECTION I – ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS ...... 6 Open Justice Public Outreach Activities ...... 6 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 7 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 12 SECTION II – REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES ...... 15 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 15 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 15 SECTION III – MAJOR ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER ...... 16 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 16 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 17 SECTION IV – PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ...... 18 SECTION V – ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT ...... 20

ANNEXES

Annex I. Report on the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan Annex II. Quarterly Budget Accrual Report Annex III. Project’s Newsletter Annex IV. Success Story Annex V. Project Deliverables

OBJECTIVE 1 1. Report on Training Activities on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (Activity 1.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

Page i USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

2. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during January 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 3. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during February 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 4. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during March 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

OBJECTIVE 2 5. Monitoring Report on the Quality of the Reasoning of the Superior Council of Magistracy's Decisions on the Selection and Careers of Judges for the Period from July 2019 to December 2019 (Activity 2.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 6. Report on the Roundtable Discussion on Use of the Videoconferencing Solution in Courts and Penitentiaries, January 31, 2020 (Activities 1.1.1.1 and 1.1.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 7. Synopsis of the Report on the Use of the Videoconferencing Solution in Moldovan Courts and Penitentiary Institutions (Activity 1.1.1.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

Page ii USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACA Agency for Court Administration CEPEJ European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice CMS Case Management System CoE Council of Europe CRO Court Reorganization and Optimization EAP Efficiency Action Plan EJSM Electronic Judicial Statistics Module ICMS Integrated Case Management System IT Information Technology JIB Judicial Inspection Board MOJ Ministry of Justice NIJ National Institute of Justice NPA National Penitentiary Agency SCM Superior Council of Magistracy USAID United States Agency for International Development

Page iii USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 ABOUT THE PROJECT

The United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID’s) Open Justice Project is a rule of law program designed to assist the Government of Moldova in improving the efficiency and transparency of the Moldovan judicial system and improving access to justice for the citizens of Moldova. The Project’s components include:

• Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System — Activities to align Case Management System (CMS) updates with recently passed laws complementing court reorganization and optimization (CRO) efforts, develop an overarching Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) to interface with existing and future databases in the justice sector, strengthen court administration processes, and build the capacity of the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) and the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) to refine legislation consistent with the goals and objectives of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy, in close collaboration with civil society. • Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System — Activities to advance and fully apply judicial ethics standards, disciplinary procedures, and a sound evaluation and merit-based judicial selection system to reduce corruption risks, strengthen professionalism and integrity, and hold the judiciary accountable for violations of ethical standards and the law.

In implementing these activities, the Open Justice Project works in partnership with key actors and stakeholders within Moldova’s justice system, primarily the SCM, the MOJ, the Agency for Court Administration (ACA), and courts throughout the country.

In addition to implementing court automation and modern information technology (IT) solutions in the judiciary, the Project is assisting its local counterparts to improve caseflow and court processes, streamline the court reorganization process, and publish court performance indicators and a statistical web report card online so that the media and citizens can readily access information about court performance. The Project also digitized all 740,824 decisions issued by the Chisinau District Court from 1965 to 2009. This will contribute to more consistent application of the law by enabling judges and staff from the court to reference and review these decisions online. Together, the Project’s activities will lead to the modernization and automation of Moldovan courts and significantly bolster judicial transparency and accountability.

The Project’s activities are led by a team of experienced national legal experts with in-depth knowledge of the Moldovan justice system. The team is supported by a wide range of international and national experts who provide specialized expertise.

Page iv USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 Open Justice Project by the Numbers — This Quarter

Court Automation

155 electronic court statistical 68 new functionalities of the 536 court employees reports developed ICMS based on courts’ trained online and on-site

feedback implemented on the use of the new

ICMS functionalities Efficiency

Two security audit and testing One monitoring report on One comprehensive report reports on the ICMS developed the quality of reasoning of on the use of the the SCM’s decisions on the videoconferencing system selection and careers of judges in all national courts and penitentiaries developed submitted to the SCM Transparency

Three reports on random case 771 people informed about the 1,000 posters on new ICMS distribution developed and new electronic applications used benefits printed to be published on the ACA’s webpage by the judiciary through articles distributed to courts and social media posts

Page v USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Open Justice Project is pleased to present its second Quarterly Report for USAID’s 2020 Fiscal Year, covering the period from January 1, 2020 to March 31, 2020. This report highlights the Project’s major accomplishments to date and describes progress made toward the Project’s goals of advancing the Moldovan justice system’s efficiency, transparency, and accountability.

This Quarterly Report begins with a list of key achievements, followed by a description of specific activities and results attained under each of the Project’s two objectives. The subsequent performance management section addresses progress toward completion of the Project’s targets. The report also includes a budget execution section and an administration and project management section, along with all of the deliverables prepared during the reporting period. A Report on the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan is included as Annex I.

Under Objective 1, the Project continued to implement several major activities that will enhance court automation and bring innovative IT solutions into the Moldovan justice sector, thus enhancing its efficiency, transparency, and accountability. The use of IT solutions — which allow courts to continue examining urgent cases remotely in situations like the current state of emergency, declared by the Moldovan Parliament from March 17, 2020 through May 15, 2020 to combat the spread of COVID–19 infections — is especially timely and important. The videoconferencing capability provided by the Project is a tool that, according to Ruling No. 1 of the Moldova Commission on the State of Emergency, courts must use to examine criminal cases involving parties in detention and civil cases that cannot be suspended.

Expanding the type of cases that courts can examine remotely through videoconferencing was the Project’s focus long before the state of emergency was declared. In order to collect supporting data and consult the opinions of stakeholders in this regard, in December 2019–January 2020, the Project developed and sent questionnaires to all courts and penitentiaries asking about successes, challenges, and recommendations pertaining to the use of videoconferencing for remote trials in which inmates are parties. On January 31, 2020, the Project organized a roundtable that gathered 33 participants, including representatives of the SCM, the ACA, the National Penitentiary Agency (NPA), judges, chiefs of court secretariats, and guardians from penitentiaries to discuss the challenges and successes in using the videoconferencing equipment for conducting remote trials. As a result of the roundtable, Open Justice drafted a comprehensive report with findings, recommendations, and actions to be carried out by the stakeholders to institutionalize and extend the use of videoconferencing to more case types, in all courts and penitentiaries. Open Justice will submit the final version of the report to the SCM, ACA, and NPA in the next quarter. The Project will also continue to support the SCM, ACA, and NPA to expand, as much as possible, videoconferencing to trials in criminal cases and specific civil cases that cannot be suspended during the COVID–19 pandemic.

Also, during the reporting period, the Project’s subcontracted IT company, Alfa Soft, developed, tested, and implemented 68 new ICMS functionalities, as requested by court users. In addition, Open Justice started developing the technical preconditions for implementing the E-File Module across the entire country, which will expand the filing of online lawsuits to jurists representing legal entities, not just licensed attorneys, as is currently the case.

To abolish paper statistical reports, the Project also developed, refined, and tested 155 electronic statistical reports for the district courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court of Justice. Starting

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 in April 2020, three pilot courts (the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal) will no longer use paper statistical reports. According to the ACA’s letter dated March 27, 2020, the use of electronic statistical reports became a high-priority issue under the recent public health concerns related to the COVID–19 pandemic. Consequently, the rest of the courts will gradually eliminate paper statistical reports during the current fiscal year.

The Project continued to offer significant assistance to ICMS users to facilitate better use of the system. Thus, throughout January–March 2020, Open Justice processed 466 requests for assistance from courts users on how to use ICMS functionalities. As part of its capacity building efforts, Open Justice also trained 536 judges, chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, and clerks. The training activities, which focused mainly on the use of the new ICMS, were conducted both online, using the videoconferencing system, and offline at the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the Chisinau District Court. They also covered aspects such as electronic statistical reports and the anonymization of personal data in the ICMS. In light of the prohibitions of large group gatherings and the closing of public venues under the current COVID–19 state of emergency, the Project expects to continue delivering training sessions online.

In January 2020, the Project succeeded in seconding a consultant to the Judicial Inspection Board (JIB) after several months of the SCM’s reluctance to undertake new activities due to tensions over the legitimacy of its current composition. During January–March 2020, the Project’s consultant conducted 10 training sessions for 13 SCM representatives and JIB inspectors on the use of the ICMS and interpreting the data available via its random distribution module. In addition, the consultant analyzed the monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts for the months of January 2020 and February 2020, and offered to support the JIB inspectors in drafting nine information requests related to alleged manipulations in case distribution.

During the reporting period, Project subcontractor Alfa Soft also developed and presented the prototype of the Media Server System — a media library solution that will allow secure storage and easy search and retrieval of court audio files. At the ACA’s request, the Project will also purchase a storage solution for the 500 TB of audio files of court hearings. Together, these steps will ensure full integration of court audio files with the ICMS and the E-File Module, thus allowing case parties and their lawyers to remotely access the audio files from their case trials via the E-File Module. Currently, case parties and their lawyers can access the case audio records only after purchasing a CD of the audio recording files for a payment of 20 Moldovan Lei.

IT subcontractor Omega Trust conducted the initial external security audit and security testing of the ICMS and submitted two reports with conclusions and recommendations. The initial security testing report identified 10 vulnerabilities in the new ICMS, out of which only one was a critical security vulnerability. By March 2020, Alfa Soft had already fixed 9 out of the 10 identified security vulnerabilities, including the critical security vulnerability, which previously made it easier for past users to log into the system based on their saved and stored initial authentication data. The ICMS’s security has now been enhanced, and it no longer allows log-ins based on previous user authentication data, thus preventing ill-intended users to exploit this previous security vulnerability. Alfa Soft will continue to assist the ACA to address system vulnerabilities throughout April–May 2020. The second and final security audit and security test are planned for the next quarter and will ensure that all ICMS vulnerabilities are identified and fully addressed.

Page 2 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

To support the ACA’s efforts to upgrade and maintain the ICMS beyond the life of the Project, Open Justice also began developing a draft IT Infrastructure Action Plan, which will be submitted for review to the ACA/MOJ next quarter.

Open Justice continued to closely monitor developments pertaining to the new Strategy for Ensuring the Independence and Integrity of the Justice Sector for 2020–2023. In January 2020, the MOJ published the first draft of the strategy. Next quarter, Open Justice will provide feedback on the draft strategy per the MOJ’s request and assist in developing a related action plan for its implementation.

Under Objective 2, Open Justice continued to monitor the MOJ’s efforts to implement planned reforms of the judiciary and develop a new mechanism for the extra-judiciary evaluation procedure. On February 25, 2020, Open Justice participated at the first round of public consultations regarding the new draft law on evaluations of judges and prosecutors. Upon the MOJ’s request, Open Justice will provide further assistance to develop a new mechanism for extra-judiciary evaluation during the next quarter.

The Project also continued efforts aimed at improving the institutional capacity of the SCM and its subordinated bodies. On January 10, 2020, Open Justice had a working meeting with SCM members on the implementation of the updated Efficiency Action Plan (EAP) for the SCM and its subordinated bodies, which Open Justice developed during Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020. As a result, the SCM expressed its commitment to build the JIB inspectors’ capacity to use the data in the ICMS for monitoring random case distribution and to investigate cases of alleged case assignment manipulations.

Open Justice finalized the Project’s monitoring report on the quality of the reasoning of the SCM's decisions on the selection and careers of judges for the period from July 2019 to December 2019. The report was submitted to the SCM and the Judicial Selection Board for feedback. In addition, at the SCM’s request, Open Justice will provide assistance in developing criteria for assessing the performance of judicial candidates during interviews conducted by SCM members. The Project will perform this activity during the next reporting period.

In late January 2020, the Project contracted IT Lab to improve the Courts’ Web Portal user experience based on feedback collected by the ACA from litigants. During this quarter, the Project held four meetings with representatives of the ACA/MOJ. As a result, IT Lab made the first version of the upgraded Portal available to the ACA/MOJ for testing in late March 2020. Open Justice plans on finalizing the implementation of this activity during the next quarter. Open Justice also worked on refining the Web Report Card according to the latest ICMS upgrades, in collaboration with the SCM, the ACA/MOJ, and the courts. The Project expects that Alfa Soft will finish refining the Web Report Card during the next quarter. The Web Report Card will list court performance data for general public access.

During Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020, the Project offered outreach assistance to the ACA/MOJ and the SCM to inform the general public about the benefits of using the videoconferencing system in trials allowing the remote participation of inmates, which provided significant savings and reduced delays and postponements. The Project also printed 1,000 bilingual A4 posters (Romanian and Russian) on the benefits of the ICMS, which will be distributed to litigating parties via the courts. This information will be especially important during the COVID–19 pandemic, when social contact will be reduced. Overall, during the reporting period, Open Justice informed 771 people about the benefits of the E-Systems used by the judiciary.

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OF THE QUARTER

OBJECTIVE 1: INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

During the reporting period, under Objective I, the Open Justice Project:

• Developed and implemented 68 new ICMS functionalities • Updated the ICMS User Guide with descriptions of the new functionalities, submitted it to the ACA/MOJ, and made it available online to all ICMS users • Processed 466 requests for assistance from court users on ICMS functionalities • Delivered a total of 31 online and on-site training sessions on ICMS functionalities and electronic statistical reports for 536 ICMS users, including court leadership teams, judges, and court staff • Conducted six working meetings with the ACA/MOJ on the Electronic Judicial Statistics Module (EJSM), and finalized the refinement of 155 electronic statistical reports in ICMS • Submitted revised draft amendments to the SCM Instruction on electronic statistical reporting for the SCM’s approval • Developed three Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts via the ICMS for January–March 2020 and presented them to the ACA/MOJ and SCM • Assisted the SCM and ACA/MOJ in following up on nine information requests for courts regarding alleged manipulations in the ICMS’s random case distribution • Developed one external security audit report and one security testing report on the ICMS and fixed 9 out of 10 identified ICMS vulnerabilities • Started to upgrade the centralized solutions for the audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida) to decrease storage requirements • Submitted a list of ICMS data to be monitored via the ICMS database monitoring solution to the ACA/MOJ and developed a scope of work for the ACA/MOJ to contract an IT specialist who will serve as IT solution administrator • Organized a roundtable to discuss the results of two surveys conducted in courts and penitentiaries to identify problem areas in institutionalizing the use of videoconferencing for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

The following activities were the Project’s major achievements under Objective 2:

• Conducted, in cooperation with the NIJ, three training sessions for 46 court staff representatives on how to correctly enter judicial case information and use the EJSM and European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) instruments • Conducted 10 trainings for 13 representatives of the SCM and JIB inspectors on the use of data in the ICMS Performance Dashboard, the EJSM, and the random distribution module • Completed one monitoring report on the quality of the reasoning of the SCM’s decisions on the selection and careers of judges for the period of July 2019 to December 2019 and submitted it to the SCM for feedback • Carried out three on-site visits to the Cahul and Orhei District Courts and the Balti Court of Appeal to monitor the use of the videoconferencing solution in hearings related to various detainees’ complaints about detention conditions • Printed 1,000 posters on the new ICMS benefits to be distributed to court users via the courts

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 SECTION I – ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS

OPEN JUSTICE PUBLIC OUTREACH ACTIVITIES

MORE MOLDOVAN CITIZENS ARE AWARE OF THE BENEFITS OF THE VIDEOCONFERENCING SYSTEM

Open Justice continues to inform the public about the Project’s assistance and the benefits of the modern technologies used by the judiciary. Thus, during the reporting period, Open Justice produced and published, on the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, an article about the efficiency of using videoconferencing in trials.

The article informed website visitors about the use of videoconferencing in trials to allow the remote participation of inmates who are defendants, which has provided significant savings and reduced delays and postponements. Figure I – Screenshot of the thematic justice website Open Justice was also active on its social media channels, www.justitietransparenta.md publishing one post about the videoconferencing system and the importance of its use on a national scale. The Project’s website and social network posts reached 771 citizens.

The aim of these materials is to inform the public about the modern technologies available in courts and the way in which the videoconferencing system contributes to more efficient and speedy justice and better court services. At the same time, the published information highlighted the courts’ and penitentiaries’ proactive approach to embracing technological innovation in order to take full advantage of its benefits.

ICMS OUTREACH AIMS TO INFORM MOLDOVANS ABOUT ITS BENEFITS

During the reporting quarter, Open Justice printed 1,000 bilingual A4 posters (in Romanian and Russian) on the benefits of the ICMS, for distribution to all court visitors when the courts re-open for regular court trials.

The Project will also publish the poster on its thematic website, www.justitietransparenta.md, to raise awareness of how the new ICMS speeds the administration of justice and improves court efficiency and transparency by instantly delivering and displaying up-to-date judicial information on the Courts’ Web Portal.

This information will be especially important during the COVID– 19 pandemic when social contact will be reduced. Building Figure 2 – ICMS poster printed in awareness that case information (e.g., trial schedule, rulings, Romanian and Russian

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 decisions, etc.) is available on an online platform via the ICMS will reduce the number of parties who need to come to courts, while still keeping them informed about postponed cases and new trial dates. This outreach effort will also raise the visibility of Open Justice’s efforts to advance the complex process of court automation via cutting-edge technologies, and its efforts to support the Moldovan judiciary in becoming an example of good practices in this field.

OBJECTIVE 1: INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

SUB-OBJECTIVE 1.1: COURT REORGANIZATION AND OPTIMIZATION IMPLEMENTED

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued to support justice sector institutions in institutionalizing the use of videoconferencing to accelerate CRO implementation and provide significant savings in time and resources.

After analyzing feedback received from questionnaires completed by national courts and penitentiaries during December 2019–January 2020, the Project organized a follow-up roundtable on January 31, 2020 to present the results of the questionnaires, evaluate the use of the videoconferencing solution, and identify problematic areas and possible solutions to institutionalize and extend the use of videoconferencing in all national courts and penitentiaries. As a result of the roundtable — which gathered 33 participants from the SCM, ACA, NPA, judges, courts, penitentiaries, and development partners — Open Figure 3 – Roundtable on the use of the videoconferencing system for inmates’ remote participation in trials Justice developed the first draft of a comprehensive report with findings, recommendations, and actions to be taken by stakeholders to institutionalize and extend the use of videoconferencing to other case categories in all national courts and penitentiaries. To assist with institutionalizing the use of videoconferencing in all national courts and penitentiaries, Open Justice will submit the final version of the report to the SCM, ACA/MOJ, and NPA during the next quarter. In addition, the Project will continue to support the SCM, ACA/MOJ, and NPA to expand the application of videoconferencing to conduct trials in specific civil and criminal cases that will not be suspended during the COVID–19 pandemic.

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued to closely monitor developments pertaining to the new Strategy for Ensuring the Independence and Integrity of Justice Sector 2020–2023. In January 2020, the MOJ published the first draft of the Strategy and submitted it to the Council of Europe (CoE) for review. The draft refers to several key aspects of the Project’s activities in the areas of CRO implementation, judicial transparency, and court automation. As part of its efforts to ensure the modernization of the justice sector through the provision of electronic systems and their interoperability, the MOJ plans, inter alia, to monitor the implementation of the ICMS, institutionalize electronic court statistical reporting, ensure continuous improvement of the functionalities of the National Courts’ Web Portal, and implement the E–File Module in all courts and make it available for all types of participants in court proceedings. In addition, the MOJ aims to ensure videoconferencing

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 is implemented in criminal cases throughout the entire court system and in all penitentiaries, to expand its use for other types of cases, and to provide continuous training for system users. The draft Strategy also provides for improving the legal framework in order to streamline the ordinary and extraordinary evaluation of judges.

At the MOJ’s request, next quarter Open Justice will provide feedback on the draft Strategy and assistance in developing its action plan.

The following activities under sub–Objective 1.1 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) are ongoing: Activities 1.1.1.1–1.1.1.2 and Activity 1.1.2.1.

SUB-OBJECTIVE 1.2: INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ICMS) IS REFINED AND IMPLEMENTED; IT IS SUSTAINABLE AND IS CAPABLE OF INTEGRATION WITH ALL RESPECTIVE E-GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS IN MOLDOVA AND COMPATIBLE WITH COURT REORGANIZATION AND OPTIMIZATION; ICMS BECOMES A STANDARD OF BEST COURT AUTOMATION PRACTICES IN THE REGION

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued to provide technical assistance to local stakeholders for refining the new ICMS system according to users’ feedback and requirements. From January 2020 to March 2020, Alfa Soft developed, tested, and implemented 68 new ICMS functionalities requested by court users, based on the feedback collected from courts during the previous reporting period. The most significant changes refer to a new, improved case search engine, refined administration of court panels that will address reported case distribution issues at the appellate court level and the Supreme Court of Justice, a streamlined claim and case registration process, and an improved interface and user experience. Thus, during Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020, Open Justice managed to develop, test, and implement 77 out of the planned 98 new ICMS functionalities.

On March 23, 2020, in cooperation with Alfa Soft, Open Justice started developing the technical preconditions for implementation of the E-File Module across the entire country. The E-File Module will be refined during the next reporting period and will allow litigants to submit procedural documents to courts electronically.

During Quarter 2, the Project also began developing amendments to both the SCM instruction on evidence and documentation processes in district courts and courts of appeal and the SCM regulation on random case distribution, in compliance with the new ICMS functionalities. Next quarter, the Project will submit both drafts to the SCM for consultation and approval.

The Project also continued to offer support to ICMS users to facilitate better assimilation of the system, including through the help of the two Project attorneys seconded to the ACA/MOJ. Throughout January–March, 2020, Open Justice processed 466 requests from court users for help with ICMS functionalities. During the next reporting period, Open Justice will continue to provide on-call ICMS user support to all Moldovan courts.

To address the issue of frequent staff turnover in the courts and reduce the pressure on the Open Justice call center, the Project periodically updated the online version of the ICMS User Guide and made it available to all ICMS users. As part of its capacity building efforts, Open Justice trained a total

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 of 536 judges, chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, and clerks. The training activities were conducted both online, using the videoconferencing system, and in-person at the NIJ and the Chisinau District Court. The training activities focused mainly on the use of the new ICMS, but also covered aspects such as electronic statistical reports and anonymization of personal data in the ICMS.

On February 13, 2020, Open Justice participated in a Figure 4 – Training for court staff on the ICMS at the NIJ working meeting on the ICMS with representatives of the SCM, the ACA/MOJ, the Supreme Court of Justice, the Comrat and Chisinau Courts of Appeal, and the Chisinau and Balti District Courts. The meeting provided an opportunity to discuss the new ICMS functionalities, receive feedback from the ICMS managers and court leaders, and plan the piloting of the electronic statistical reporting during the next quarter.

During January–March 2020, one of the key areas of the Project’s work was the development and refinement of electronic statistical reports. Overall, the Project held six working meetings with the ACA/MOJ on the EJSM. During the working meetings, Open Justice developed, refined, and tested, using real data, 155 electronic statistical reports for all national courts — 51 statistical reports for the first-tier courts, 40 statistical reports for the appellate courts, 20 general statistical reports for both first-tier and appellate courts, and 44 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice. In addition, Open Justice continued to oversee data entry by court staff from the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal, which were designated by the SCM in December 2019 as pilot courts for generating electronic statistical reports. The Project team contacted staff from these courts on a weekly basis to complete the data needed to generate accurate electronic reports from the ICMS. According to a letter from the ACA dated March 27, 2020, the use of electronic statistical reports became a high-priority issue under the recent public health concerns related to the COVID–19 pandemic. Starting April 2020, the three pilot courts will no longer use paper statistical reports. The rest of the courts will gradually eliminate paper statistical reports during the current fiscal year.

In late February 2020, the Project, in cooperation with the NIJ, conducted three trainings on entering data into the ICMS and interpreting data from the EJSM and Performance Dashboard for 46 chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, and specialists from the Procedural Tracking and Documentation Divisions. These training sessions laid the foundation for the successful piloting of the EJSM during the next reporting period.

Open Justice also continued to upgrade the existing audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida) to improve its usability, decrease storage requirements, and integrate it with the ICMS, including the public-facing E-File Module. In January 2020, Project subcontractor Alfa Soft started developing a Media Management System and presented the first version of the Media Server Prototype in March 2020. At the ACA’s request, the Project will also purchase a storage solution for storing 500 TB of audio files of court hearings. During the next reporting period, the solution will be integrated into the ICMS and will improve the security, storage, and online search tool for court audio recordings in all national courts. The final handover and training of users on the new Media Management System will be completed in June 2020. The System will ensure that, when necessary,

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 the higher courts and E–File Module users have direct access to court hearing recordings, thus contributing to greater transparency of court proceedings.

During the reporting period, the Project’s IT subcontractor Omega Trust conducted an initial external security audit and security testing of the ICMS and submitted two draft reports with conclusions and recommendations. The initial security testing report determined 10 vulnerabilities in the new ICMS, out of which one was a critical security vulnerability. Alfa Soft fixed 9 out of the10 security vulnerabilities by the end of March 2020, including the one critical vulnerability that allowed user access based on previous saved and stored user authentication data. Alfa Soft will continue to assist the ACA/MOJ in addressing system vulnerabilities throughout April–May, 2020. The second and final security audit is planned for the next quarter and will ensure that all ICMS vulnerabilities have been identified and fully addressed.

In March 2020, the Project also began developing a draft IT Infrastructure Action Plan that will be submitted for review to the ACA/MOJ next quarter. The IT Infrastructure Action Plan will support the ACA’s efforts to upgrade and maintain the ICMS beyond the life of the Project, and it is an important instrument in the Project’s capacity-building efforts for this agency.

The following activities under sub-Objective 1.2 from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension are ongoing: Activities 1.2.1.1–1.2.1.3, Activities 1.2.2.1–1.2.2.4, Activities 1.2.2.6–1.2.2.10, Activity 1.2.3.1, Activity 1.2.3.3, and Activities 1.2.4.1–1.2.4.2.

Given tensions within the judiciary, the Project temporarily put on hold Activity 1.2.2.5 (Year 3 Work Plan for the second extension).

Activity 1.2.3.2 and Activity 1.2.3.4 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) under sub-Objective 1.2 are planned for Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 of Fiscal Year 2020.

SUB-OBJECTIVE 1.3: STREAMLINE CASE FLOW AND OPTIMIZE COURT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT BASED ON DATA FROM THE UPGRADED ICMS

During Quarter 2, Open Justice submitted revised draft amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting to the SCM and ACA/MOJ, as well as a Guide on Generating and Verifying the Statistical Reports available in the EJSM. On March 27, 2020, the Project submitted a letter to the SCM and ACA/MOJ to highlight the importance of adopting the amendments to the Instruction prior to implementing the new electronic statistical reporting in the pilot courts in Quarter 3. During the next reporting period, the Project will provide any support required by the SCM to adopt the modified Instruction.

In January 2020, the Project succeeded in seconding a consultant to the JIB, thus overcoming the obstacle to Open Justice’s assistance created by the tensions within the judiciary during the previous reporting period. Throughout January–March 2020, the Project’s consultant conducted 10 training sessions for 13 SCM representatives and JIB inspectors on the use of the ICMS and interpreting the data available via the ICMS random distribution module. In addition, the consultant continued to analyze the monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts. Based on data from these reports for January 2020 and February 2020, the consultant supported JIB inspectors in drafting nine information requests regarding actions taken by court staff that appeared to circumvent the proper random assignment of cases. In addition, at the SCM’s request, the Project’s

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 consultant will draft one Informative Note for courts on how to correctly use the ICMS to avoid real or perceived manipulations in random case distribution. The SCM is planning to send the Informative Note to the relevant courts in April 2020.

To provide additional security verification for the ICMS database, Open Justice previously purchased, installed, and configured an IT solution (Imperva) for monitoring the ICMS database. Imperva is designed to monitor, block, and prevent attempted manipulations and to ensure the safety and integrity of the data stored in the ICMS. During the reporting period, Open Justice analyzed the monitoring functionalities of Imperva and provided the ACA/MOJ with a list of ICMS data to be monitored. The list will serve as a basis for the final draft of the ICMS security policies. To ensure that Imperva is used in the most effective manner in the future, Open Justice suggested that the ACA/MOJ contract an IT specialist who will serve as solution administrator and ensure that the ACA/MOJ has the capacity to closely monitor and interpret the reports generated by the monitoring system. The Project also submitted to the ACA/MOJ a job description and requirements to be included in the call for selection.

The following activities under sub-Objective 1.3 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) are ongoing: Activities 1.3.1.1–1.3.1.3.

SUB-OBJECTIVE 1.4: ICMS IS CAPABLE OF EVENTUAL FUNCTIONAL INTEGRATION WITH ALL RELEVANT SYSTEMS OF THE STATE AGENCIES (THE CIVIL REGISTRY, PROSECUTOR GENERAL’S OFFICE, POLICE, PRISONS, FORENSICS BUREAU, CADASTER SYSTEM, ETC.)

While it is outside the Project’s scope to implement the interoperability of the ICMS with other state systems, during the reporting period, Open Justice continued to monitor the development of new information systems and regulatory changes pertaining to the interoperability of state E-Systems. In particular, the Project closely observed the state agencies’ initiatives in the area of developing new automated systems that could potentially be integrated with the ICMS in the future.

For example, on February 21, 2020, the State Chancellery published and proposed for discussion a draft Government Decision on the Concept and Regulation of the automated information system “Register of powers of attorney using the electronic signature (MPower).” This system aims to provide individuals, legal entities, and public authorities with an efficient mechanism for creating, verifying the validity of, and cancelling powers of attorney using electronic signatures.

Later in February 2020, the State Chancellery also published and proposed for discussion a draft Government decision for approval of the Regulation on the use, administration, and development of the Citizens’ Government Portal. The proposed portal will be a one-stop shop service intended to provide individuals with a mechanism for obtaining, in a centralized manner, the official information of public interest that is available in various state registries.

On March 6, 2020, the State Chancellery published and proposed for discussion a draft Government decision for approval of the Regulation on the use, administration, and development of the Government Portal for entrepreneurs. This portal will allow entrepreneurs to obtain centralized access to official information of public interest and official information about their enterprises that is available in various state registries.

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

Finally, on March 13, 2020, the State Chancellery published and proposed for discussion a draft Concept of the Government Electronic Notification Service (MNotify) and Regulation on the Government Electronic Notification Service (MNotify), which provide for the rights and duties of MNotify subjects and regulate the interaction of the MNotify service with other information systems. Once the final version is approved, Open Justice will verify that the ICMS’s content and regulations are in line with new MNotify rules.

During the next reporting period, Open Justice will closely monitor further developments and will discuss with the SCM and ACA/MOJ the type of assistance they may need to assess and identify the steps necessary for the eventual interoperability between the ICMS and the newly proposed systems.

Activity 1.4.1.1 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) under sub- Objective 1.4 is ongoing.

OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

SUB-OBJECTIVE 2.1: PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT STANDARDS APPLIED BASED ON THE MANAGEMENT DATA GENERATED BY THE ICMS

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued to build the capacity of the SCM, ACA/MOJ, and courts to utilize the electronic statistics and performance data from the ICMS.

In anticipation of piloting the EJSM in the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and Comrat Court of Appeal, the Project conducted three training sessions at the NIJ for 46 court representatives on the use of the ICMS functionalities and CEPEJ instruments. These trainings also partially covered the issue of correctly registering judicial case information in the ICMS, which is a prerequisite for maintaining accurate data in the EJSM. The participants were encouraged to share the knowledge they acquired at the trainings with their colleagues. Figure 5 – CEPEJ and ICMS training at the NIJ

In cooperation with the NIJ, Open Justice had planned to deliver two training sessions for court leaders on the improvement of court performance and services using the electronically generated statistical data and other available ICMS functionalities. On March 17, 2020, however, the Government put into action anti-coronavirus measures that resulted in the postponement of the training sessions. On March 24, 2020, Open Justice submitted a letter to the SCM proposing to conduct the planned training session using the videoconferencing system. Implementation of the online trainings during Quarter 3 is pending approval from the SCM.

The following activities under sub-Objective 2.1 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) are ongoing: Activity 2.1.1.1 and Activity 2.1.1.2.

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

SUB-OBJECTIVE 2.2: INSTITUTIONALIZE OVERSIGHT OVER JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued its efforts to monitor the MOJ’s planned reforms of the judiciary and the new mechanism for the extra-judiciary evaluation process.

After reviewing feedback from the Venice Commission and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights on the first Draft Law on the Extra-judiciary Evaluation of Judges, the MOJ published a new draft that sets out the difference between the evaluation of a judge’s integrity and qualifications, and provides for the creation of a Board for Judicial Evaluation and Career composed of 10 members. The Board will include former judges and members of civil society and academia who will be appointed for a term of five years. On January 3, 2020, the MOJ also sent the new draft to the CoE for expert review. On January 20, 2020, the Minister of Justice took part in a meeting with experts from the CoE’s ad-hoc Working Group on Justice Reform and agreed on close collaboration on the actions to be carried out to finalize the draft law.

In addition, the MOJ conducted consultative sessions with representatives of the judiciary, other justice sector professionals, and civil society to discuss the draft law. Subsequently, on January 21, 2020, the MOJ made public its Action Plan on consulting and finalizing the document. On February 25, 2020, Open Justice participated in the first round of public consultations on the evaluation of judges and prosecutors. Following the event, the MOJ decided to create a technical working group for the finalization of the draft law. Upon the MOJ’s request, the Project will second one representative to the working group to provide further assistance in developing the draft law on the evaluation of the performance and careers of judges.

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued efforts aimed at improving the institutional capacity of the SCM and its subordinated bodies. On January 10, 2020, Open Justice had a working meeting with SCM members on the implementation of the updated EAP for the SCM and its subordinated bodies, which the Project developed during Quarter 1. As a result, the SCM expressed its commitment to build the JIB inspectors’ capacity on the use of ICMS data and to continue to improve judicial selection procedures.

Throughout January–March 2020, Open Justice finalized the Project’s monitoring report on the quality of the reasoning of the SCM’s decisions on the selection and careers of judges for the period of July 2019–December 2019. The report was submitted to the SCM for feedback. In addition, at the SCM’s request, Open Justice will provide assistance in developing criteria for assessing judicial candidates’ performance during interviews conducted by the SCM members. The Project will perform this activity during the next reporting period.

The following activities under sub-Objective 2.2 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) are ongoing: Activity 2.2.1.1, Activities 2.2.2.1–2.2.2.4, and Activities 2.2.3.1–2.2.3.3.

Given the tensions within the judiciary and the impact of COVID–19, the Project temporarily put Activity 2.2.3.4 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) on hold.

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

SUB-OBJECTIVE 2.3: PUBLIC ACCESS TO JUSTICE SECTOR INFORMATION

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued to support its stakeholders to improve judicial transparency and accountability through enhanced access to information.

In late January 2020, the Project contracted IT Lab to improve the Courts’ Web Portal user experience based on feedback collected by the ACA from litigants. The Project coordinated four meetings between representatives of the ACA/MOJ and IT Lab and received approval for the redesign of the Courts’ Web Portal interface and improvement of the centralized search engine. The agreed improvements will allow users to search for information through all national courts at once, as well as to use a search engine tailored to each court’s webpage. The first version of the upgraded Portal was made available to the ACA/MOJ for testing in late March 2020. Open Justice plans on finalizing this activity in the Figure 6 – Screenshot of the main page of the next reporting period. upgraded Courts’ Web Portal

In addition, following the implementation of all agreed changes to the Courts’ Web Portal, the Project plans to conduct an online training session for 19 webpage administrators and public relations specialists on how to update the content of the courts’ new webpages to reflect the courts’ activity.

During the reporting period, Open Justice also worked on refining the Web Report Card in collaboration with the SCM, ACA/MOJ, and courts. The Project expects that Alfa Soft will finish refining the Web Report Card next quarter. The Web Report Card, which is accessible from the SCM’s website, will list court performance data for general public access. Making this information accessible to the public is essential for increasing transparency and building citizens’ and lawyers’ trust in the judiciary.

In March 2020, Open Justice printed 1,000 bilingual posters demonstrating how the new ICMS improves the courts’ efficiency and transparency, which will be distributed to the courts. Printing and distribution of the posters is part of the ICMS outreach campaign, which the Project planned for March–May 2020. Under the current COVID–19 conditions, the Project will also focus on disseminating this information using online outlets (i.e., social media and websites). During Quarter 2, Open Justice also produced and published one article and one social network post about the benefits of the videoconferencing system. The new article and the post were published on the thematic website, www.justitietransparenta.md, and through social networks.

The following activities under sub-Objective 2.3 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) are ongoing: Activity 2.3.1.1 and Activity 2.3.1.4.

Activities 2.3.1.2–2.3.1.3 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) under sub- Objective 2.3 are planned for Quarter 4 of Fiscal Year 2020.

Given the extension of the Open Justice’s activities until November 30, 2020, the Project will reschedule Activity 2.3.1.5, on organizing the Closing Conference, for a later date during Fiscal Year 2021.

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 SECTION II – REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

OBJECTIVE 1: INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Report on Training Activities on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (Activity 1.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during January 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during February 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during March 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Monitoring Report on the Quality of the Reasoning of the Superior Council of Magistracy's Decisions on the Selection and Careers of Judges for the Period from July 2019 to December 2019 (Activity 2.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Report on the Roundtable on the Use of the Videoconferencing Solution in Courts and Penitentiaries (Activities 1.1.1.1 and 1.1.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 SECTION III – MAJOR ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER

OBJECTIVE 1: INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Complete the development, testing, and implementation of additional ICMS functionalities requested by court users (Activity 1.2.2.4 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Conduct online trainings on ICMS functions for ACA representatives, judges, and courts staff to ensure better absorption of the ICMS (Activity 1.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Continue to offer ongoing on-call ICMS user support to facilitate better assimilation of the system (Activity 1.2.2.7 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Pilot refined statistical reports in three pilot courts – the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal (Activity 1.2.2.6 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Submit amendments to the SCM instruction on evidence and documentation processes in district courts and courts of appeal for the SCM’s approval (Activity 1.2.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Submit the amendments to the SCM regulation on random case distribution for the SCM’s approval (Activity 1.2.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Finalize the upgrade of the existing audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida) to decrease storage requirements and integrate it with the new ICMS on a dedicated Media Server (Activity 1.2.2.10 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Continue to assist the SCM and ACA/MOJ in monitoring and following up on alleged manipulations in the ICMS random case distribution (Activity 1.3.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Continue to assist the ACA to develop an IT Infrastructure Action Plan for further maintenance and upgrade of the Judicial Information System during 2020–2023 (Activity 1.2.1.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Conduct the final external security audit and security testing of the ICMS (Activity 1.2.2.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Continue to develop the security policies needed to implement the ICMS database monitoring solution (Activity 1.3.1.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Submit the final version of the report on monitoring the use of the videoconferencing system in trials with the remote participation of inmates to the ACA/MOJ, SCM, and NPA (Activity 1.1.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Provide support to the MOJ in developing the new Strategy for Ensuring the Independence and Integrity of Justice Sector (Activity 1.1.2.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Organize online training activities for court personnel and court leaders on how to correctly enter and use performance data (Activity 2.1.1.1 and Activity 2.1.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Complete upgrades to the Courts’ Web Portal based on the feedback collected by the ACA/MOJ from litigants (Activity 2.3.1.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Continue to provide support to the SCM and JIB to analyze the random distribution module data and follow up with courts (Activity 2.2.2.4 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Provide support to the SCM to improve judicial selection and evaluation proceedings (Activity 2.2.3.2 and Activity 2.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Conduct outreach activities to raise awareness about the benefits of the new ICMS, the videoconferencing solution, and other new electronic applications (Activity 2.3.1.4 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 SECTION IV – PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

This section provides an overview of the progress towards achieving planned Project activities during the second quarter of Fiscal Year 2020.

During the reporting quarter, Open Justice made steady progress toward implementing the activities covered by the Project’s Work Plan for this period, January 1–March 31, 2020. On March 24, 2020, the Contracting Officer signed a no-cost extension for the Project through November 30, 2020. By May 15, 2020, the Project will submit to the Contracting Officer Representative an updated Work Plan and Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan for the period until November 30, 2020.

On March 17, 2020, the Moldova Parliament declared a state of emergency until May 15, 2020 in order to combat the spread of the COVID–19 infection. As of March 23, 2020, the Open Justice team has switched to teleworking from home to comply with the quarantine measures imposed by the Government.

According to the Law on the State of Emergency, Siege, and War, public institutions are functional and the courts continue to examine criminal cases and urgent civil cases. Thus, the Project’s activity involving local counterparts continued as usual, but remotely. Only two ICMS trainings for court chairs planned for March 23 and 24 were postponed; the Project will conduct them once the SCM approves the delivery of the trainings online, using the videoconferencing equipment installed in courts.

The use of the videoconferencing equipment by courts to examine criminal cases and other types of cases that cannot be postponed was mandated by Ruling No. 1 of the Commission for the Emergency Situation starting March 18, 2020. Expanding the types of cases that courts can examine remotely using videoconferencing was the Project’s focus even before the state of emergency was declared. Thus, during the reporting quarter, the Project developed a detailed report that contains recommendations for expanding the use of videoconferencing to examine more types of cases than those currently covered by the law. The Project will discuss the report with the SCM, ACA, and courts in the next quarter, and will provide assistance with implementing the recommendations from the report. The report is based on recommendations that were collected from court and penitentiary representatives at the roundtable the Project conducted on January 31, 2020.

The Project also made great progress in developing and testing 155 electronic statistical reports for the district courts, the appellate courts, and the Supreme Court of Justice. Starting April 1, 2020, the three pilot courts will no longer use paper statistical reports. The ACA asked the Project to help with rapid implementation of electronic court statistics reports in the rest of the Moldovan courts starting May 2020, when piloting in the three selected courts will end.

The Project’s IT subcontractor Alfa Soft developed 77 new ICMS functionalities that were implemented in courts in March 2020. The new functionalities improve random case distribution and case search mechanisms, as requested by ICMS users. Alfa Soft also fixed 9 out of 10 identified security vulnerabilities in the ICMS, as identified in the ICMS security audit carried out by Omega Trust, who the Project contracted for the ICMS security testing and audit. The remaining security issue will be fixed in early April 2020.

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

During the reporting quarter, the Project also managed to second a consultant to the JIB after several months of reluctancy on the part of the SCM to embark on new activities due to the tensions over the legitimacy of the SCM’s current composition. During January–March 2020, the consultant conducted 10 training sessions for 13 SCM representatives and JIB inspectors on the use of the ICMS and interpreting data available via the ICMS random distribution module. The Consultant also offered support in drafting nine information requests for courts on alleged manipulations in the ICMS random case distribution, which the JIB will send to the applicable courts.

Open Justice finalized the Project’s monitoring report on the quality of the reasoning of the SCM’s decisions on the selection and careers of judges for the period from July 2019 to December 2019. The report was submitted to the SCM and the Judicial Selection Board for feedback and discussion during the next quarter.

The Project continued its outreach activities by informing 771 people about the benefits of the E- Systems used by the judiciary via postings on social media. The Project also printed 1,000 bilingual posters (in Romanian and Russian) on the new ICMS benefits, which will be distributed to litigating parties via the courts once they reopen to the public. The Project will also publish the poster on its thematic website, www.justitietransparenta.md, to raise awareness of how the new ICMS speeds the administration of justice and improves court efficiency and transparency by instantly delivering and displaying up-to-date judicial information on the Courts’ Web Portal.

In conclusion, the Project was on track with the planned activities and will continue to adjust its approach and remain flexible to implement as many of the planned activities as possible during the next quarter, in spite of the COVID–19 emergency situation, which restricts in-person activities.

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020 SECTION V – ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

On September 19, 2019, USAID approved a second extension of the Project’s duration until June 30, 2020. The extension was awarded to continue implementing Objective 1 activities on court automation and to resume Objective 2 activities on judicial selection, evaluation, and discipline. In March 2020, USAID agreed to extend the Project’s duration by an additional five months, until November 30, 2020.

In light of the ongoing COVID–19 pandemic, starting on March 18, 2020, the Project staff has limited in-person interactions, meetings, and events and is working remotely from home. The Project’s staff are fully connected online and operational, and the team is using online tools to replace activities that cannot be carried out on-site.

During the reporting quarter, Open Justice did not request USAID’s approval for the hiring or promotion of any personnel. The diagram below shows the Project team as of March 31, 2020.

Millennium DPI Home Office Brian Hannon, CFO Chief of Party USAID

Natalija Stamenkovic, Cristina Malai Moldova COR Technical Director

Remus Turcan, Administration & Finance Monitoring, Evaluation, Deputy Chief of Party Director Knowledge & Learning Luciana Iabangi Olga Birca, Subcontracts, Elina Petrovici, Director Grants & Bookkeeping

OBJECTIVE 1 OBJECTIVE 2 Increased Efficiency of the Justice System Mihai Grosu, Key Expert 1 Ecaterina Televca, Senior IT Increased Transparency Adviser and Accountability of the Non-key Support Staff Vitalie Levința, IT Manager Justice System Cristina Rau, Patricia Zgibarta, Staff Attorney Irina Lupusor, Senior Staff Outreach Specialist Veronica Mocanu, Staff Attorney Iulia Zaharia, Attorney Cornel Sotnic, Junior Staff Project Assistant Vladislava Martin, Attorney Victor Bicenco, Driver Anastasia Donica, Elena Musteata, Victor Calac, Valeria Ursu, Gabriel Mitablinda, Junior Staff Attorneys

Moldovan Partner Alfa Soft (IT Subcontractor – ICMS Software Development), Lawyers, LCRM, and Others

Page 20 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

ANNEX I. REPORT ON THE MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING PLAN

REPORT ON THE PROJECT MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING PLAN

FOR THE PERIOD OF January 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

April 30, 2020

DISCLAIMER

REPORT ON THE PROJECT MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING PLAN

FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2020–MARCH 31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Submitted on April 30, 2020

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ACRONYMS ...... ii I. PROGRESS AGAINST PROJECT INDICATORS...... 1 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 1 B. PROJECT INDICATORS...... 7 Project Goal Indicator...... 7 Objective 1 Indicators ...... 7 Objective 2 Indicators ...... 8 C. Table of Performance Indicators and Progress ...... 9

Page i USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACA Agency for Court Administration CEPEJ European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice CMS Case Management System (courts) CPC Criminal Procedure Code CRO Court Reorganization and Optimization ICMS Integrated Case Management System (justice sector-wide) IFCE International Framework for Court Excellence JIB Judicial Inspection Board JIS Judicial Information System JPI Judicial Performance Indicator MELP Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan MOJ Ministry of Justice NCPPD National Center for Protection of Personal Data NIJ National Institute of Justice NPA National Penitentiary Administration PGO Prosecutor General’s Office SCM Superior Council of Magistracy SITCS Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security (formerly CTS) USAID United States Agency for International Development WJP World Justice Project Rule of Law Index

Page ii USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

I. PROGRESS AGAINST PROJECT INDICATORS

A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) approved the initial Open Justice Project’s Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (MELP) on September 6, 2017. The Project’s original lifetime was planned for two years, starting on May 15, 2017 and ending on May 14, 2019.

In February 2019, at the request of the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM), USAID extended the Project’s original implementation period by 4.5 months, from May 15, 2019, to September 30, 2019. The extension was granted to continue the Project’s Objective I activities only, aimed at finalizing the implementation of the new Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) in all 20 Moldovan courts. To continue to monitor its own performance during the first extension, the Project revised several Objective 1 Indicators’ targets from the original MELP. In addition, the Project, at the request of USAID, continued to monitor and report on four out of the original ten Objective 2 indicators, even if the Project did not implement any activities under its Objective 2 during the first extension.

In September 2019, USAID awarded a second Project extension until June 30, 2020, in order to facilitate a better absorption of the new ICMS by the Moldovan courts and to assist the former Government led by Maia Sandu1 implement progressive judicial reforms. Accordingly, the Project developed new activities and has also revised the MELP to add five new performance indicators under Objective I2 and to complete one original indicator, which referred to the ICMS’s random distribution, with five additional sub-indicators3.

In March 2020, USAID awarded a no-cost extension of the Project until November 30, 2020. On May 15, 2020, the Project will present, for the Contracting Officer Representative’s approval, the draft Work Plan and revised MELP indicators for the no-cost extension period.

This MELP Report reflects the Project’s performance against the indicators and the targets approved for the second extension period ending June 30, 2020, which appears as the “Project 2nd extension” in the Indicators’ table below. New indicators and targets for

1 The Sandu Government was dismissed in November by a no-confidence vote of the Parliament. 2 1) Indicator 1.1.2. “Number of central premises of the courts using the video conferencing system to conduct video hearings with the participation of inmates, in specific matters, described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC)”; 2) Indicator 1.1.3, “Number of courts’ hearings with the participation of inmates, conducted using the video conferencing system in specific matters described in the Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC)”; 3) Indicator 1.2.2 “Number of new ICMS functionalities, developed and implemented by the project during the 2nd extension period and used by courts’ staff”; 4) Indicator 1.3.2 “Percentage increase in Reasoned Explanatory Notes on ICMS alleged manipulations, submitted by courts to SCM’s Judicial Inspection Board (JIB)/ versus SCM JIB’s issued Requests for Information on ICMS alleged manipulations”; 5) Indicator 1.3.3. “Number of Mandatory Electronic Statistical Reports generated by pilot courts via ICMS”. dge. 3 Indicator 1.3.1, “Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module,” was amended and now has eight sub-indicators. Of them five are new sub-indicators, namely: 4) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file””; 5) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Reversed case distribution””; 6) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Modification of the panel of judges”; 7) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Correction of the panel””; 8) “Number of actions saved as “Activation/deactivation of judge.”

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 the Project’s activity from July 1, 2020 to November 30, 2020 will be added to the MELP subsequently, after the Contracting Officer Representative approves them.

This MELP Report for Quarter II of the fiscal year 2020, reflects Open Justice’ progress against twenty-two indicators, of which one is a Goal Indicator, eleven are Objective I Indicators, and ten are Objective 2 indicators.

At the request of USAID, this and future MELP reports will report on Project’s performance on all indicators — both new and original indicators, as they are part of the initial and amended Task Order.

By March 31, 2020, the targets for ten out of twenty-two project indicators had already been reached, and some even had significantly exceeded their planned values. Of these eleven indicators, one is a Goal Indicator, five are Objective 1 indicators and the other five are Objective 2 indicators, as detailed below:

• Goal Indicator, “Increase in the score for court management,” has an End-of-Program target of 0.35 points. Open Justice established the baseline and target for this Goal Indicator, that is custom and complex, based on specific World Justice Project (WJP) factors and sub-factors. This value of this custom indicator for 2019 is 0.37, which exceeds by 0.02 p.p. the precedent value calculated for the 2018. The details are provided in the description of this Indicator in the Indicators’ Table below.

• Indicator 1.1.3, “Number of court hearings with the participation of inmates, conducted using the video conferencing system in specific matters described in the Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC)” has an established June 30, 2020 target value of 2,500 courts hearings, held via videoconferencing system. According to data made available by the National Penitentiary Administration (NPA), provided as of March 01, 2020, the overall number of videoconferencing hearings, conducted throughout January 01 – March 31, 2019 is 2,751 hearings, with exceeds by 271 units the established target.

• Indicator 1.2.1, “Number of courts utilizing overarching ICMS” has reached the target of 20 courts. Thus, by September 30, 2019, the new ICMS had already been in use in all 20 courts (46 central and secondary locations), which include: 15 District courts, 4 Appellate courts and the Supreme Court of Justice. The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as the new ICMS is already used by all courts.

• Indicator 1.3.3. “Number of Mandatory Electronic Statistical Reports generated by pilot district and appellate courts via ICMS” is a new indicator, and its actual value, achieved by March 31, 2020 consists of 111 statistical reports, developed with Open Justice’s assistance during the second project extension, as compared to 90 reports planned to be developed for the courts of two levels — district and Appellate. These results are due to the fact the Project made significant efforts, from October 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020, to implement activities related to implementing electronic statistical report in district and appellate courts. Details for this Indicator are provided in the Indicators’ Table below.

• Indicator 1.4.1, “Number of public-facing electronic applications that are incorporated into the MOJ’s overarching ICMS,” reached the Project Year 3 target of four public-facing applications incorporated into the ICMS by September 30, 2019 (the project’s first extension). The respective applications are: 1) the E-File version 2.0 that will allow lawyers to electronically submit complaints, 2) the National Courts' Web Portal that ensures online access to

Page 2 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

operational data available on the ICMS for court users, 3) the upgraded Web Report Card listing court performance data for general public access, and 4) the electronic application related to submission of online petitions to the SCM Judicial Inspection Board (JIB). The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as Open Justice had already achieved the set target.S

• Indicator 1.4.2, “Number of e-governance systems/services integrated with overarching ICMS,” significantly exceeded the initial target of three services that had to be connected to the new ICMS. Thus, by December 31, 2019, the Project has already connected eight systems/services to the new ICMS, namely: MConnect Platform, MPay, MPass, MSign, MLog, MNotify, the Registry of Population and the Registry of Legal Entities. In addition, the Open Justice subcontractor Alfa Soft developed web services to make the ICMS capable of eventual functional integration with the Prosecutor’s E-File system, E-Bailiffs, the Registry of Forensics and Criminology, and the Registry of Criminal Offences/Contraventions. The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as Open Justice had already connected all existing relevant e-services and systems to the new ICMS.

• Indicator 2.2.1, “Percentage of performance management standards developed versus applied,” achieved the actual target of 100% of judicial performance indicators developed versus applied, as all 20 Moldovan Courts already use the ICMS’s upgraded Performance Dashboard. The Dashboard automatically generates information about 16 key courts performance indicators, which the SCM, ACA/MOJ and courts leadership use to assess court performance. The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as Open Justice had already achieved the set target.

• Indicator 2.3.3, “Increase in number of positive or neutral media reports, reflecting MOJ/ACA and SCM activity,” significantly exceeded the planned initial target of more than 20% increase, reaching an actual increase of 538%. This dramatic increase is due to that fact that, due to its heightened interest in the justice sector, the media published numerous articles covering various aspects of judicial reform, such as the ICMS, court reorganization, the reasoning of court rulings, and judicial selection and discipline. At the same time, Open Justice made significant efforts to inform the public and involve media representatives in events related to the existing CMS and the new ICMS and other topics of major importance to the public related to the courts. The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as Open Justice had already overachieved the target value and will not continue to monitor this Indicator.

• Indicator 2.3.4, “Proportion of SCM sessions archived out of the total sessions live streamed,” reached its Year I target of 100% by May 15, 2018. With the Project’s assistance, the SCM created a public archive of its live-streamed meetings on the SCM webpage and increased the level of transparency of its activity for mass media and the public. During the fiscal year 2018, all 22 SCM sessions were broadcasted and archived on the current SCM webpage. (http://csm.md/files/wArhivaSedintelor/arhivacsm.html) The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as Open Justice had already achieved the set target.

• Indicator 2.3.5, “Number of pilot courts using audio and video equipment to accommodate court users who are unable to attend a court hearing or sessions” reached its set Year 2 target of 6 pilot courts (100% of pilot courts) using the audio and video equipment to accommodate courts users who are unable to attend a court hearing or sessions, by May 15, 2019. Moreover, after

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

the successful piloting of the video conferencing equipment for remote hearing of inmates in matters described in Articles 469, 4731 and 4732 of the CPC, the use of the video conferencing equipment was extended from six pilot courts to all Moldovan courts and penitentiaries.

• Indicator 2.3.6, “Number of court decisions and rulings of the Chisinau District Court for years 1973 to 2009 digitized and searchable online,” reached 740,824 digitized court decisions and rulings by May 14, 2019, which exceeded the set target of 689,000 digitized court decisions. The value of this indicator will not change during the Project’s extension period, as Open Justice achieved the set target and will not continue to digitize court decisions and rulings.

Due to various factors outside the Project’s control, including the effects of the COVID-19-related state of emergency on the activity of the judiciary4, six indicators under Objective 1 and five indicators placed under Objective 2, have not achieved their June 30, 2020 targets, as listed below:

• Indicator 1.1.1, “Number of approved and implemented amendments, regulations, court rules, and instructions developed with the Open Justice Project’s support,” has a June 30, 2020 target of 40 normative acts. By March 31, 2020, the total number of approved and implemented normative acts had already reached 37. During the reporting quarter, the Project developed a total of five amendments, regulations and instructions that it submitted to the MOJ and SCM for approval. The Project will follow up with the MOJ and the SCM about approval on these during next quarter.

• Indicator 1.1.2. “Number of central premises of the courts using the video conferencing system to conduct video hearings with the participation of inmates, in specific matters, described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC)” has June 30, 2020 target value of 19 central courts’ premises using the video conferencing system. In March 2020, the Project developed and sent a questionnaire to all national courts to gather data on the use of a videoconferencing system and trials conducted via the system. According to data made available by the courts, during reporting period, 19 out of 19 Central premises of the courts had fully functional videoconferencing system, but only 13 courts used the videoconferencing system to conduct video hearings during the reporting period, which still represents an increase by 4 courts compared to previous quarter.

• Indicator 1.2.2 “Number of new ICMS functionalities, developed and implemented by the project during the second extension period and used by courts’ staff” is a new indicator, and the activities related to its achievement started during the reporting quarter. So far, out of 98 new functionalities, planned to be developed and implemented by June 30, 2020, , the Project developed, tested and implemented on courts’ production servers, 77 functionalities. By June 30, 2020 the Project expects to reach the set target of 98 functionalities.

• Indicator 1.2.3, “Number of justice sector personnel who received training with the Open Justice Project’s support,” has a revised end of 2nd extension target of 4,500 trained justice sector personnel. By March 31, 2020, Open Justice had trained a total of 4,480 persons on judicial

4 On March 17, 2020, the Moldovan Parliament declared a state of emergency to combat the spread of the COVID- 19 virus infection. According to Ruling no. 1 of the Commission on Matters related to the State of Emergency, courts will examine only urgent criminal cases and administrative contravention cases, while all other types of cases will be temporarily suspended. Also, in April 2020, all public functionaries (including non-key court staff) were sent on forced paid leave, which also significantly slowed down courts’ activity.

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

reform issues pertaining to the subject areas in which the Project works. Of those, 3,413 (76%) were women and 1,067 (24%) were men. During Quarter 1I of the fiscal year 2020, the Project has trained 583 persons, of which 467 were women (80%) and 115 were men (20%). The indicator’s values reflects the high number of trainings that the Project conducted and will conduct for judges, court staff, lawyers, and the Agency for Court Administration (ACA)/MOJ representatives on the use of the upgraded Case Management System (CMS), the new Integrated Case Management System (ICMS), and its new functionalities, statistical reporting, data analysis of the random distribution, the E-File Module, the use of the new videoconferencing equipment, personal data protection, and other topics related to the Project’s activities.

• Indicator 1.3.1. “Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module” has eight sub-indicators included in the revised MELP, of which five are newly developed, as listed in footnote nr. 3 above. The first five sub-indicators listed in MELP have a positive trend: 1) Number of actions saved in the system as judges blocked for a period of time; 2) Number of times judges saved as “incompatible”; 3) Number of cases/actions saved as “examined by the same judge/panel”; 4) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file”; 5) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Reversed case distribution”.

According to the monitoring conducted, only three out of eight sub-indicators measured have values that are still over their targets (negative trend): 6) Number of actions saved in ICMS as ” Modification of the panel of judges”; 7) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Correction of the panel”; and 8) Number of actions saved as “Activation/deactivation of judge”. This is due the fact that the current ICMS is undergoing continuous updates and is still in a piloting phase, as its new functionalities are developed, tested and implemented gradually, and ICMS users still need to be trained how to correctly use some new functionalities. There has also been a big turnover of judges and court staff who make errors when using the new ICMS. Moreover, the values of the sub-indicators are influenced by the COVID–19 related state of emergency (cases being suspended or reassigned), affecting the operation of courts as well.

• Indicator 1.3.2 “Percentage increase in Reasoned Explanatory Notes on ICMS alleged manipulations, submitted by courts to SCM’s JIB / versus SCM JIB’s issued Requests for Information on ICMS alleged manipulations” is a new indicator, and the project activities related to its achievement started during the current reporting quarter. The request for explanation refers to identified, problematic situations in a specific court, and aim both at excluding human errors and alleged manipulations of the ICMS. The established June 30, 2020 value of 25% refers to an expectation that at least one fourth of courts’ explanations on SCM’s JIB inquiries on alleged manipulations in the ICMS will be clearly reasoned. So far, due to the complex internal situation at the SCM and the COVID–19 pandemic-related country situation, things did not progress, despite the assistance that the Project offered to JIB/SCM. To achieve the planned target, starting January 21, 2020, Open Justice seconded to the SCM one Project attorney, to support the SCM’s JIB in investigating possible alleged manipulations of the new ICMS. The Project attorney delivered 10 trainings on the related topics and helped JIB/SCM to develop nine Notes requesting information from courts. These Notes are based on data from monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution, developed for February and March, 2020. The JIB did not send the notes to the courts, invoking various urgencies related to courts activities during the COVID–19 related state of emergency. The Project will continue to help the ACA/MOJ in developing monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Distribution in Moldovan Courts, as well as will support the JIB to elaborate Notes, that will be presented to the SCM.

• Indicator 2.1.1, “Ratio of judicial cases backlogged from the total number of pending cases,” shows that the most recent backlog, derived from the latest available data provided by the ACA (for the period January 1- March 31, 2020) is 8,9%. The fluctuation of this indicator is a result of the disruption of court processes caused by the ongoing court reorganization and optimization (CRO) reform. Thus, the total number of pending cases during January 1 –March 31, 2020 is 69,746 cases, of which 6,187 (8.9%) cases were backlogged cases pending more than 24 and 36 months (including civil, criminal and contravention cases). The actual value of this indicator, measured during this quarter, negatively exceeds by 2.7 percentage points the established baseline of 6.2% and is higher by 2.9% than the final target value of less than 6%. For example, parties to a trial and lawyers sometimes fail to show up to hearings due to the long distances and costs involved in traveling to the newly reorganized and centralized courts, and many of the newly reorganized courts lack judges and staff, which also affects the case management. During the reporting period, this indicator is also influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic state of emergency, announced by governmental Committee for Exceptional Situations (CES), that imposed a reduced operation mode in courts and suspended the solution of different types of cases.

• Indicator 2.2.2, “Increase of reasoned, merit-based judicial appointments ensured by the SCM,” had a value of 0%, compared to the established June 30, 2020 target of 25%. On August 6, 2019, the SCM organized the first judicial selection and promotion contest in accordance with the new legal framework that the Project helped develop in 2018. As a result of the contest, the SCM appointed 31 judges and approved 17 judicial promotions, issuing one joint decision in this regard. The decision provided a brief review of the qualifications of each judicial candidate. While the SCM did implement six out of the eight recommendations for improved reasoning that the Project developed and included in the Guidelines for SCM Members on Preparing Well-Reasoned Decisions on the Selection of Judges, the issued decision did not meet all eight recommendations. None of the judicial appointments mentioned in the decision was fully reasoned, leaving the reader to believe that the appointments were not merit-based. Therefore, the value of this indicator for the reporting quarter was 0%. The Project plans to provide additional assistance and recommendations for improving the SCM’s institutional capacity to draw-up well-reasoned decisions on selection and career of judges during the next quarter. No other contest was organized during the reporting period covering January 1- March 31, 2020.

• Indicator 2.3.1, “Increase public confidence of judicial effectiveness,” was a Project Year 2 indicator that measured the public’s perception about the effectiveness of the Moldovan judicial system. In December 2017, Open Justice organized the first public opinion survey to measure the level of trust in the justice system. During October and November 2018, Open Justice conducted the second survey regarding perceptions about the effectiveness of the Moldovan judicial system. Compared to the results of the first survey conducted in December 2017, public trust in the justice system has increased by 3%, from 16% to 19% among the general population and from 18% to 26% among those who have interacted with courts in the last two years. However, the results of the second survey on general public confidence show that the indicator did not achieve the target set for Year 2, which was a 5% increase over the indicator’s baseline value of 22%. Numerous external factors have influenced the achievement

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

in this indicator, most of which are outside the Project’s control. Open Justice will not implement any activities related to this indicator during the Project’s Year 3.

• Indicator 2.3.2, “Number of citizens reached by public outreach campaigns,” has a new end-of project target of 55,000 citizens to be reached by the Project’s public outreach campaigns. As of March 31, 2020, Open Justice has already reached 48,900 persons, of them, 771 persons were informed during the reporting period. Open Justice expects to fully achieve the target by June 30, 2020. This cumulative indicator reflects a very strong public interest in the Project’s outreach activities and efforts. To consolidate the achieved results, Open Justice recently published and distributed outreach materials, targeting court users and vulnerable groups, and permanently updates the Project’s Facebook page.

• Indicator 2.4.1 “Proportion of female panel speakers and female general participants in Project program-assisted activities, initiatives, and events,” is also close to the established targets of 80% with regard to women general participants and 15% referring to female panel speakers, thanks to the numerous trainings involving women judicial specialists. Thus, so far, the Project has reached 76% female general participants and 12% of female panel speakers having participated in the Project’s initiatives and events, conducted by March 31, 2020. As this is a cumulative indicator, Open Justice will make every possible effort (including remote trainings by video conference equipment available in courts) to increase the involvement of women to achieve the desired targets.

B. PROJECT INDICATORS

Project Goal Indicator

• Increase in the score for court management

Objective 1 Indicators

The eleven Objective 1 performance indicators are:

1. Number of approved and implemented amendments, regulations, court rules and instructions developed with Open Justice support

2. Number of central premises of the courts using the video conferencing system to conduct video hearings with the participation of inmates, in specific matters, described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the CPC.

3. Number of courts’ hearings with the participation of inmates, conducted using the video conferencing system in specific matters described in the Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the CPC.

4. Number of courts utilizing the overarching ICMS

5. Number of new ICMS functionalities, developed and implemented by the project during the second extension period and used by courts’ staff

6. Number of justice sector personnel who received training with Open Justice support

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

7. Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module.

8. Percentage increase in Reasoned Explanatory Notes on ICMS alleged manipulations, submitted by courts to SCM’s JIB/ versus SCM JIB’s issued Requests for Information on ICMS alleged manipulations

9. Number of Mandatory Electronic Statistical Reports generated by pilot courts via ICMS

10. Number of public-facing electronic applications that are incorporated into the MOJ’s overarching ICMS

11. Number of e-governance systems/services, integrated with the overarching ICMS

Objective 2 Indicators

The ten Objective 2 performance indicators are:

1. Ratio of judicial cases backlogged to the total number of pending cases 2. Percentage of performance management standards developed versus applied 3. Increase of reasoned, merit-based judicial appointments ensured by the SCM 4. Increase in public confidence of judicial effectiveness 5. Number of citizens reached by public outreach campaigns 6. Increase in number of positive or neutral media reports, reflecting MOJ, ACA, and SCM activity 7. Proportion of SCM sessions archived out of the total sessions live-streamed 8. Number of pilot courts using audio and video equipment to accommodate court users who are unable to attend the court hearing or sessions 9. Number of court decisions and rulings of the Chisinau District Court for the years 1973– 2009 digitized and searchable online (except for domestic violence, sexual assault and other cases containing sensitive information) 10. Proportion of women panel speakers and women general participants in the Project’s program-assisted activities, initiatives, and events

The table below analyzes the Project’s performance against the revised or new established targets for June 30, 2020.

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 C. TABLE OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND PROGRESS

Project Goal: More accountable and efficient justice system accessible to all members of society

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) Increase in the score for court 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.37 management

Unit: Number (Scores) COMMENT: Open Justice established the value for this indicator based on an external evaluation source, namely the World Justice Project (WJP). The WJP includes 44 sub-factors measured through specific WJP Rule of Law tools, and quantitative data are posted on the WJP’s web page (https://worldjusticeproject.org/our-work/publications/rule-law-index-reports).

Out of the WJP’s total 44 sub-factors, Open Justice identified and selected only those relevant to the Project’s areas of activity. As a result, Open Justice identified four relevant WJP factors to monitor during the Project’s lifetime. These four factors are: 1) Constraints on Government Powers; 2) Absence of Corruption; 3) Civil Justice; and 4) Criminal Justice. The data measures the extent to which Moldova’s policy and state institutional framework support the accountability and efficiency of the courts and the quality of the courts’ administration.

WJP Index scores range from 0 to 1, with 1 indicating the strongest adherence to the rule of law. According to the latest edition of the WJP’s report for the year 2019, the overall indicator value for Moldova was 0.5 points, which exceeds the overall score for 2018 of 0.49 by 0,01 (https://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/documents/WJP-ROLI-2020-Online_0.pdf)

As the Project measures only the four specific factors mentioned above (see Performance Indicator Reference Sheet5), our calculated value for this indicator—comprised of (an average of) these four

5 WJP’s Rule of Law Index reports present information on eight composite factors that are further disaggregated into 44 specific sub-factors. Open Justice Project identified and selected 4 relevant factors and 8 applicable sub- factors that will be monitored during the project cycle. Factor 1: Constraints on Government Powers Sub-factor 1.2: Government powers are effectively limited by the judiciary – measures whether the judiciary has the independence and the ability in practice to exercise effective checks on the government. Factor 2: Absence of Corruption Sub-factor 2.2: No corruption in the Judiciary – measures whether judges and judicial officials refrain from soliciting and accepting bribes to perform duties or expedite processes, and whether the judiciary and judicial rulings are free of improper influence by the government, private interests, and criminal organizations. Factor 7: Civil Justice Sub-factor 7.2: Civil justice is free of discrimination — measures whether the civil justice system discriminates in practice based on socio-economic status, gender, ethnicity, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Sub-factor 7.3: Civil justice is free of corruption — measures whether the civil justice system is free of bribery and improper influence by private interests. Sub-factor 7.4: Civil justice is free of improper government influence — measures whether the civil justice system is free of improper government or

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 factors that the Project is tracking, differs from the country’s overall value of 0.5. Compared to 2019, the counted values of four indicators that the Project is monitoring, increased from 0.34, in February 2019, to 0.37 in February 2020. Thus, according to the WJP’s latest report data, the actual value of this project custom indicator is 0.37, which exceeds the established project target of 0.35 points by 0.02 decimal points. It is expected that the next WJP’s report for 2020 will be published in February 2021.

Disclaimer: The Project’s scope is too narrow and the duration too short to produce a significant score increase for this overarching Project Goal indicator. USAID, in discussions with the Project, recognized that, given its narrow scope and the short time period of the contract, Open Justice cannot influence these scores in any meaningful way. Therefore, it was agreed that the Project’s MELP Director will only monitor and report any changes in the WJP scores.

Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System

Result 1.1: Court reorganization and optimization mapping updated, refined, and implemented

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.1. 1. Number of 0 8 12 40 37 approved and implemented amendments, regulations, court rules, and instructions developed with Open Justice Project support Unit: Number COMMENT: During May 15, 2017-March 31, 2020, Open Justice assisted the SCM, ACA, MOJ and courts to draft and approve a total of 37 regulations, decisions and legislative acts.

Thus, by March 31, 2020, Open Justice assisted the SCM, courts and ACA/MOJ to develop and/or amend the following documents: 1) the Regulation on Case Weights for Civil, Administrative, and Criminal Cases, approved by the SCM; 2) the Regulation on Publishing Court Decisions, approved by the SCM; 3) the Decision related to the Updated List of 17 Performance Indicators, approved by the SCM and MOJ; 4) the SCM Regulation on the Pilot-testing of the Video Recording Equipment for Court Hearings at Balți Appellate Court and Soroca District Court; 5) the Regulation on Processing Information Containing Personal Data by Using the Piloted Video Information System, approved by the Soroca District Court and the Balti Court of Appeal; 6) the Regulation on Criteria for the Selection, Promotion, and Transfer of Judges, approved by the SCM; 7) the Regulation on Criteria, Indicators, and

political influence. Sub-factor 7.5: Civil justice is not subject to unreasonable delay – measures whether civil justice proceedings are conducted and judgments are produced in a timely manner without unreasonable delay. Factor 8: Criminal Justice Sub-factor 8.5: Criminal system is free of corruption – measures whether the police, prosecutors, and judges are free from bribery and improper influence from criminal organizations. Sub-factor 8.6: Criminal system is free of improper government influence – measures whether the criminal justice system is independent from government or political influence.

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Procedure for the Performance Evaluation of Judges, approved by the SCM; 8) the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System for Judicial Organization and Administration, approved by the SCM; 9) the Regulation on Random Distribution of Cases in Courts, approved by the SCM; 10) the Regulation on the Activity of the Commission on Ethics and Professional Conduct of Judges, approved by the SCM; 11) the Instruction on the Activity of Recording and Procedural Documentation in District Courts and Courts of Appeal, approved by the SCM; 12) the Law No. 136 of July 19, 2018 on amending the Law No. 178/2014 on the disciplinary liability of judges, developed by the MOJ and approved by the Parliament; 13) the Regulation on piloting a videoconferencing system for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings, approved by the SCM on October, 2, 2018; 14) the Law No. 137 of September 27, 2018 on amending several regulatory acts pertaining to the selection and evaluation of judges, developed by the MOJ, approved by the Parliament and promulgated by the President of the Republic of Moldova on October 19, 2018; 15) the ACA/MOJ Regulation on the processing of personal data in the Judicial Information System (JIS); 16) the ACA/MOJ Regulation on keeping the Register of the Judicial Information System; 17) the ACA/ MOJ Security Policy for the protection of personal data processed in registers managed by the Agency for Court Administration; 18) five Regulations on Processing Information Containing Personal Data by Using the ICMS approved by 5 pilot courts from the Comrat and Cahul Courts of Appeal jurisdiction, in order to comply with the National Center for Protection of Personal Data (NCPPD) requirements on protection of personal data used in the new ICMS system; and 19) fifteen Regulations on Processing Information Containing Personal Data by Using the ICMS approved by 15 additional pilot courts from the Chisinau, Balti, Drochia, Edinet, Soroca, Criuleni, Hancesti, Orhei, Straseni, Anenii Noi, Causeni and Ungheni District Courts, and Balti and Chisinau Courts of Appeal, and Supreme Court of Justice.

During the reporting Quarter, the local counterparts did not approve or implement any new amendments, regulations, court rules or instructions, although the Project developed and delivered, since January 01, 2020, the following five drafts of Regulations and Instructions:

1) The draft Regulation for the use of the Imperva monitoring solution of the ICMS. The implementation of the Imperva monitoring solution will help ACA identify, investigate, block and document possible manipulations of ICMS database. The draft Regulation is pending MOJ approval; 2) Proposed amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting, which regulate the type of electronic statistical reports that the Moldovan courts will produce using the ICMS;

3) The Guide on generating and verifying the statistical reports, which included instructions on the correct use of the EJSM by court staff;

4) Instruction on keeping the procedural evidence and documentation in district and appellate courts, which covers the use of the new ICMS functionalities that the Project developed during the reporting quarter;

5) Amendments to the Regulation on random distribution in courts, which includes explanations on the correct use of the random case distribution module in the new ICMS.

Due to the temporary suspension of the SCM’s activity in early 2020, existing urgent MOJ priorities related to developing the draft framework on extraordinary judicial evaluation, and the existing restrictions caused by COVID-19 related state of emergency in March 2020, the SCM and the MOJ did not manage to approve the amendments submitted by Open Justice during the reporting period. The Project will follow-up with the SCM and the MOJ on this matter in April 2020.

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Result 1.2: Case management system (CMS) is redesigned, upgraded, and implemented; it is sustainable and capable of integration with all respective e-governance systems (ICMS) in Moldova and compatible with court reorganization and optimization; ICMS becomes a standard of best court automation practices in the region

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020Actua Target Target Target l (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.1.2. Number of central 17 n/a n/a 19* 19 premises of the courts using the videoconferencing system 9 n/a n/a 19* 13 to conduct video hearings with the participation of inmates, in specific matters, described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). Unit: Number COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension (October 1, 2019- June 30, 2020). During the reporting quarter, the number of central premises of the courts using the videoconferencing system to conduct video hearings with the participation of inmates in matters described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), increased by four courts (from nine to thirteen courts), compared to the last reporting quarter.

Prior to this, with the Project’s assistance, the SCM and MOJ developed the Regulation on the use of teleconferencing in penitentiaries and courts, which extended the use of the videoconferencing system from just three pilot courts to all 20 national courts. The SCM approved the respective regulation in July 2019. According to the Moldovan legislation, courts may use videoconferencing to conduct remote trials in matters provided by Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code.6 In 2018, the Project purchased and installed 20 sets of videoconferencing equipment in all Moldovan courts (central locations).

The piloting of the videoconferencing system for the remote trial participation of inmates was carried out during November-February 2019, and involved three courts (Orhei District Court, Cahul District Court and Cahul Appellate Court) and two penitentiaries (Branesti and Taraclia). During fiscal year 2019, the Chisinau and Comrat Courts of Appeal and the Edinet District Court, at their own initiative, also started using the videoconferencing system for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings.

Based on the successful piloting of the videoconferencing solution, at the request of the MOJ/ACA, by its Decision No. 108/6 of March 26, 2019, the SCM extended the use of videoconferencing solution to all courts (Central premises) across the country. According to data received from courts via the questionnaires in January 2020, 18 out of 19 Central premises of the courts had fully functional

6 Pertaining to the condition of detention.

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 videoconferencing system (including special devices, such as computers, screens, microphones, and headsets) and only 9 used it, during previous quarter.

In March 2020, the Project repeatedly sent a questionnaire to all national courts to collect data on the number of functional videoconferencing equipment units and the number of trials conducted via the videoconferencing system. According to data made available by courts, 19 courts have fully functional videoconferencing system and 13 courts reported on using it. The reasons why only thirteen courts used the videoconferencing system are multiple, from the fact that courts are not used to applying videoconferencing systems to conduct remote trials, to lack of training on how to correctly use the system. The collected data also will help the Project assess further training needs of courts’ staff to use the system, so that the latter is more frequently used by all courts.

In March 2020, when the COVID–19 related state of emergency was imposed by the Moldovan Parliament, the Moldovan Bar Association (MBA) requested the expansion of the use of videoconferencing equipment to all types of case hearings, not just those on matters provided by Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code In an interview in March 2020, the Minister of Justice was also very supportive of expanding the use of the videoconferencing to all types of cases, whenever possible, provided that the necessary legislation is amended to allow that.

The Project developed a Report on the Use of Videoconferencing for Examining Cases Remotely and will submit it to the MOJ and SCM for discussions in April 2020.

*Note: This indicator measurement refers to 19 out of overall 20 national courts’ central premises (District and Appellate levels), as the central premises of the Chisinau District Court does not have jurisdiction to examine cases related to Articles 469, 4731, 4732 CPC.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020)

1.1.3. Number of court hearings with the participation 1,106 n/a n/a 2,500 2,751 of inmates, conducted using the video conferencing system in specific matters described in the Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). Unit: Number

COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started on October 1, 2019, during the second Project extension. Open Justice established the baseline value of 1,106 court hearings conducted using the video conferencing system, based on information presented in the official NPA report, released in October

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

2019. The NPA report covered the period from January 2019 to September 2019. The data provided by NPA is the primary source for this Indicator. During the reporting period, covering January 01 to March 31, 2020, Open Justice continued collecting information on the use of videoconferencing for remote trials held between courts and penitentiaries with the participation of inmates. The context of this activity changed dramatically because of the COVID–19 pandemic and consequent state of emergency announced by Moldovan Government. The state of emergency caused important changes in both courts and penitentiaries’ activity, leading to the suspension or postponement of the court hearings on existing cases and the suspension of the initiation of new civil, criminal, or contravention cases, except for urgent ones. Also, the time for resolution of criminal cases was reduced. During the reporting period, at Open Justice’s request, the NPA provided the Project with additional data (in the COVID–19 related context, data were not officially published on the NPA web page). Thus, according to NPA, a total of 615 court hearings with the participation of inmates were held via videoconferencing between penitentiaries and courts during January 1, 2020- March 31, 2020. At the same time, according to the results of the survey implemented by Open Justice in courts via online questionnaires, the number of case hearings, conducted using the videoconferencing equipment examined during the reporting quarter, amounted to 1,813 hearings.

Also, the courts’ and penitentiaries’ staff still has limited knowledge and experience related to the full and correct use of the videoconferencing equipment, collecting and reporting data on the use of videoconferencing solution for case trials, as per the requirements included in the existing Regulation of the use of the videoconferencing in courts. This is a major issue, but also an important opportunity, especially during the current state of emergency which imposes serious restrictions on gatherings, and the number of persons who can be present at a trial. However, the quality of collected data largely depends on how the court and penitentiary staff ensures the accuracy of the introduced information related to the use of videoconferencing system in matters described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the CPC.

Open Justice will discuss with the relevant stakeholders developing an action plan to extend and institutionalize the use of the videoconferencing system in all national courts and penitentiaries, in order to examine more types of cases. The institutionalized use of the videoconferencing system will provide significant cost savings and will help avoid delays and postponements resulting from the need to transport inmates to court locations.

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Result 1.2: Case management system (CMS) is refined and implemented; it is sustainable and capable of integration with all respective e-governance systems (ICMS) in Moldova and compatible with court reorganization and optimization; ICMS becomes a standard of best court automation practices in the region

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March, 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.2.1. Number of courts 20 n/a 15 n/a 20 utilizing overarching ICMS

Unit: Number COMMENT: Open Justice developed an overarching ICMS which was implemented in all Moldovan courts (district, appellate, and the Supreme Court) by July 2019. The ICMS replaced the former Case Management System (CMS) that the Moldovan courts used during 2009-2019.

The ICMS is built on a modern IT platform that allows the ICMS to easily interconnect with other state electronic systems. While it is beyond the Project’s scope to connect the ICMS with other state electronic systems, the Project made vigorous effort to collaborate with various state entities to encourage and facilitate interconnection of other state E-Systems with the ICMS (for details, see Indicator 1.4.2 below).

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March Year 1 Year 2 extension December Target Target Target 31, 2020 (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, Actual 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.2.2 Number of new ICMS 0 n/a n/a 98 77 functionalities, developed and implemented by the project during the 2nd extension period and used by courts’ staff

Unit: Number COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. This indicator measures the courts’ progress in implementing the new ICMS functionalities developed by Open Justice during the second extension. The newly developed and implemented ICMS’s functionalities refer to additional features embedded in the system at the request of courts and partners. Overall, by June 30, 2020, the Project plans to implement 98 new ICMS functionalities, coordinated with the Project’s stakeholders.

Starting October 1, 2019 in cooperation with the IT developer Alfa Soft, Open Justice managed to develop, test and implement 77 out of 98 new ICMS functionalities, of them 68 refinements/ functionalities were developed, tested and implemented during the reporting quarter. The new ICMS

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 functionalities were requested by court users and coordinated with and ICMS developer. The most significant changes refer to the newly improved search engine, development of the Registries for case participants, refined administration of courts’ administration pages, a courts panel related to case distribution issues at the appellate and Supreme Court of Justice, streamlined claim and case registration, improved users’ profile and experience due to enhanced interface.

On March 25, 2020, ACA/MOJ submitted a request to the Project to adjust the ICMS classifier and allow ICMS users to suspend the examination of cases during the state of emergency, except for urgent cases. The suspension of non-urgent cases' examination was required by the Moldova's Commission for Exceptional Situations through the Ruling no.1 of March 18, 2020. The Project made this change to the ICMS by March 30, 2020.

In addition to the new ICMS functionalities, Open Justice continues to work on developing other IT solutions that will be integrated with the ICMS to provide a better user experience. For instance, the Media Server solution that the Project is developing will allow court staff and judges to remotely access and retrieve audio recording files. The E-file module, which the Project also continues to work on, will allow lawyers and companies’ legal representatives to file complaints and other court documents online, and also retrieve the audio recording of their court cases.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.2.3. Number of justice sector 0 200 1,200 4,500 4,480 personnel who received training with Open Justice Project support

Unit: Number COMMENT: Since the start of the Project, Open Justice trained a total of 4,480 persons on judicial reform issues in the subject areas in which the Project works. Of those, 3,413 (76%) were women and 1,067 (24%) were men.

During Quarter 1I of the fiscal year 2020, the Project has trained 582 persons, of those, 467 were women (80%) and 115 were men (20%). Below there is a description of trainings, workshops, and informative events that the Project conducted during the reporting period:

Under Objective 1, during January 01-March 31, 2020, the Open Justice Project delivered forty-two trainings, including nine in cooperation with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). The list of all training courses delivered during the reporting quarter and the number of participants, is as follows:

1) Twenty-eight workshops on “Ensuring the sustainability of ICMS use and administration at the national level” for Chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, and specialists from Procedural Tracking and Documentation Divisions (PTDDs). Of these 28 workshops, 17 workshops were conducted by the project team using the videoconferencing equipment. The training events were attended by 490 participants, of them 406 (83%) women, and 84 (17%) - were men. The trainings focused on the updates in the new ICMS’s functionalities and anonymization of personal data. The knowledge gained will be implemented by judges’ and

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

court management teams and will help to ensure better and full acceptance of all developed ICMS’s functionalities.

2) Open Justice organized three workshops on the “Development of the ability to apply the standards of the performance management in courts”, for 46 participants consisting of courts’ chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, and specialists from (PTDDs). Of 46 participants to workshops, 39 (85%) were women, and 7 (15%) were men. The trainings focused on strengthening the courts’ staff capacity for a correct entry of the judicial data into the ICMS in order to produce accurate resulting data in the Statistical Fiche and Performance Dashboard and monitor court performance.

3) During the reporting period, Open Justice organized 10 individual training sessions for 13 participants of them 12 women (92%) and 1 man (8%) on “Improving the capacity of the Judicial Inspection (JIB) and the Disciplinary Board (DB) to receive, investigate and resolve complaints against judges”. The Project consultant conducted training sessions for SCM representatives and JIB inspectors on the use of ICMS and interpretation of data available via the ICMS random distribution module and monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts.

4) On January 31, 2020 the project organized a workshop that gathered 33 participants, (of them 23 were men (70%), and 10 (30%) women), including representatives of the SCM, the ACA, the NPA, judges, chiefs of court secretariats, guardians from penitentiaries, and development partners. The event enabled the participants to present the results on the questionnaires, to evaluate the practices on the use of the videoconferencing solution, and to identify problematic areas and possible solutions to institutionalize and extend the use of the videoconferencing system in all national courts and penitentiaries.

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Result 1.3: Case management data generated to streamline case flow and optimize court administration and management

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.3.1. Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module Units: numeric, percentage Sub-Indicators: 1. Number of actions saved in 93 <30% <20% <93 27 the system as judges blocked (100 %) (29%) for a period of time Established as of October 01, 2019, here, and below

2. Number of times judges 1,418 <80% <60% <1,418 1,377 saved as “incompatible” (100%) (97%)

3. Number of cases/actions 147 <95% <90% <147 107 saved as “examined by the (100%) (73%) same judge/panel”

4. Number of actions saved in 30 n/a n/a <30 15 ICMS as “Erroneous status of (100%) (50%) the claims /file”

5. Number of actions saved in 33 n/a n/a <33 18 ICMS as “Reversed case (100%) (55%) distribution” 6. Number of actions saved in 28 n/a n/a <28 36 ICMS as” Modification of the (100%) (129%) panel of judges” 7. Number of actions saved in 29 n/a n/a <29 39 ICMS as “Correction of the (100%) (134%) panel” 8 Number of actions saved as 4 n/a n/a <4 6 “Activation/Deactivation of (100%) (150%) judge” COMMENT: Since November 2014, all Moldovan courts have been using the Case Management System (CMS) automatic random case assignment module to distribute cases to judges. Since December 2014, the previous USAID-funded Rule of Law Institutional Strengthening Program (ROLISP)

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 started to produce monthly reports on the random assignment of cases via the CMS in Moldovan courts. After ROLISP ended in February 2016, the MOJ/ACA took over the development of the monthly random case assignment monitoring reports, which are published on the ACA’s website — http://aaij.justice.md/ro/rapoarte/rapoarte-privind-repartizarea-aleatorie.

In October 2017, Open Justice contracted a staff attorney who trained and helped ACA develop the CMS/ICMS random case assignment monthly reports during fiscal year 2018 and during October 2018- May 2019. During the fiscal year 2019, in partnership with the SCM’s JIB, the Open Justice staff attorney followed up with specific courts that had the highest number of interventions in the CMS/ICMS random case assignment, to document and analyze the reasons for the interventions. Since June 2019, ACA/MOJ took over the development of the monthly random distribution reports.

The reports are published and available to the public on the web page of the ACA. The data presented above are covering the period of March 1-31, 2020.

The new ICMS version is based on a more sophisticated case distribution mechanism than the former CMS and consists of new ICMS functionalities (e.g. at the appellate and Supreme Court levels, it distributes the cases to a panel of judges). Previously, the CMS only designated the reporting judge, and the other two members of the panel were mentioned only on paper documents and were not reflected in the new ICMS. This change, which increased the transparency of case distribution to panels, also triggered the need to develop mechanisms that allow a more thorough evidence of how these panels are modified on the basis of a chairman’s ruling. Open Justice developed these mechanisms and monitors them via five newly introduced sub-indicators: Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file”, Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Reversed case distribution”, Number of actions saved in ICMS as” Modification of the panel of judges”, Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Correction of the panel”, Number of actions saved as “Activation/deactivation of judge”. Thus, since October 1, 2020, quarterly reports on ICMS random case assignment module/courts’ case distribution are based on monitoring, extracting and analysis data provided through 8 ICMS functionalities, which court staff may mis-use to manipulate the random case assignment with ICMS

Compared to the baseline, the data obtained as a result of the monthly Monitoring of Random Case Distribution in Moldovan courts reveals an important enhancement in the values of five sub-indicators, according to data from the March 2020 report. The following five sub-indicators showing a positive change are: 1) Number of actions saved in the system as judges blocked for a period of time; 2) Number of times judges saved as “incompatible”; 3) Number of cases/actions saved as “examined by the same judge/panel”; 4) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file”; 5) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Reversed case distribution”.

However, the values of the following three sub-indicators are still over their established targets, namely: the sub-indicator 6) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as ” Modification of the panel of judges”, the sub- indicator 7) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Correction of the panel” and the sub-indicator 8) Number of actions saved as “Activation/deactivation of judge”. The over value of the sub-indicator 6) ” Modification of the panel of judges” is determined, inter alia by the facts that, during the previous reporting period, case distribution of panel to three judges, as opposed to one reporting judge in the previous CMS version, still leads to more changes in the panel composition. The exceeding value of the sub- indicator 7) “Correction of the panel” is explained by the fact that all 39 manual modifications of the judicial panels were made based on the ruling of the Chairman or the Deputy Chairman of the Court. The over value of the sub-indicator 8) “Activations and deactivations of judges” is determined by the fact that more than 30 new judges were appointed by the SCM during the previous quarter, each of these

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 judges was allocated a new user role and activated in the ICMS and by the turnover of judges at Chisinau and Orhei District Courts and also, several judges presented their resignation recently.

Given the novelty of such distribution, court staff are still adjusting to all ICMS new functionalities. To mitigate possible deviations from the correct use of ICMS, Open Justice will continue to offer support to courts’ staff during the next reporting period, despite the COVID–19 related state of emergency, which is causing a reduced work time/ reduced presence at work places of the regular and key staff, including SCM, MOJ/ACA NPA. The state of emergency, declared by Moldovan Government, will last until May 15, 2020 and this fact is influencing the mode of operation of the main Project’s partners, including all Moldovan courts, where some personnel were forced to take a rotative vacation and/or have a reduced workload; also, courts are not obliged to present reports, as of March 31.

Generally, the registered increases or decreases in the value of specific sub-indicators observed during the whole monitoring period do not necessarily suggest a strong negative or positive trend. The indicator and target values must be analyzed in their context in order to accurately measure whether manipulations of the random case assignment module have occurred (and this is the logic behind using the word “alleged” in the indicator description). While no intentional manipulations of the random case assignment module were revealed during the reporting period, there were frequent errors committed by the system users, and thus they are a factor of human error and not corrupt intent. The analysis of these factors, submitted by courts at the SCM’s request, revealed that the high incidence of user error is due to the frequent turnover of court personnel, the limited training capacity of courts, and the bugs and technical malfunctions that sometimes occur in the ICMS in certain courts.

To ensure the sustainability of this activity and to institutionalize the monitoring of the case random distribution via ICMS, Open Justice seconded, starting January, 2020, a junior staff attorney from Open Justice to the JIB under the SCM. During the next reporting period, Open Justice will help the SCM continue to monitor the alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module and will revise the instruction on monitoring random case distribution via the ICMS.

The continuous monitoring of random case distribution helps to: 1) increase courts’ responsibility and reduce illegal interventions/improper use of CMS/ICMS case random distribution, 2) improve the structure and content of the MOJ/ACA reports on random distribution, and 3) institutionalize the responsibility of the SCM, the ACA, and court staff to properly monitor the random distribution of cases.

Page 20 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.3.2 Percentage increase in Reasoned Explanatory Notes 0 % n/a n/a >25% 0% on ICMS alleged manipulations, submitted by courts to SCM’s Judicial Inspection Board (JIB)/ versus SCM JIB’s issued Requests for Information on ICMS alleged manipulations

Unit: Percentage COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started on October 1, 2019. This indicator is meant to measure the increase in the SCM JIB’s capacity to track and follow-up with courts on alleged manipulations and the court’s responsiveness to JIB’s inquiries. During the reporting period, a Project’s Consultant seconded to the SCM/JIB helped the SCM develop nine information requests/inquiries that the SCM will send to courts in April-May 2020. The nine courts would need to provide explanations for alleged manipulations of the random case distribution detected based on February-March 2020 Random Case Distribution Reports. The JIB did not send the notes to the courts by the end of March 2020, invoking various urgencies related to courts activities during the COVID–19 related state of emergency.

However, in March 2020, the SCM, helped by Open Justice, developed a Letter to all courts pointing on the necessity to correctly perform the case random distribution and warning on existing vulnerabilities and identified courts staff errors when using ICMS for random distribution, which will be sent to all courts in April 2020.

Open Justice planned to second the Consult to JIB as of October 1, 2010, to support the SCM’s JIB in investigating an alleged manipulation of the new ICMS. Due to the complex political context that generated tensions within the judiciary and the SCM, Open Justice was able to deploy the consultant to the JIB only on January 21, 2020, once the SCM signaled its commitment to collaborate on this matter. The cooperation is developing productively, and Open Justice will continue to provide targeted assistance to the JIB in to track and follow-up with courts on alleged manipulations, and start investigations in cases with sufficient merits.

Page 21 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.3.3. Number of Mandatory 0 n/a n/a 51 71 Electronic Statistical Reports generated by pilot courts via (of them, ICMS 51 reports are specific Unit: Numeric for district courts)

n/a n/a 49 60

(of them, 40 reports are specific for district courts) COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. At the beginning of the 2nd extension, at the request of Project’s counterparts, the new ICMS will incorporate 90 statistical reports, as follows: 41 reports for district courts, 39 reports for appellate courts and 10 general reports for the use of courts of both levels. Mandatory Electronic Statistical Reports refer to specific sets of ICMS statistical report templates, filled in with data by pilot courts’ staff, and electronically generated via ICMS.

This indicator has a cumulative value, and the actual achieved metric shows that considerable progress was made during the reporting quarter. Thus, out of the overall 155 statistical reports developed for all national courts, 111 statistical reports were developed for the Moldovan courts of two levels - district and appellate (51 statistical reports are for the first–tier courts, 40 statistical reports for the appellate courts, 20 general statistical reports for the use of both first–tier and appellate courts) and 44 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice. The actual achieved metric shows that considerable progress was made during the two reporting quarters, as the Project developed these additional, cumulative, 44 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice.

During the reporting period, Open Justice made all necessary preparations and tested the reports with ACA, and started piloting these different sets of statistical reports in three pilot courts of both levels (the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal), according to the SCM’s decision No. 419/3, approved on December 10, 2019. These three pilot courts were planned to be the first courts trained and consulted to no longer use paper statistical reports. But, according to ACA’s letter, dated March 27, 2020, the use of electronic statistical reports became a high-priority issue under the recent public health concerns related to the COVID –19 pandemic. Consequently, the rest of the courts will gradually abolish paper statistical reports during the current fiscal year.

During the reporting period, Open Justice also started to implement the activities, included in the drafted action plan on the Electronic Statistics implementation, developed during the previous quarter,

Page 22 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 which provides capacity building for court leadership and key staff on how to correctly introduce data to generate accurate electronic statistical reports, and how to interpret statistical data. The training sessions were carried out between February-March 2020 and will ensure that courts can effectively use electronic statistical reports to improve their efficiency and performance. Result 1.4: ICMS is capable of eventual functional integration with all relevant systems of the state agencies (the Civil Registry, the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO), police, prisons, Forensics Bureau, cadaster system, etc.)

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March Year 1 Year 2 extension 31, 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.4.1. Number of public-facing 0 2 4 n/a 4 electronic applications that are incorporated into the MOJ’s overarching ICMS

Unit: Number COMMENT: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information briefly reviews the Project’s results.

ICMS incorporates three electronic publicly-available applications as follows: the E-File version 2.0 that will allow lawyers to electronically submit complaints, the National Courts' Web Portal that ensures online access to operational data available on the ICMS for court users, and the upgraded Web Report Card listing court performance data for general public access, which is available on the SCM’s website. The fourth public-facing electronic application related to submission of online petitions to the SCM JIB, envisaged at the beginning of the Project when developing this indicator, has been accessible since October 2018 from the upgraded SCM website, rather than via ICMS.

The E-File version 1.0 was developed by the MOJ, in accordance with the Government’s Action Plan for 2016–2018, which laid out several priorities, such as ensuring extensive functionality of the ICMS. Open Justice assisted ACA/MOJ to interconnect the E-File version 1.0 with the CMS and to pilot the E-File module. The E-File module enables case parties and their representatives to electronically submit procedural documents to the court, and monitor the progress of the related court proceedings online. Open Justice also provided technical assistance to the MOJ to assess the pilot phase results, upgrade the E-File application and make it part of the ICMS. The redesign of the E-File module version 2.0 and its integration with ICMS was completed by September 2018. Open Justice, in collaboration with Alfa Soft, trained 20 attorneys on how to use the newly developed E-File module. The piloting of the upgraded E-File module started on April 1, 2019 in Cahul district court and the Cahul Appellate Court.

In March 2018, Open Justice selected the IT company Deeplace to upgrade the National Courts’ Web Portal. At the ACA/MOJ’s request, the launch of the upgraded National Courts’ Web Portal was postponed until the piloting of the new ICMS is launched. In January 2019, Open Justice transferred the National Courts' Web Portal to the production version and tested the developed web services. The upgraded National Courts’ Web Portal automatically extracts all court decisions from the new ICMS

Page 23 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 for public use which considerably enhances the transparency and accessibility of the judiciary. The launch of all the courts’ webpages, as part of the upgraded National Courts’ Web Portal, increases judicial transparency and helps to inform the public about judicial performance in real time.

During quarter 1, of fiscal year 2020, MOJ/ACA sought Open Justice’s help to redesign and update the National Courts’ Web Portal in Moldova (www.instante.justice.md) in order to meet additional expectations of the stakeholder and the public. The scope of Portal modernization includes the new developments involving modern technologies and UI/UX best practices7, development of the search mechanism for public judicial acts to be retrieved from ICMS. Open Justice refined the Web Report Card which was developed by the Project’s subcontractor Alfa Soft. The Web Report Card publishes court performance data related to 20 courts and allows journalists, academics, and the general public to have access to court performance information.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March r Year 1 Year 2 extension 31, 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 1.4.2. Number of e-governance 0 1 3 n/a 8 systems/services integrated with overarching ICMS

During fiscal year 2018, Open Justice assisted the MOJ to establish the Working Group on the interoperability of the new ICMS with other e-governance systems. The architecture of the new ICMS is able to interconnect and provide a platform for data exchange and communication between all relevant state agencies. During the Working Group meetings, it was determined that the governmental interoperability platform called M-Connect will ensure the interconnection of the information systems. The Working Group proposed that each institution remain the proprietor of its own information system, which will export data to the ICMS. The costs of interconnectivity will be supported by each institution.

During fiscal year 2018, with the Open Justice assistance, the MOJ, in its capacity as the owner of the JIS, signed the Agreement on Interoperability Services, delivered through the M-Connect Interoperability Platform, with the E-Gov Center. According to the Governmental Decision No. 593 of July 24, 2017, the JIS includes four components: ICMS, E-File, the National Courts' Web Portal, and the IT solution for recording court hearings, Femida. The interoperability of the JIS will be ensured by integrating ICMS with other governmental registries and systems.

7 UI refers to user interface design—it is the point of interaction between the user and a digital device or website. UX design refers to the user experience design—the process of developing and improving the quality of the interaction between a user and all facets of a system.

Page 24 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

By this date, while the Year 2 target was a maximum of three e-governance systems/services integrated with the new ICMS, the Project has connected eight systems/services to the new ICMS and namely: MConnect Platform, MPay, MPass, MSign, MLog, MNotify, the Registers of Population and Legal Entities, services. In addition, Open Justice subcontractor Alfa Soft developed web services to make the ICMS capable of eventual functional integration with the Prosecutor’s E-File system, E-Bailiffs, the Registry of Forensics and Criminology, and the Registry of Criminal Offences/Contraventions. The functioning of these services has been tested since January 21, 2019 in the first three pilot courts, namely Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and Comrat Court of Appeal, designated by the SCM in its Decision No. 323/16 of July 3, 2018, and Decision No. 376/19 of July 31, 2018.

During Quarter 3 of fiscal year 2019, the Project tested the ICMS integration with the PGO’s E-File system. The full integration with the PGO’s E-File system will be possible once the PGO registers with the NCPPD and has access to M-Connect service.

In order to assess the preconditions for ensuring ICMS connectivity and to support the stakeholders in determining the regulatory and technical requirements for the ICMS’s functional integration, in late April 2019, the Project contracted an international expert to conduct an Interoperability Assessment.

During April–June, 2019, Open Justice also developed and implemented a new ICMS functionality, which allows court staff to send court decisions and additional documents electronically to probation officers from the ICMS to their email addresses. The functionality addresses one of the most pressing issues that the Probation Office is currently facing – tardy receipt of court decisions for enforcement. Further integration with the Probation Office will take place based on the Interoperability Assessment, mentioned above.

Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System

Result 2.1: Performance management standards applied based on the management data generated by the CMS/ICMS

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March Year 1 Year 2 extension 31, 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.1.1. Ratio of judicial cases 6.2% <3% <2% <6% 8.9% backlogged from the total number of pending cases

Unit: Percentage

COMMENT: On November 29, 2016, the SCM adopted a decision establishing case processing time standards, which have not yet been implemented. Consequently, for the purpose of this Project indicator, a “backlogged case” is a domestic court case that is pending and unresolved, for a period exceeding 24 months. This definition corresponds to the European Court of Human Rights case law.

Page 25 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Given the actual circumstances related to COVID-19 pandemic and the temporary exemption of courts to present some categories of periodical reports to MOJ/ACA and SCM, Open Justice extracted from the ICMS the information related to the backlog.

Thus, according to latest available data extracted by the project staff, from the ICMS, the total number of pending cases during January 1-March, 31, 2020 is 69,746cases, of which 6,186 (8.9%) cases were backlogged cases pending more than 24 and 36 months (including civil, criminal and contravention cases). The actual value of this indicator, measured during this quarter, negatively exceeds by 2.7% percentage points its established baseline and by 2.9% than the established June 30, 2020 target value of less than 6%. This might be explained by the fact that many trials in specific civil and criminal cases were suspended during the COVID –19 pandemic, starting March, 18, 2020.

Generally, backlog has an oscillating value and its increase or decrease is as a result of complex factors, such as the court reorganization reform, which reduced the number of court premises in the country. Parties to a case and lawyers often fail to show up to hearings and trials due to the long distances they now have to travel to a court and the higher travel costs they have to pay. Many of the newly- reorganized courts lack judges and staff, which also affects case management.

During previous implementation stages, Open Justice supported the SCM’s Working Group on European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) indicators to review all current performance indicators and developed an upgraded list of 17 Performance Measures based on CEPEJ indicators. At Open Justice’s request, the SCM, through its Decision No. 854/37 of December 19, 2017, approved the Performance Indicators’ list, including those related to time management, which are CEPEJ measures of court performance (clearance rate, disposition time, age of pending cases, on-time case processing). On March 28, 2018, the MOJ also approved the 17 Judicial Performance Indicators (JPIs).

The Project implemented the CEPEJ-based statistical electronic fiche that automatically generates CEPEJ court reports on eight performance indicators. Open Justice connected the electronic fiche with the new ICMS in January 2019. Using the fiche, the courts can better track their performance and observe downward trends related to case clearance or time to disposition, which will encourage actions to decrease case backlog in the long run.

Additionally, one of the most important elements of the Project’s International Framework Court Excellence (IFCE) implementation efforts in all Moldovan Appellate Courts was the use of CEPEJ-based judicial timeframes (see https://rm.coe.int/16807481f2) as a tool to assist courts in dealing with the excessive length of judicial proceedings. The Appellate Courts identified the causes of unnecessary delays in handling cases and defined the time standards and targets for all relevant case types. Further, the Appellate Courts monitored the observance of time standards by the management of the court, in order to detect potential delays at an early stage in the proceedings. One of the main outcomes of the IFCE piloting was that courts applied a court performance quality system that involved judicial performance indicators related to time management.

The Project’s scope is too narrow and the duration too short to significantly influence a decrease in the ratio of judicial case backlogs to the total number of pending cases in the context of the ongoing court reorganization reform. The Project provided local stakeholders with clear standards and modern IT tools that will automatically track and generate information and performance indicators about the duration of cases, which will lead to improved backlog reduction efforts.

Page 26 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

In the current difficult context, the Project will continue to support the SCM, ACA/MOJ and the NPA to expand, as much as possible, the application of videoconferencing solution to conduct trials and to improve the rate of case examinations. Result 2.2: Oversight over judicial performance institutionalized

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.2.1. Percentage of 23% 13 100% 100% 16 performance management developed standards developed versus vs. applied 16 applied Unit: Percentage COMMENT: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information shortly reflects the Project’s results.

Prior to the Project’s start, the SCM adopted the Decision No. 634/26, of September 29, 2016, approving a list of 13 JPIs. During the fiscal year 2018, Open Justice assisted the SCM CEPEJ Working Group to revise and update the JPIs. As a result of Open Justice assistance, the SCM revised its Decision No. 634/26 and approved the updated list of 17 JPIs by its Decision No. 854/37, dated December 19, 2017. At the Project’s request, MOJ endorsed the new list of 17 JPIs on March 28, 2018.

Currently, Court Performance Indicators approved by the SCM are used through the ICMS Judicial Performance Dashboard and the electronic CEPEJ-based statistical fiche that the Project developed. Open Justice developed and incorporated 16 out of 17 approved JPIs into the upgraded Performance Dashboard of the new ICMS, which will increase the capacity of the Moldovan judiciary to monitor and assess its performance. The 17th JPI is set out to measure the litigants’ satisfaction with courts’ services by using paper questionnaires within the court premises. The performance data of Moldovan courts are uploaded in the upgraded Judicial Performance Dashboard after the implementation of the new ICMS in all courts in September, 30, 2019.

Open Justice developed a user guide on the Performance Dashboard, which contributes to capacity- building of the courts to use and interpret real-time data and automated reports generated by the Performance Dashboard. Open Justice integrated the draft Guide into the ICMS and made it available to all pilot courts. The Guide is accompanied by video tutorials and can be also used as training material in future training activities for the courts.

During April 10-12, 2019, Open Justice held two training sessions for Moldovan judges, court chairmen and chiefs of the secretariat at the NIJ. The training focused on ICMS time management tools and the improvement of the quality of judicial services, as well as on ICMS reporting tools and analysis of judicial statistics data. The training improved the ability of court chairmen and chiefs of the secretariat to effectively apply ICMS tools for the automated processing of judicial information and management of the court.

Page 27 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Open Justice also updated the Web Report Card that provides data on courts' performance to the public at no cost, thus significantly increasing judicial transparency. The Web Report card is available online and displays data from the courts using the new ICMS.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.2.2. Increase of reasoned, 0% >40% >70% >25% 0% merit-based judicial appointments ensured by the SCM

Unit: Percentage COMMENT: USAID approved the Open Justice Year 1 Work Plan with a request that the Project promote merit-based judicial appointments and clear judicial promotion criteria and procedures. This request arose from the fact that, according to the media and expert non-governmental organizations, the process of judicial selection and promotion lacks transparency and impartiality and thus undermines public confidence in the justice system.

During the fiscal year 2018, the Open Justice Project contributed significantly to improving the legal framework via local and international consultancy and expertise, assessments, and the creation of related platforms for discussions between stakeholders. Based on the Project’s solid technical assistance and recommendations, the MOJ developed draft laws for amending several legislative acts, which significantly change judicial selection/evaluation procedures. On July 29, 2018, the Parliament passed amendments regulating the reasoning of the SCM decisions pertaining to judicial appointments and granting the Plenum of the SCM a 20% margin of discretion in deciding candidates’ final scores. The President of the Republic of Moldova promulgated the law on October 19, 2018.

Additionally, by Decision No. 612/29 of December 20, 2018, the SCM amended the Regulation on the organization and conduct of the competition for the selection of judges, and appointment of vice- president and president of the court. According to these amendments, the SCM shall organize ordinary contests for supplementing the judicial vacancies twice a calendar year. The first contest, organized under the new legal framework was held on August 6, 2019. In that case the SCM appointed 31 judges and approved 17 promotions. The Project examined the decision adopted by the SCM on this occasion and found that none of the judicial appointments mentioned in the SCM decision incorporated all eight recommendations included in the Guidelines for SCM Members on Preparing Well-Reasoned Decisions on the Selection of Judges developed by the Project in 2019. Therefore, we considered that the value of this indicator represented a 0% increase.

The next ordinary contest for supplementing the judicial vacancies, based on the amended Regulation on the organization and conduct of the competition for the selection of judges, and appointment of vice-president and president of the court, should have taken place in February, 2020. This contest was, however, cancelled due to the lack of quorum in the Plenum of the SCM. On December 20, 2019, the Parliament amended the Law No. 947 of July 19, 1996 on SCM, whereby the total number of SCM members was increased from 12 to 15, adding 4 new members from among tenured law professors.

Page 28 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

The contest for the selection of these new members was conducted by the Parliament and ended on March 17, 2020, while any SCM activities on selection and career of judges were suspended.

Despite the COVID-related state of emergency, SCM didn’t suspend fully its activity, including those related to the selection and career of judges, and the work of its specialized boards involved in judicial selection/promotion. So far, officially, an only meeting of the Disciplinary Board was cancelled. The conclusion is that SCM can, hypothetically, organize competitions for the selection/promotion of judges, as long as it complies with the sanitary-epidemiological rules in the decisions of the CES.

At the same time, it is worth mentioning that, despite these circumstances, the Project continued its efforts to assist the SCM on increasing the number of reasoned, merit-based judicial appointments. In this context, the Project finalized and sent, on March 27, 2020, for the SCM's acknowledgement the Monitoring Report on the quality of reasoning of the SCM's decision on selection and career of judges for the period of July 2019 - December 2019.

Open Justice Project will monitor the following ordinary contest, which shall take place in August 2020, in order to continue improving the aspects related to the distribution of the 20 points and the final voting of the SCM, and implementation of all eight recommendations from the Guidelines. The Project plans to provide additional assistance and recommendations for improving the SCM’s institutional capacity to draw-up well-reasoned decisions on selection and career of judges. Result 2.3: Public Access to justice sector information

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March Year 1 Year 2 extension 31, 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.3.1. Increase of public 22% n/a >5% n/a 19% confidence of judicial (general effectiveness public)

Unit: Percentage 26% (people who interacted with courts) COMMENT: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information provides a brief review of the Project’s results.

As a baseline for this indicator Open Justice used data presented by the Institute for Public Policies in its last Barometer of Public Opinion survey, conducted in early 2017. The Institute’s survey contains only data about respondents’ trust in various state and non-state institutions, including in the justice sector.

In accordance with the Project’s Year 1 and Year 2 Work Plans, Open Justice carried out two national public opinion surveys to assess the overall population’s understanding of the ongoing judicial reforms and achievements, as well as to gather feedback for further improvements. In each survey, more than

Page 29 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

1,100 people expressed their perception about the judicial system in Moldova, 200 people described their interaction with the judicial system in the last two years, and four Focus Groups sought to obtain in-depth information about the judiciary’s performance.

The first survey results showed that there are areas requiring considerable improvements. For example, only 16% of the general population and 18% of people who have interacted with courts declared they had trust in the judicial system, which is less than the established baseline of 22% by 6% and 4% respectively. At that time, these values confirmed the negative trend related to the trust in judiciary resulting from other opinion polls conducted by different institutions during 2017–2018. Among the reasons for distrust in the judicial system were: limited access to high-quality legal assistance, corruption, examination of high-profile cases behind closed doors, poor legal education, and judges’ biased attitudes. The SCM took note of the first survey results and emphasized that these results will serve as a basis for further pro-active implementation of beneficial changes. The media posted the electronic version of the survey brochure online and noted the SCM’s effort to actually take into account court users’ opinions regarding reforms that are much needed in the judicial system.

Even though the results of the second survey show that the (average) value of the indicator referring to the public perception of the judiciary failed to achieve its final target, the second survey shows certain improvements in the judicial system. For instance, the trust in the justice system has increased from 16% to 19% among the general population, and from 18% to 26% among people who have interacted with courts in the last two years.

The stated improvements are partially due to the vigorous efforts made by the Open Justice Project to support the reform in the judiciary, to upgrade and develop the new ICMS, to train, inform, consult and involve many key stakeholders and final users in developing Project products and activities. To inform and produce a change at the level of general knowledge and the perception of the public at large, the Project’s outreach team developed information materials and conducted awareness activities.

The Open Justice Project also developed a brochure and a one-page flyer with the survey findings and results, comparing 2017 and 2018 survey results. The one-pager helps specialists and the public to understand the studies’ general trend — which is that persons who interacted with the judiciary in the last two years are better informed overall and have more confidence in the judiciary than the general population. The final report, the brochure and the one-pager were developed, printed and presented to the SCM in March 2019, for further evidence-based decision-making and dissemination to the public at large.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.3.2. Number of citizens 0 2,000 5,000 55,000 48,900 reached by public outreach campaigns

Unit: Number COMMENT: Open Justice continually informs its partners, stakeholders, and the public at large, on various topics relevant to the Project’s main areas of activity and cross-cutting issues. So far, from the

Page 30 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Project’s start, a total of 48,900 persons have been informed via different information material and activities. Of those, 21,931 people were informed via the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, 24,586 people via social media channels, and 2,383 people via various public outreach events.

During the Quarter 1I of the fiscal year 2020, Open Justice informed 771 persons through articles and social media posts, representing all possible means of communication with the public. Of these 771 persons, 478 persons visited the Project’s webpage, 293 persons engaged on Open Justice’s social media channels (of them, 250persons on Facebook and 43 persons on Instagram).

Between January 1 - March 31, 2020, Open Justice produced and published, on the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, an article on the benefits of using the videoconferencing system in trials with the remote participation of inmates in terms of state budget savings, the reduction of delays and postponements. In this context, the article also explains the need to extend the scope of the videoconferencing system for the examination of more types of cases.

In addition, Open Justice printed 1,000 bilingual A4 posters (Romanian and Russian) on the new ICMS benefits in order to be distributed in courts. The distribution was postponed due to the state of emergency, declared amid COVID-19. The printing and distribution of the posters is part of the ICMS nationwide outreach campaign, which the Project planned for March-May 2020. Once the state of emergency is lifted, the Project will continue the planned outreach activities on the implemented judicial E-Systems, including ICMS. These activities will raise the public’ awareness of how the new IT tools improve the courts efficiency and transparency, and contribute to better court services.

The restrictions instituted due to COVID-19 were also the reason for the postponement of two public events. First event was planned for March 11, 2020, and was prepared in partnership with Balti Court of Appeal and Moldova State University representatives. For this occasion, Open Justice had prepared a presentation for a group of law students on the available new technologies for the judicial processes, such as ICMS, Courts' Web Portal, E-file. A similar presentation was planned for March 20, 2020, for a group of IT students from the Technical University of Moldova. The aim of the planned events was to raise the awareness among the future law and IT specialists on the modern technologies used by the judiciary. Once the restrictions are lifted, Open Justice will reschedule the organization of the above- mentioned events.

The aim of the conducted outreach activities, both through public events and published materials, was to inform more people about the new IT systems used by the judiciary and the way in which these new tools will ensure better court services for citizens. In addition, these activities contributed to the consolidation of the public’s trust in the judiciary and increasing the visibility of the Project and USAID’s role in advancing the justice sector reform.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.3.3. Increase in number of 120 >10% >20% n/a 538% positive or neutral media

Page 31 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 reports, reflecting MOJ/ACA and SCM activity

Unit: Number, Percentage COMMENT: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information briefly reviews the Project’s results.

By the end of the Project Year 2, a total of 645 positive and neutral media reports were published, which represented a striking increase of 538%, compared to the baseline. Generally, during the entire period of the Project implementation, the most-reported theme in the media was on the selection and promotion of judges. The other most publicized topics were about the CRO reform, judges’ salaries, court budgeting, court premises, and access to court decisions.

The increased interest of the media in the topics related to the judiciary can be explained by the fact that transparency in the judicial system continues to be associated with fairness in the selection and promotion of judges, and thus the media has shown an increased interest in this topic. Also, the overall number of published media reports during the fiscal year 2019 was largely due to the active interest of mass media in the reorganization and optimization of courts and court automation, the parliamentary election, government appointment and the effect of these political changes on the judiciary, dismissals of judicial leadership, court decisions in political cases, and anticipated important reforms in the judiciary. It should be noted that this reported increase of 538%, compared to the baseline, also reflected the Open Justice team’s thorough monitoring of the mainstream media and press.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.3.4. Proportion of SCM 0 100% 100% n/a 100% sessions archived out of the total sessions live streamed

Unit: Percentage COMMENT: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information briefly reviews the Project’s results.

Since 2013, the SCM has live streamed its weekly meetings, so that any interested party can watch the meetings in real time. Live streaming of the SCM meetings has significantly increased the transparency of the SCM’s activity compared to past practices, when very few people could observe the meetings remotely. During the fiscal year 2019, the SCM held weekly livestreamed meetings during which the SCM members discussed and adopted decisions on various issues pertaining to the daily activities of the courts, court administration, and judicial appointment and promotion, as well as issue decisions on requests submitted by various agencies.

In May 2018, with the Project’s assistance, the SCM created a public archive of its live streamed meetings and placed them on the current SCM webpage, thus increasing the level of accessibility of the

Page 32 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

SCM sessions to the public. Further, all SCM working sessions, live streamed in video and audio format, were downloaded from the server and posted on the SCM webpage for public access. By the end of fiscal year 2019, a total of 28 sessions were broadcasted and 16 sessions were still available on the current SCM website, as the duration of placement is six months (http://csm.md/files/wArhivaSedintelor/arhivacsm.html)

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March 31, Year 1 Year 2 extension 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.3.5. Number of pilot courts 0 1 2 n/a 6 using audio and video equipment to accommodate court users who are unable to attend a court hearing or sessions

Unit: Number COMMENT: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator by September 30, 2019. The following information briefly reviews the Project’s results.

Open Justice Project supported the SCM and ACA/MOJ to enhance the regulatory framework and the courts’ technical capacities to offer better services to the public, including ensuring remote participation in hearings and sessions for defendants who are in custody. In October 2018, the SCM, with support from the Project, developed and approved the Regulations on holding court hearings with the use of the teleconferencing system in the pilot courts and pilot penitentiaries. The Project also provided technical assistance to the NPA to purchase and install video conferencing equipment in the penitentiaries in Taraclia and Orhei, enabling remote communication with the courts. During November 2018 (the first month of piloting of the videoconferencing system) by six courts and two penitentiaries, 342 court hearings were conducted, saving approximately 211,014MDL ($12,000) for the NPA.

The six pilot courts were: Orhei District Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, and Edinet District Court. After a successful pilot, the Project developed conclusions and recommendations for procedural rules and training of both court and penitentiary personnel. As a result of the successful implementation, the NPA purchased and installed 17 additional teleconferencing systems in December 2018.

After a highly successful piloting of the videoconferencing system, the ACA/MOJ and the SCM, with the Project’s help, developed the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries, which expanded the use of the videoconferencing equipment to all courts and penitentiaries across the country. The Regulation, which the SCM approved in July 2019, includes provisions related to management and use of the system, technical rules for conducting the remote trial participation of inmates and statistical evidence of remote court sessions, in the matters described in Articles 469, 4731 and 4732 of the CPC.

Page 33 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020

Indicator 1.1.2 above provides details about the number of courts that are currently using the video conferencing system to conduct remote trials with participation of inmates, and Indicator1.1.3 provides information about the number of remote hearings that courts conducted since November 2018.

Open Justice has had a significant impact on the justice system, through this videoconferencing solution which reduces costs and delays and postponements. Speedy justice is now a reality for the criminal justice system in Moldova, which is especially important in times of the COVID–19 related state of emergency, when courts cannot continue their usual activity involving presence of the different parties at the hearings. Thus, the Project continues to foster a more accountable and efficient justice system, promoting institutional capacity building and cutting-edge technological tools and solutions.

Note: The Project was not able to ensure the use of videoconferencing equipment for the remote participation of all court users (except for inmates from penitentiaries). For that to happen, the legal framework must be revised and amended by the Parliament, and premises outside the courts (e.g. hospitals) must be equipped with videoconferencing equipment, which is not within the Open Justice Project’s scope of work. The Year 3 work plan includes only activities related to the ICMS development and deployment.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March Year 1 Year 2 extension 31, 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.3.6. Number of court 0 97,000 689,000 n/a 740,824 decisions and rulings of the Chisinau District Court for the years 1973-2009 digitized and searchable online (except for domestic violence, sexual assault and other cases containing sensitive information)

Unit: Number

Comment: Open Justice fully completed the activity related to this indicator during the 1st extension of the Project implementation period. The following information briefly describes the Project’s results.

In February 2018, USAID requested that Open Justice add an additional activity to its scope of work comprising the digitization of court decisions and rulings of the Chisinau District Court. At Open Justice’s request, in March 2018, USAID approved a new indicator related to the digitization process of court case files in the Chisinau District Court, which was included in the MELP. Open Justice contracted the IT company Andmevara to digitize the judicial decisions issued by the District Court of Chisinau from 1965 to 2009.

On November 8, 2018, Open Justice submitted a written request to the MOJ regarding the storage of the Chisinau Court’s digitized archive on the Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security (SITCS) servers and ensuring public online access to the archive. The MOJ communicated its position,

Page 34 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 by a letter of December 7, 2018, stating that there are no legal grounds to host the digitized archive on SITCS server and ensure public access to court decisions issued prior to 2008. As a result, during December 2018, Open Justice suggested placing the archive on a server that will be managed by the Chisinau District Court. The SCM approved the purchase of a server for the Digitized Archive of the Chisinau District Court during calendar year 2019. To develop the connection between the digitized archive and the ICMS (as provided in the Andmevara contract), Open Justice temporarily hosted the archive on a computer at the Chisinau District Court, until the archive could be transferred onto a dedicated SCM’s server.

By April 2019, Andmevara SRL completed the digitization process by digitizing a total of 740,824 decisions and rulings, amounting to 2,278,197 million pages. Andmevara integrated the archive with the ICMS (via web-services), and also developed and tested a new application – the Archive Information System that enables the staff from the Chisinau District Court to browse, search, retrieve and view the digitized content by key words and various filters.

Andmevara also developed the users’ guide, the administrator’s guide, the technical documentation regarding a possible connection between the archive and third-party systems, and a warranty letter that ensure that Andmevara will connect the temporarily hosted digitized archive (on a computer of the Chisinau Court) with the new ICMS beyond the Project’s life, when a server dedicated for the digitized archive will be purchased. On April 20, 2019, Andmevara SRL has entered into the warranty phase, which will be completed on April 20th, 2020.

The digitization of court judgments increases the transparency of the Moldovan judicial system. It will also reduce the costs of storing archives, enhance the security of information, ensure greater uniformity in applying the law, and speed up court processes.

Performance Indicator BL Project Project Project 2nd March Year 1 Year 2 extension 31, 2020 Target Target Target Actual (May 14, (May 14, (June 30, 2018) 2019) 2020) 2.4.1. Proportion of female 0 Female Female Female Female panel speakers and female panel panel panel panel general participants in Project speakers speakers speakers speakers program-assisted activities, – 15% – 25% – 15% -12% initiatives, and events Female Female Female Female Unit: Percentage participants participants participants participants – 45% – 55% – 80% -76%

COMMENT: During Project implementation, Open Justice organized various events, such as trainings, workshops, study visits, roundtables and public lectures with the participation of women as both participants and panelists.

Overall, from the onset of the Project, out of the total 4,480 participating specialists at various events, including working groups, trainings and public events, a total of 3,413 (76%) were female general participants and 393 (12%) were women, who played a central or important role as

Page 35 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, MELP Report April 30, 2020 experts/moderators/ interveners/facilitators. During January 01- March 31, 2020, out of the total of 3,413 women, 48 women had an important role in project activities carried out.

Thus, the achieved values of both disaggregation of this indicator, i.e. related to female panel speakers and female participants, reveal an increase by 1 p.p. per each disaggregation, compared to the values, achieved during the previous quarter.

Open Justice will continue to advocate for more active women’s participation in Project activities, and will engage them as panelists whenever possible, including via remote trainings.

Page 36 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

ANNEX II. QUARTERLY BUDGET ACCRUAL REPORT Open Justice Project in Moldova USAID AID-117-TO-17-00001 May 14, 2017-November 30, 2020

BUDGET EXECUTION SECTION

Quarterly Report: January-March 2020

Invoiced as of Billed Expenditures Billed Expenditures Billed Expenditures Cummulative Line Item Contract Amount Balance December 31, 2019 January 2020 February 2020 March 2020 Expenditures

1 2 3 4 5 6=2+3+4+5 7=1-6 Salaries and Wages $1,287,670 $1,037,857 $45,560 $39,821 $41,594 $1,164,832 $122,838 Fringe Benefits $310,734 $254,329 $10,251 $8,960 $9,359 $282,898 $27,836 Travel and Per Diem $127,568 $77,346 $0 $0 $0 $77,346 $50,222 In-Country National, Third Country National $355,547 $224,025 $848 $839 $893 $226,605 $128,942 Consultants & International Consultants Equipment and Supplies $70,963 $69,689 $452 $472 $766 $71,379 -$416 Communications $14,601 $12,099 $374 $421 $386 $13,280 $1,321 Subcontractors $3,901,119 $2,798,656 $43,150 $7,312 $78,196 $2,927,314 $973,805 Other Direct Costs $328,328 $275,284 $6,373 $8,415 $7,045 $297,117 $31,211 Program Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 G&A $733,520 $618,300 $0 $0 $3,295 $621,595 $111,925 Subtotal Contract Cost $7,130,050 $5,367,584 $107,008 $66,240 $141,533 $5,682,365 $1,447,685 II. Fixed Fee $406,518 $321,469 $6,420 $3,974 $8,492 $340,356 $66,162 III. Total Cost Plus Fixed Fee $7,536,568 $5,689,054 $113,429 $70,214 $150,025 $6,022,722 $1,513,846 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

ANNEX III. PROJECT’S NEWSLETTER OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT

NEWS BULLETIN January – March 2020

OPEN JUSTICE SUPPORTS THE AUTHORITIES IN EXTENDING THE USE OF THE VIDEOCONFERENCING SYSTEM On January 31, 2020, the Open Justice Project organized a all Moldovan courts and penitentiaries for examining a roundtable on the use of the videoconferencing system for wider range of cases, including civil cases. inmates’ remote participation in court trials. The event was organized in partnership with the Agency for Court Administration (ACA), the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) and the National Penitentiary Administration (NPA). The roundtable was attended by 33 participants from the court and penitentiary systems. The discussion was focused on the results of the surveys conducted by the Project December 18, 2019–January 17, 2020, which assessed the successes and challenges of using the videoconferencing An Open Justice representative moderates the discussions on system for conducting remote trials. Participants discussed the use of the videoconferencing system the challenges and brainstormed solutions for extending the use of the videoconferencing solution to more types of According to data provided by the NPA, during 2019, cases, as the current regulations only provide for its use in 2,136 court hearings were conducted using the video- a limited category of cases, such as complaints against the conferencing system, which saved the state budget an NPA or about detention conditions. estimated 414,085 MDL ($23,698). Based on the results of the roundtable discussions, Open Currently, every Moldovan court is provided with a set of Justice developed a comprehensive report, which contains videoconferencing equipment purchased by the Open recommended steps and specific activities to extend and Justice Project. Every penitentiary was also equipped with a institutionalize the use of the videoconferencing system in corresponding set of videoconferencing equipment by the Ministry of Justice, purchased from the state budget.

CAPACITY BUILDING FOR THE COURTS IN ELECTRONIC STATISTICAL REPORTING During January–March 2020, Open Justice developed and Justice (NIJ), organized training workshops in February 2020 tested 155 electronic statistical reports for district and for court employees to improve their ability to generate and appellate courts. These statistical reports will be piloted in interpret data from the ICMS. the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal in April 2020. Electronic statistical data is generated through the upgraded Electronic Judicial Statistics Module (EJSM), which is a component of the new Integrated Case Management System (ICMS). The new reporting mechanism will allow the SCM, the ACA, and the courts to electronically generate, monitor, and analyze complex statistical data from Training at the NIJ on the electronic statistical reporting mechanism the ICMS and eliminate inefficient paper-based statistical The implementation of electronic statistical reporting in all reports. In addition, the upgraded EJSM allows users to national courts will significantly increase the judiciary’s retrieve data, create customized statistical reports, and efficiency, accountability, and transparency. In this way, conduct queries. Open Justice is helping to strengthen the rule of law and To support adoption of the new reporting mechanism, build public trust in the judicial system. Open Justice, in partnership with the National Institute of

OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT

USAID Open Justice Project 27, Armeneasca Street, 2nd floor Chisinau MD-2012, Moldova Tel.: +373 22 27 01 77 [email protected]

DISCLAIMER

This newsletter is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents are the responsibility of the Open Justice Project and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

ANNEX IV. SUCCESS STORY

SUCCESS STORY

REMOTE TRIALS IN MOLDOVA — A PARADIGM SHIFT FOR DELIVERING JUSTICE DURING A PANDEMIC

The videoconferencing system in Alexandru Zmeu, a defense attorney in Chisinau, has defended dozens of Moldova especially demonstrates its clients before the courts. When Moldova suspended most trials for efficacy during this unprecedented COVID-19, he grew concerned that those in custody could face lengthy state of emergency, when in-person delays in detention, placing their rights to a fair and speedy trial at risk. hearings are discouraged as a social Mr. Zmeu was impressed when Moldova’s courts used the videoconferencing systems provided by USAID’s Open Justice Project to distancing measure to curtail the continue conducting remote hearings, deciding urgent detention cases, spread of COVID-19. and dispensing justice during the pandemic. The videoconferencing systems “The remote hearings allow both the defense and the prosecution to located in every court, which were benefit from the right to appeal and to challenge any decision. This way, the people I represent were not subjected to extended periods of provided by the USAID-funded Open detention without legal review,” Mr. Zmeu said. Justice Project, are allowing courts to continue hearing the most urgent The Open Justice Project provided videoconferencing equipment to all criminal cases. This helps prevent 20 Moldovan courts in 2018 to allow parties in detention to participate human rights abuses and plays a key remotely. Moldova’s Ministry of Justice outfitted detention facilities with role in ensuring that public order is similar equipment. This capability has been particularly useful during the first two weeks of Moldova’s state of emergency, allowing the courts to protected in these turbulent times. examine over 170 cases remotely through video hearings. Most of these cases are related to pre-trial detention and sentencing in criminal cases. Mr. Zmeu believes that Moldova’s justice system should promote the use of video hearings more broadly, especially during the emergency period: “Now, [videoconferencing] is the only solution for the smooth running of justice. This way, we can continue our activity and represent our clients.... I think it is a good opportunity to bring about a change of approach and to widely use this system, even after the emergency period, for examining more types of cases, including civil cases.” The USAID’s Open Justice Project recently completed a comprehensive assessment on ways to expand the use of videoconferencing. The assess-

Project OpenJustice Photo: ment identifies immediate opportunities and provides recommendations A remote trial at the Chisinau Court of Appeal for gradually transitioning in geographically remote courts. The Project will discuss the implementation of these recommendations with the Ministry of Justice, so that concrete activities can start immediately to ensure access to justice even during a pandemic.

Launched in 2017, the Open Justice Project supports the Moldovan authorities in their efforts to forge a more efficient and transparent justice sector. Implementation of the new Integrated Case Management System, the launch of the new Courts’ Web Portal, and the modernization of the en Justice Project Justice en websites of the Superior Council of Magistracy and the Agency for Court Administration are just some of Open Justice’s major achievements. In

Op Photo: the coming months, the Project will help the judiciary implement activities The Open Justice Project has equipped every to expand the number and types of remote hearings, which will enhance Moldovan court with videoconferencing systems access to justice and transparency and ensure the right to a fair trial.

U.S. Agency for International Development April 2020 www.usaid.gov USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

ANNEX V. PROJECT DELIVERABLES

OBJECTIVE 1 1. Report on Training Activities on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (Activity 1.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 2. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during January 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 3. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during February 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 4. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during March 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

OBJECTIVE 1

1. Report on the Training Activities on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (Activity 1.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) ---QR Y2

REPORT ON TRAINING ACTIVITIES ON THE USE OF THE INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ICMS 5.0)

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

March 31, 2020

DISCLAIMER

REPORT ON TRAINING ACTIVITIES ON THE USE OF THE INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ICMS 5.0)

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Submitted on March 31, 2020

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ...... 1 Methods ...... 1 Dates ...... 1 Participants ...... 3 Speakers/Trainers ...... 5 Report...... 7 Report on the Training Activities on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)...... 7 Final Conclusions ...... 9 Annex 1. Agenda ...... 11 Annex 2. Photos ...... 15

Page i USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020 INTRODUCTION

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) selected Millennium DPI Partners, LLC, an international development firm based in the United States, to implement the Open Justice Project in Moldova. Open Justice is assisting the Government of Moldova in improving the efficiency and transparency of the Moldovan judicial system and improving access to justice for citizens of Moldova. This report describes the training activities carried by Open Justice in its efforts to build capacity to process cases through the new Integrated Case Management System (ICMS Version 5.0).

From January 2020 to March 2020, Open Justice Project delivered 19 training activities on the use of ICMS Version 5.0. for 536 representatives of Moldovan courts, including judges, chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, and specialists from Procedural Tracking and Documentation Divisions (PTDDs).

METHODS

The first 7 trainings covered the use of the ICMS updates and involved 304 participants. The trainings were conducted by means of the videoconferencing system purchased and installed by Open Justice in 20 Moldovan courts in 2018. To organize these sessions, the project checked the availability of the conference rooms equipped with videoconferencing system and the availability for participation of court employees, such as judges, judicial assistants, court clerks and PTDD specialists from courts.

The next 5 workshops covered the topic of data anonymization in the ICMS and they were organized within the premises of the Chisinau District Court (Centru branch, Riscani branch, Buiucani branch and Ciocana branch). 116 ICMS users attended those workshops. During these training sessions, the participants received detailed information about the ICMS functionality for anonymization of personal data from courts’ decisions.

The last 7 workshops took place at the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), equipped for computer based practical exercises. The trainings, attended by 116 participants, covered IT use by court staff and the use of CEPEJ tools for monitoring court performance. During the trainings, the participants received detailed information about the functionalities added to ICMS Version 5.0.

Trainers provided by Open Justice, Agency for Court Administration (ACA), the courts, and NIJ used interactive methods, such as a mock registration and exercises related to automated assignment of claims and cases and other procedural actions that are part of ICMS Version 5.0. The exercises were helpful for the participants to gain the necessary skills in the ICMS use.

DATES

Training activities were organized on the following dates:

I. Trainings held via videoconferencing: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0).”

• Day 1, January 21, 2020 • Day 2, January 22, 2020

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

• Day 3, January 23, 2020 • Day 4, January 24, 2020 • Day 5, January 27, 2020 • Day 6, January 28, 2020 • Day 7, January 29, 2020

II. Workshops organized at courts: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0). Anonymization of Personal Data.”

• Day 8, February 11, 2020 • Day 9, February 19, 2020 • Day 10, February 21, 2020 • Day 11, February 24, 2020 • Day 12, February 25, 2020

III. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “CEPEJ tools in court activities”

• Day 13, February 26, 2020 • Day 14, February 27, 2020 • Day 15, February 28, 2020

IV. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies and electronic case management”

• Day 16, March 2, 2020 • Day 17, March 3, 2020 • Day 18, March 4, 2020

V. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies in the judicial work of judges’ assistants and court clerks”

• Day 19, March 5, 2020

Page 2 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

PARTICIPANTS

From January 2020 to March 2020, the Project trained 536 participants, including judges, judicial assistants, court clerks and PTDD specialists from courts.

No. Training Number Position Total dates of number of training Judicial Court Judge Others participants days Assistant clerk I. Trainings held by means of videoconferencing system: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)” January 21, 1. 1 2 21 7 15 451 2020 January 22, 2. 1 4 19 3 25 512 2020 January 23, 3. 1 3 19 5 16 433 2020 January 24, 4. 1 0 28 24 28 804 2020 January 27, 5. 1 1 23 4 24 525 2020 January 28, 6. 1 0 7 1 11 196 2020 January 29, 7. 1 0 8 1 5 147 2020 II. Workshops organized within the premises of the courts: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0). Anonymization of Personal Data” February 11, 8. 1 1 8 4 6 198 2020

1 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Balti District Court, Cimislia District Court, Comrat District Court 2 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Edinet District Court, Soroca District Court, Drochia District Court 3 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Anenii Noi District Court, Causeni District Court, Criuleni District Court 4 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Comrat Court of Appeals, Balti Appellate Court 5 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Hancesti District Court, Orhei District Court, Ungheni District Court, Straseni District Court. 6 The participants of the training were from the following court: Chisinau Appellate Court 7 The participants of the training were from the following court: Chisinau District Court, Central branch. 8 The participants of the workshop were from the following court: Chisinau District Court, Riscani branch

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

No. Training Number Position Total dates of number of training Judicial Court Judge Others participants days Assistant clerk February 19, 9. 1 0 10 12 1 239 2020 February 21, 10. 1 0 26 17 2 4510 2020 February 24, 11. 1 0 6 7 0 1311 2020 February 25, 12. 1 0 13 1 2 1612 2020 III. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “CEPEJ tools in court activities”

February 26, 13. 1 0 3 4 12 1913 2020 February 27, 14. 1 0 2 1 11 1414 2020 February 28, 15. 1 0 4 1 8 1315 2020 IV. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies and electronic case management”

16. March 2, 2020 1 0 4 5 7 1616

17. March 3, 2020 1 0 3 9 0 1217

9 The participants of the workshop were from the following court: Chisinau District Court, Buiucani branch 10 The participants of the workshop were from the following court: Chisinau District Court, Centru branch 11 The participants of the workshop were from the following court: Chisinau District Court, Riscani branch. 12 The participants of the workshop were from the following court: Chisinau District Court, Ciocana branch. 13 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Anenii Noi Court, Balti Appellate Court, Cahul Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau District Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Criuleni District Court, Edinet District Court, Hancesti District Court, Soroca District Court. 14 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Anenii Noi District Court, Balti District Court, Balti Appellate Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau District Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Ungheni District Court. 15 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Anenii Noi Court, Balti Appellate Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau District Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat District Court, Ungheni District Court. 16 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Balti Appellate Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau District Court, Cimislia District Court, Comrat District Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Drochia District District Court, Orhei District Court, Soroca District Court, Ungheni District Court. 17 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Anenii Noi District Court, Balti District Court, Cahul District Court, Chisinau District Court, Drochia District Court, Edinet District Court, Soroca District Court.

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

No. Training Number Position Total dates of number of training Judicial Court Judge Others participants days Assistant clerk

18. March 4, 2020 1 0 4 6 4 1418 V. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies in the judicial work of judges’ assistants and court clerks”

19. March 5, 2020 1 0 15 10 3 2819 TOTAL: 11 223 122 180 536

SPEAKERS/TRAINERS

I. Trainings held by means of videoconferencing system: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)”

• Mihai Grosu, Objective 1 Key Expert, Open Justice Project • Patricia Zghibarta, Objective 1, Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project • Vlada Martin, Junior Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project • Marin Chihai, Intern, Open Justice Project • Gabriel Mîțăblîndă, Junior Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project • Anastasia Donica, Junior Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project

II. Workshops organized within the premises of the courts: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0). Anonymization of Personal Data”

• Mihai Grosu, Objective 1 Key Expert, Open Justice Project • Vlada Martin, Junior Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project • Gabriel Mîțăblîndă, Junior Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project

18 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Balti District Court, Chisinau District Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Orhei District Court, Soroca District Court, Straseni District Court. 19 The participants of the workshop were from the following courts: Cahul District Court, Chisinau District Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Cimislia District Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Criuleni District Court, Drochia District Court, Hancesti District Court, Orhei District Court, Soroca District Court, Straseni District Court, Ungheni District Court.

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

III. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “CEPEJ tools in court activities”

• Mihai Grosu, Objective 1 Key Expert, Open Justice Project • Veronica Mocanu, Objective I, Staff Attorney, Open Justice Project • Victoria Palanciuc, ACA’s Director, certified CEPEJ expert

IV. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies and electronic case management”

• Mihai Grosu, Objective 1 Key Expert, Open Justice Project • Tatiana Ciaglic, NIJ's trainer, Chief of the e-Training and Analysis Division, Legal Information Center, NIJ

V. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies in the judicial work of judges’ assistants and court clerks”

• Mihai Grosu, Objective 1 Key Expert, Open Justice Project • Tatiana Ciaglic, NIJ's trainer, Chief of the e-Training and Analysis Division, Legal Information Center, NIJ

The agenda and photos from the training activities are attached as Annexes 1 and 2 to this report.

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

REPORT

REPORT ON TRAINING ACTIVITIES ON THE USE OF THE INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ICMS 5.0)

Open Justice conducted 19 training activities via videoconferencing and at the premises of the NIJ and Chisinau District Court to present the latest updates made to ICMS 5.0. The training activities were tailored to the specific needs of targeted beneficiaries and presented detailed information about changes introduced through new functionalities of the software. Trainees were also provided with a User Guide for ICMS 5.0.

I. Trainings held by means of videoconferencing system: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)”

Open Justice’s training team focused the trainings on the following main topics:

• Modifications in the registration and examination of cases by the administrative court; • Record of cases; • Setting exceptions to case examination by specialized judges; • Record of court hearings performed by means of videoconferencing; • Exclusion of distribution of certain case categories to judges who are not blocked in the ICMS; • Displaying hearing result on the Courts’ Web Portal; • Statistical reports on the age of participants in trials; • Examination results and records of domestic violence victims; • Viewing data from the file to be attached to the judge’s main file; • Notification in the action sheet if a participant is mentioned in another file in a court hearing; • Elimination of members from the judge’s team; • Other modifications to the ICMS.

II. Workshops organized within the premises of the courts: “Updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0). Anonymization of Personal Data”

The following main topics were addressed:

• Anonymization of personal data in court decisions within ICMS 5.0;

• Cancelation of the publication of judicial acts in ICMS;

• Repeated anonymization of personal data in the judicial act in ICMS.

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

III. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “CEPEJ tools in court activities”

Open Justice included the following main topics in the workshop agenda:

• Introductory considerations regarding the European standards, methodology and tools of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ);

• Overview of 17 court performance measures and their calculation formulas;

• Court performance indicators and the evaluation procedure;

• The use of CEPEJ indicators and evaluation of court activities – examples of good practice;

• CEPEJ indicators in ICMS 5.0; assessing, monitoring and evaluating court activity;

• Electronic Statistical Reporting in ICMS 5.0.

IV. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies and electronic case management”

The workshops focused on the following main topics:

• General description of ICMS 5.0 and its menus; • General principles of system operation; • Search engine of the software; • How to create an electronic case file in the system; • Court management module; • Notifications module; • Calendar and scheduling module; • Case transfer module; • Templates management module; • Archiving module; • Publishing module (including anonymization of personal data).

The functionalities developed in ICMS 5.0 contribute to the improvement of file management in courts through the following upgrades:

• The system improves the judiciary’s administration, increases transparency and public access to justice;

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

• The ICMS automates the current manual work in courts; • The software removes duplication of data and facilitates the work of court staff; • The system establishes an efficient system for the judiciary’s statistical reporting; • ICMS ensures electronic record keeping of data in courts; • ICMS facilitates data sharing between various judicial institutions; • The system automates the secretarial work in courts.

V. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies in the judicial work of judges’ assistants and court clerks”

The workshops focused on the following main topics:

• Advanced use of HUDOC legal databases and web resources on European Court of Human Rights caselaw, Supreme Court of Justice’s case law and eLex databases; • Editing of .doc files., file conversion, text recognition, keyboard shortcuts to make file management more efficient; • Touch typing and voice typing; • Publication of court decisions and anonymization of personal data; • Interaction between ICMS and SRS Femida (software program and equipment for audio recording in the courts).

At the end of each training session, participants could ask questions and receive detailed answers on how to use the new functionalities programmed into ICMS 5.0.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS

Based on the 19 training activities on ICMS 5.0, participants will be able to more efficiently examine and solve cases registered in the courts. In addition, the workshops contributed to building the skills of the courts’ clerical staff to measure the performance of district and appellate courts by means of CEPEJ spreadsheet, which ICMS creates automatically. Trained court representatives will use the functionalities of the upgraded Electronic Judicial Statistical Module and the CEPEJ spreadsheet to automatically generate the performance indicators. This will provide better court management oversight and will provide data to judicial administration bodies to make evidence-based decisions on how to enhance court performance.

The participants (judges, judicial assistants, secretaries) requested more trainings in the future, both within the NIJ and by means of videoconferencing.

Participants also showed a keen interest in the ICMS modules intended for automatic transmission of judicial acts via e-mail to trial participants, the integration of ICMS with other state information

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020 systems (e.g., the State Population Register and State Register of Legal Entities), the possibility to electronically sign judicial acts and to automatically retrieve data from the system in the form of 180 statistical reports.

Participants were encouraged to share the knowledge acquired at the trainings with their colleagues.

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020 ANNEX 1. AGENDA

REPORT ON THE TRAINING ACTIVITIES ORGANIZED ON THE USE OF THE INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ICMS)

Participants: Chiefs of the Secretariat / Chiefs of the Documents Tracking Division /Judicial Assistants / Court Clerks / Judges

Organizer: Open Justice Project

I. Trainings held by means of videoconferencing system: “The updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)”

AGENDA

10:00 – 11:00 1. Modifications in terms of the registration and examination of cases by the administrative court a. Registration of the requests to suspend the enforcement/interim decree b. Registration of the first action in the administrative court c. Registration of the requests to initiate the enforcement before the administrative court d. Registration of the requests for solving a conflict of competences/transfer 2. Record of small cases 3. Marking the duty judge 4. Setting the exceptions to the case examinations by specialized judges 5. Incompatible judges at the registration of a case for rehearing by a new panel Questions & Answers 11:00 – 12:00 6. Optimization of the insertion of the examination result 7. Record of the court hearings performed by means of videoconferencing 8. Exclusion of the distribution of certain case categories to the judges which are not blocked in the ICMS 9. Displaying the hearing result on the Courts’ Web Portal. 10. The age of the participants (statistical reports) 11. Examination results and records of domestic violence victims 12. Viewing the data from the file that is to be attached to the judge’s main file 13. Notification in the action sheet if a participant is mentioned in another file in a court hearing 14. Elimination of members from the judge’s team 15. Other modifications in the ICMS Questions & Answers

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

II. Workshops organized within the premises of the courts: “The updates of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0). Anonymization of personal data”

AGENDA

08:45 – 09:00 Registration of the participants 09:00 – 10:30 The trainings focused on the following main topics:

• Anonymization of the judicial acts within the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)

• Cancelation of the publication of judicial acts in the ICMS

• Repeated anonymization of the judicial act in the ICMS

10.30 –11.45 Conclusions and evaluation of the activity

III. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “CEPEJ tools in the court activity”

AGENDA

08:45 – 09:00 Registration of the participants 09:00 – 10:30 Introductory considerations regarding the European standards, methodology and tools of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ).

Court performance indicators and the evaluation procedure.

10:30 – 10:45 Break 10:45 – 12:15 The use of CEPEJ indicators and evaluation of the court activity. Examples of good practice.

12:15 – 13:15 Break 13:15 – 14:45 CEPEJ indicators in ICMS 5.00. Accessing, monitoring, evaluation.

14:45 – 15:00 Break 15:00 – 16:30 Electronic Statistical Reporting in ICMS 5.00.

16.30 –16.45 Conclusions and evaluation of the activity

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

IV. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “The use of information technologies and electronic case management”

AGENDA

08:45 – 09:00 Registration of the participants 09:00 – 10:30 General Presentation of the Integrated Case Management System, version 5.0 and its functional menus.

Administration menu within the Integrated Case Management System and Personal profile

Court of first instance/Appellate Court: acts for filing a lawsuit, appeals, cassation appeals lodged with the SCJ.

Simulation in ICMS, performing practical tasks

Questions & Answers

10:30 – 10:45 Break 10:45 – 12:15 Cases: case materials (civil, criminal and on contraventions), procedural action, audit, splitting, lists, calendar.

Simulation in ICMS, performing practical tasks

Questions & Answers

12:15 – 13:15 Break 13:15 – 14:45 Appeals, other actions: registration and transfer.

Cassation appeals lodged with the SCJ: registration and transfer.

Simulation in ICMS, performing practical tasks

Questions & Answers

14:45 – 15:00 Break 15:00 – 16:30 Local administration of the ICMS: office management, court rooms, employees, teams, judge panels, budget

Centralized administration of the ICMS: court management, users, classifiers, taxes, distribution

Simulation in ICMS, performing practical tasks Questions & Answers

16.30 –16.45 Conclusions and evaluation of the activity

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

V. Workshops organized at the NIJ: “Information Technologies in judicial work of judges’ assistants and court clerks”

AGENDA

08:45 – 09:00 Registration of the participants 09:00 – 10:30 How technologies help us

Advanced use of HUDOC legal databases and web resources with ECHR and SCJ case law, eLex databases

10:30 – 10:45 Break 10:45 – 12:15 Editing of .doc files. File conversion. Text recognition, Keyboard shortcuts to make the file management more efficient. Touch typing and voice typing. 12:15 – 13:15 Break 13:15 – 14:45 ICMS 5.00. Publication of decisions. Anonymization, monitoring Interaction between ICMS and FEMIDA. 14:45 – 15:00 Break 15:00 – 16:30 Practical work with files and ICMS simulator 16:30 – 16:45 Conclusions and evaluation of the activity

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020 ANNEX 2. PHOTOS

January 23, 2020 – Training held by means of videoconferencing system on updates of the ICMS 5.0

January 29, 2020 – Workshop on updates of the ICMS 5.0 at the Chisinau Court of Appeal

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 March 31, 2020

January 29, 2020 – Workshop on updates of the ICMS 5.0 at the Chisinau District Court

March 3, 2020 – Training on the use of information technologies and electronic case management at the INJ

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

2. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during January 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) QR Y2

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1–31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

January 31, 2020

DISCLAIMER

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1–31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

INTRODUCTION

Millennium DPI Partners, LLC, an international development firm based in the United States of America, is implementing the USAID-funded Open Justice Project in Moldova. Open Justice is assisting the Government of Moldova to improve the efficiency and transparency of the Moldovan judicial system and improve access to justice for citizens of Moldova.

Open Justice Project aims to build the capacity of the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) and the Agency for Court Administration (ACA) and Ministry of Justice (MOJ) to collect and analyze statistics on the justice system regarding its activity and the ability to generate and refine court performance standards, use data for budget and personnel planning, and integrate other functions required for effective, transparent, and efficient court administration. One of the key activities performed in line with that objective is the regular monitoring and follow-up on alleged manipulations in the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) random case distribution process, as well as reporting to the SCM and ACA about the revealed irregularities, in line with the Open Justice Project Year 3 Work Plan (Second extension), sub-activity 1.2.3.1.

Since November 2013 the monitoring of case distribution by means of the ICMS takes place monthly. From this, monthly reports are submitted to the SCM and the ACA. This is the seventy-fourth monitoring report on random case distribution covering the period of January 1-31, 2020. The data for this report is accessed by the Open Justice Project with the assistance of the Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security (SITCS, formerly CTS). The report is available to the public and is published on the web page of the ACA.

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

MONITORING OF RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION

The random assignment of cases by means of the ICMS during the period of January 1-31, 2020, has the following percentage distribution:

• 91.28 % of the total number of incoming cases were automatically randomly distributed one time • 7.68 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed twice • 0.79 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed three times • 0.25 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed four or more times

Although the data on random distribution is generally positive, the ICMS indicates that some courts (listed in Table 1 and Table 3 below) have used the options for blocking judges1 and marking them as “disqualified”2 on many occasions, compared to the number of active judges. Judges from both categories were excluded from random case distribution by means of the ICMS.

The detailed information about these judges in each court is presented in the statistical module (Reports) from the ICMS system.

Blocked Judges

The data analysis on the actions of blocking judges, saved in ICMS, shows the courts with the most frequent instances of blocking judges (Chisinau Court, Orhei Court, Ungheni Court, Anenii Noi Court). Table 1. Blocked judges Number of Total number of ICMS user who instances when No. Court active judges in performed the judges were January, 2020 action blocked 1 Chisinau Court 126 24 ICMS Manager 2 Orhei Court 19 7 ICMS Manager

1 The Regulation on random distribution of cases in courts, approved by the Decision of the SCM, No. 110/5, from 5 February 2013 stipulates that a judge shall be blocked from random case distribution if he is temporarily transferred to another court or is suspended from performing his duties, if he takes an annual leave, as well as in other justified cases, based on the reasoned ruling of the court president. 2 The SCM Regulation stipulates that judges from different premises of the same court will be marked as “disqualified” pursuant to the provisions of the Law No. 76 on the reorganization of the courts. Additionally, the action “disqualified judges” is used in the situations of recusal of judges from the examination of cases initially assigned to them, in line with the provisions from art. 35 CPP and art. 53 CPC, and in compliance with the art. 33 CPP and art. 49 CPC, which refer to the disqualification of a judge to ensure he does not participate in the adjudication of the same case.

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

3 Ungheni Court 11 5 ICMS Manager 4 Anenii Noi Court 9 4 ICMS Manager

Table 2 shows the courts, the names of the blocked judges and the number of judge blocking actions saved in ICMS.

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Table 2. Blocked judges

Chisinau Court Orhei Court Ungheni Court Anenii Noi Court

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of instances when judges were blocked instances when judges were instances when judges were instances when judges were – 24 blocked – 7 blocked - 5 blocked - 4 • Alexandru Mardari - • Gheorghe Popa - • Valentina Stratulat - • Ghenadie Mîra - (blocked (blocked 3 times) (blocked 2 times) (blocked 2 times) 2 times) • Angela Vasilenco - (blocked • Alexandra Romanaș - • Dumitru Racoviță - • Ina Țîbîrnă - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) once) • Mihai Murguleţ - (blocked 2 • Igor Negreanu - (blocked • Rodica Costru - (blocked • Maria Chiperi - (blocked times) once) once) once) • Olga Bejenari - (blocked 2 • Ivan Parii - (blocked once) • Vasile Şchiopu - (blocked times) • Ramona Moşneguţu - once) • Galina Ciobanu - (blocked (blocked once) once) • Viorica Severin - • Georgeta Grozav - (blocked (blocked once) once) • Grigorii Cazacu - (blocked once) • Irina Țonov - (blocked once) • Nadejda Mazur - (blocked once) • NINA Arabadji - (blocked once) • Olesea Țurcan - (blocked once) • Radu Ţurcanu - (blocked once) • Roman Mazureț - (blocked once)

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

• Sergiu Daguța - (blocked once) • Tatiana Avasiloaie - (blocked once) • Veaceslav Nicula - (blocked once) • Victor Sandu - (blocked once) • Victor Sîrbu - (blocked once) • Viorica Dodon - (blocked once)

For more information on the number of judge blocking actions saved in the ICMS see the Annex 1, Annex 2 and Annex 3 to this Report.

“Disqualified” Judges

The data analysis on the actions of” Disqualified judges”, saved in the ICMS shows the courts with the most frequent instances of “Disqualified Judges” (Chisinau Court of Appeal, Balti Court of Appeal, Supreme Court of Justice, Cahul Court of Appeal, Chisinau Court and Comrat Court of Appeal).

The Table 3 displays the list of courts using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS.

Table 3. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the ICMS Instances of using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS Total number of Total number of Total number of No. Court active judges in ICMS users who performed instances when the judges marked as January 2020 the actions/ No. actions option was used “disqualified” • Ludmila Calalb - 276 • Nadejda Ceban - 88 Chisinau Court of 1 46 613 • Mariana Rusu - 64 613 Appeal • Ala Bolfa - 63 • Irina Şumleanschi - 62 Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

• Aurelia Bumbu - 29 • Ruslana Reuleţ - 29 • Sergiu Budeci - 2 • Mariana Șveț - 101 • Inga Zaharcu - 87 • Victoria Guțu - 45 2 Balti Court of Appeal 24 318 • Rodica Clapco - 43 318 • Virginia Banu - 21 • Natalia Snatinschi - 15 • Elena Răileanu - 6 • Tatiana Bradu - 75 • Valentina Martînenco - 44 • Tatiana Mîrzenco - 36 • Marina Şişcovschi - 35 Supreme Court of 3 20 239 • Parascovia Vutcariova - 239 Justice 21 • Zinaida Dioguta - 10 • Vera Ioniţă - 9 • Iulia Corbu - 5 • Gheorghe Cuţitaru - 4 • Silvia Lazăr - 92 • Tamara Pintilei - 58 Cahul Court of 4 9 194 • Adela Jurca - 30 194 Appeal • Lidia Bercaru - 11 • Maria Daud - 3 • Ana Nicolaev - 39 • Tatiana Ciobanu - 24 5 Chisinau Court 126 107 • Svetlana Sîrbu - 14 107 • Nadejda Damaschin - 13 Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

• Natalia Petriman - 7 • Agafia Ohrim - 6 • Natalia Oprea - 4 • Liudmila Arnaut - 15 Comrat Court of • Anna Topal - 10 6 6 31 31 Appeal • Olga Gorelco - 3 • Tatiana Odnostalco - 3

For more information on courts using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS see the Annex 4, Annex 5 and Annex 6 to this Report.

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Examined by the same judge/panel

In addition, the ICMS system contains information on the use of the option “Examined by the same judge/panel” during the claim or case registration and distribution by means of the ICMS. This option allows automatic direct distribution of the registered claim or case to the judge rapporteur, who is indicated in the case saved previously in the ICMS. The data regarding the use of the option “Examined by the same judge/panel,” saved in ICMS throughout January 1-31, 2020, reveals the following: • Chisinau Court - 399 claims • Orhei Court - 36 claims • Balti Court - 8 claims • Comrat Court - 7 claims • Causeni Court - 3 claims • Straseni Court - 8 claims • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 36 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 22 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 20 cases • Chisinau Court - 5 cases • Balti Court - 5 cases • Drochia Court - 4 cases

Changes in judge user roles

The ICMS system contains information about changes in the data regarding judge users for each court. According to the data retrieved from the SITCS’s server that hosts the ICMS, throughout January 1-31, 2020, the data on ICMS users who are judges was changed in the following courts:

• Soroca Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Petru Cocitov – editing once

Erroneous status of claim/case

The ICMS system contains information on the change of the claim/case status to ‘erroneous’. This status is given when the claim/case is registered by mistake. The chancellery/manager from the court may assign ‘erroneous’ status to a claim/case after having registered a supporting document. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of changing the claim/case status that have been undertaken in the courts between January 1-31, 2020 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court - 6 claims • Balti Court - 2 claims • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 1 claim • Comrat Court - 1 claim • Drochia Court - 1 claim • Ungheni Court - 1 claim Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

• Chisinau Court - 5 cases • Comrat Court of Appeal - 4 cases • Cahul Court - 3 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 1 case • Anenii Noi Court - 1 case • Comrat Court - 1 case • Criuleni Court - 1 case • Hancesti Court - 1 case • Orhei Court - 1 case

Reversed case distribution

In addition, the ICMS system contains information on the number of actions of changing the Judge Rapporteur for each court. When a claim/case is erroneously redistributed (from the judge A to judge B), the ICMS functionality allows a reversed distribution from judge B to judge A when uploading the Chair’s resolution or another supporting document. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of changing the Judge Rapporteur that have been undertaken in the courts between January 1-31, 2020 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court - 2 claims • Comrat Court - 1 claim • Chisinau Court - 9 cases • Soroca Court - 3 cases • Balti Court - 2 cases • Causeni Court - 2 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 1 case • Anenii Noi Court - 1 case • Edinet Court - 1 case

Panel modification

The section “Reports” from the ICMS system contains additional information on the number of actions of panel modification, including the reporter judge for each court. At the level of Appellate Courts and the Supreme Court of Justice, one or all panel members may be replaced by means of this functionality when there is a need to modify a panel. Thus, the judge/judges shall be automatically and randomly replaced by another/others. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of panel change, including the reporter judge that have been undertaken in the courts between January 1-31 2020 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 13 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 9 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 1 case

Panel rectification

The section “Reports” from the ICMS system contains additional information on the number of actions of manual panel modification of each court. At the level of Appellate Courts and the Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Supreme Court of Justice, when there is a need to replace a judge on a panel (not the judge rapporteur) with another judge assigned by the Chair, it is possible to use this functionality, mentioning the judge who has been replaced by a judge assigned by the Chair. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of manual panel modification that have been undertaken in the courts between January 1-31, 2020 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 114 case • Balti Court of Appeal - 33 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 9 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 1 case • Comrat Court of Appeal - 1 case

Panel settings modification

The ICMS system contains information on the number of actions of panel settings modification for each court. When there is a need to modify the panel settings established by the Chair’s order, the ICMS manager shall save the modifications in the system. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of panel setting modification that have been undertaken in the courts between January 1-31, 2020 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 87 actions • Chisinau Court - 79 actions • Supreme Court of Justice - 46 actions • Orhei Court - 41 actions • Balti Court of Appeal - 29 actions • Cimislia Court - 28 actions • Cahul Court of Appeal - 24 actions • Comrat Court - 24 action • Criuleni Court - 16 actions • Comrat Court of Appeal - 14 actions • Soroca Court - 13 actions • Causeni Court - 12 actions • Edinet Court - 11 actions • Cahul Court - 10 actions • Straseni Court - 10 actions • Hancesti Court - 9 actions • Drochia Court - 4 actions • Ungheni Court - 4 actions • Balti Court - 2 actions • Anenii Noi Court - 2 actions

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Annex 1. List of the courts with the highest number of blocked judges in the period August 2019 – January 2020 (6 months)

January December November October September August

2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

Total Total Total Total Total Total

Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances

number of number of number of number of number of number of number

when judges when judges when judges when judges when judges when judges when

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

were blocked blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were

Chisinau 1 126 24 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 Court Orhei 2 19 7 21 6 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 Court

Ungheni 3 11 5 11 0 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 Court Anenii 4 Noi 9 4 8 0 6 1 6 4 6 4 6 3 Court

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Annex 2. The courts with the highest number of blocked judges in the period August 2019 – January 2020 (6 months) 120

100 96

60 60

40 34 32 29 24

20 16 13

7 7 6 5 5 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 0 1 0 1 0 Chisinau Court Orhei Court Ungheni Court Anenii Noi Court

January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Annex 3. Blocked judges during the period of February 2019 – January 2020 (12 months) January December November October September August March February July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

al number of al number

active judges active

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

blocked judges blocked judges blocked

blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number Tot of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number

Chisinau 1 126 24 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 122 14 124 11 123 24 Court Orhei 2 19 7 21 6 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 18 1 18 1 18 1 Court Ungheni 3 11 5 11 0 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 10 2 10 0 10 2 10 0 Court Anenii 4 Noi 9 4 8 0 6 1 6 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 6 3 7 3 7 1 7 0 7 1 Court Edinet 5 15 3 15 1 14 0 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 15 2 15 0 16 2 Court Straseni 6 12 3 13 6 11 2 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 12 1 12 0 12 3 Court Balti 7 26 3 28 5 24 1 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 23 4 23 1 23 0 Court Soroca 8 11 3 10 2 7 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 8 1 8 1 8 0 Court Cahul 9 12 2 14 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 10 8 10 7 10 7 10 0 Court Chisinau 10 Court of 46 1 45 14 44 1 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 54 9 48 4 49 1 49 0 42 2 Appeal Cimislia 11 9 1 9 1 8 0 9 2 9 3 9 6 8 3 10 2 8 2 8 1 9 1 10 0 Court Hancesti 12 12 1 12 0 12 0 12 3 11 8 9 7 13 8 14 5 14 2 14 0 15 1 15 0 Court

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

January December November October September August March February July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

al number of al number

active judges active

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

blocked judges blocked judges blocked

blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked

Criuleni 13 9 0 9 3 7 2 6 3 6 3 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 1 7 1 7 1 Court Drochia 14 13 0 13 1 11 0 11 3 10 5 8 2 11 9 11 2 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 Court Causeni 15 7 0 7 0 6 0 6 2 6 3 7 5 6 0 8 2 8 2 7 1 8 0 7 0 Court Comrat 16 5 0 5 1 4 4 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 5 1 5 1 5 3 5 2 Court Comrat 17 Court of 6 0 6 2 5 2 5 2 5 4 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 0 Appeal Balti 18 Court of 24 0 24 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 23 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 Appeal Cahul 19 Court of 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 4 5 0 6 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 1 Appeal Supreme 20 Court of 20 0 20 1 21 1 21 0 22 1 23 0 29 0 27 1 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 Justice

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Annex 4. List the courts with the highest number of judges marked as “disqualified” in the period August 2019 – January 2020 (6 months)

January December November October September August

2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

f f

No. Court

judges" judges" judges" judges" judges" judges"

Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number o Total number

as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified”

marking the judges judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the

actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified Chisinau 1 Court of 613 613 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 Appeal Balti Court 2 318 318 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 of Appeal Supreme 3 Court of 239 239 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 Justice Cahul 4 Court of 194 194 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 Appeal Chisinau 5 107 107 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 Court

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Annex 5. The courts with the highest number of judges marked as “disqualified” in the period August 2019 – January 2020 (6 months)

700

613 603 600 545

500 483 423 442 411424 432 400 375

318 315 300 239

194 204 181 200 170 169 149 150 148 138 125 123 132 109 115 107 100

34 0 0 Chisinau Court of Appeal Balti Court of Appeal Supreme Court of Justice Cahul Court of Appeal Chisinau Court

January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

Annex 6. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the period February 2019 – January 2020 (12 months) January December November October September August February July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019

2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

actions N actions Court

“ disqualified”

stances of marking the stances of marking the

"Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible judges" "Incompatible

Total number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of Total number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of Total number of actionsTotal number

Instances of marking the of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances In of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances

judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Chisinau 1 Court of 613 613 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 333 1366 342 1265 342 1200 Appeal Balti Court 2 318 318 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 91 144 49 163 72 306 of Appeal Supreme 3 Court of 239 239 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 122 498 95 357 96 427 Justice Cahul 4 Court of 194 194 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 189 189 76 135 38 176 Appeal Chisinau 5 107 107 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 162 934 130 607 656 6703 Court Comrat 6 Court of 31 31 30 30 18 18 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 19 19 14 14 29 29 Appeal Drochia 7 21 21 11 11 18 18 11 11 7 7 8 8 7 7 12 12 17 17 117 136 65 80 6 9 Court Orhei 8 20 20 18 18 17 17 10 10 4 4 7 7 14 14 37 44 43 55 39 54 35 37 28 33 Court Comrat 9 10 10 15 15 333 333 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 42 42 4 4 3 3 7 7 Court Straseni 10 7 7 5 5 5 5 4 4 1 1 2 2 59 74 324 360 186 244 216 240 13 37 13 27 Court Soroca 11 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 8 13 13 6 6 8 8 6 6 Court

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, January 2020 January 31, 2020

January December November October September August February July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019

2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

actions N actions Court

“ disqualified”

stances of marking the stances of marking the

judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Hancesti 12 5 5 36 36 20 20 15 15 3 3 3 3 14 14 19 40 5 20 14 39 18 33 17 31 Court Edinet 13 5 5 8 8 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 9 9 2 2 5 5 126 135 83 117 61 83 Court Causeni 14 4 4 4 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 17 17 16 23 24 25 24 25 15 15 Court Cahul 15 4 4 3 3 9 9 10 10 4 4 0 0 3 3 2 2 5 5 4 4 17 30 19 89 Court 16 Balti Court 3 3 3 3 2 2 7 7 0 0 10 10 5 5 11 11 8 8 10 35 13 23 2 7 Ungheni 17 3 3 9 9 1 1 4 4 2 2 0 0 12 12 18 20 11 15 15 23 10 14 17 34 Court Cimislia 18 2 2 5 5 3 3 7 7 3 3 1 1 5 5 0 0 9 9 7 7 2 2 4 4 Court Criuleni 19 1 1 10 10 2 2 4 4 3 3 5 5 62 62 196 197 82 90 108 110 10 10 10 12 Court Anenii Noi 20 1 1 7 7 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 11 11 12 12 26 55 17 32 5 8 6 6 Court

Page 20 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

3. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during February 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) QR Y2

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 1–29, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

February 29, 2020

DISCLAIMER

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF FEBRUARY 1–29, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

INTRODUCTION

Since November 2013 the monitoring of case distribution by means of the ICMS takes place monthly. From this, monthly reports are submitted to the SCM and the ACA. This is the seventy-fifth monitoring report on random case distribution covering the period of February 1-29, 2020. The data for this report is accessed by the Open Justice Project with the assistance of the Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security (SITCS, formerly CTS). The report is available to the public and is published on the web page of the ACA.

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

MONITORING OF RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION

The random assignment of cases by means of the ICMS during the period of February 1-29, 2020, has the following percentage distribution:

• 95.19 % of the total number of incoming cases were automatically randomly distributed one time • 4.22 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed twice • 0.49 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed three times • 0.10 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed four or more times

The detailed information about these judges in each court is presented in the statistical module (Reports) from the ICMS system.

Blocked Judges

The data analysis on the actions of blocking judges, saved in ICMS, shows the courts with the most frequent instances of blocking judges (Chisinau Court, Ungheni Court, Balti Court, Cimislia Court). Table 1. Blocked judges Number of Total number of ICMS user who instances when No. Court active judges in performed the judges were February, 2020 action blocked 1 Chisinau Court 127 14 ICMS Manager 2 Ungheni Court 11 6 ICMS Manager

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

3 Balti Court 24 3 ICMS Manager 4 Cimislia Court 9 3 ICMS Manager

Table 2 shows the courts, the names of the blocked judges and the number of judge blocking actions saved in ICMS.

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Table 2. Blocked judges

Chisinau Court Ungheni Court Balti Court Cimislia Court

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of instances when judges were blocked instances when judges were instances when judges were instances when judges were – 14 blocked – 6 blocked - 3 blocked - 3 • Nina Arabadji - (blocked 2 • Valentina Stratulat - • Ecaterina Arseni - • Victoria Tofan - (blocked times) (blocked 3 times) (blocked 2 times) 2 times) • Victor Sandu - (blocked 2 • Mariana Stratan - • Iurie Malcoci - (blocked • Maria Ganganu - times) (blocked 2 times) once) (blocked once) • Mihai Murgulet - (blocked 2 • Dumitru Racovita - times) (blocked once) • Alexandru Gafton - (blocked once) • Olga Bejenari - (blocked once) • Petru Paun - (blocked once) • Olga Ionascu - (blocked once) • Sergiu Suvac - (blocked once) • Maria Tertea - (blocked once) • Cristina Cheptea - (blocked once) • Sergiu Papuha - (blocked once).

For more information on the number of judge blocking actions saved in the ICMS see the Annex 1, Annex 2 and Annex 3 to this Report.

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

“Disqualified” Judges

The data analysis on the actions of” Disqualified judges”, saved in the ICMS shows the courts with the most frequent instances of “Disqualified Judges” (Chisinau Court of Appeal, Supreme Court of Justice, Balti Court of Appeal, Cahul Court of Appeal, Chisinau Court and Comrat Court of Appeal).

The Table 3 displays the list of courts using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS.

Table 3. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the ICMS Instances of using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS Total number of Total number of Total number of No. Court active judges in ICMS users who performed instances when the judges marked as February 2020 the actions/ No. actions option was used “disqualified” • Ludmila Calalb - 297 • Nadejda Ceban - 103 • Mariana Rusu - 85 • Aurelia Bumbu - 49 Chisinau Court of • Irina Şumleanschi – 46 1 46 691 691 Appeal • Diana Cușnir – 46 • Ala Bolfa - 44 • Ruslana Reuleţ - 8 • Sergiu Budeci – 7 • Vitalie Goraș – 6 • Mariana Șișcovschi – 58 • Tatiana Mîrzenco – 37 • Tatiana Bradu – 47 Supreme Court of • Valentina Martînenco – 2 20 200 200 Justice 20 • Vera Ioniță – 20 • Iulia Corbu – 15 • Olga Trufanova – 2

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

• Angela Matveiciuc - 1 • Natalia Solcan – 33 • Mariana Șveț – 32 • Inga Zaharcu – 30 • Victoria Guțu – 22 3 Balti Court of Appeal 24 158 158 • Elena Răileanu – 21 • Virginia Banu – 13 • Rodica Clapco – 4 • Natalia Snatinschi - 3 • Silvia Lazăr - 60 Cahul Court of • Tamara Pintilei - 24 4 9 99 99 Appeal • Adela Jurca - 12 • Lidia Bercaru - 3 • Ana Nicolaev - 51 • Tatiana Ciobanu – 21 • Natalia Oprea – 8 5 Chisinau Court 127 94 • Nadejda Damaschin - 5 94 • Agafia Ohrim – 5 • Natalia Petriman – 3 • Ana Pîslari - 1 • Anna Topal - 23 • Valentina Diacenco – Comrat Court of 6 6 57 15 57 Appeal • Liudmila Arnaut - 10 • TatianaOdnostalco- 9

For more information on courts using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS see the Annex 4, Annex 5 and Annex 6 to this Report.

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Examined by the same judge/panel

In addition, the ICMS system contains information on the use of the option “Examined by the same judge/panel” during the claim or case registration and distribution by means of the ICMS. This option allows automatic direct distribution of the registered claim or case to the judge rapporteur, who is indicated in the case saved previously in the ICMS. The data regarding the use of the option “Examined by the same judge/panel,” saved in ICMS throughout February 1-29, 2020, reveals the following: • Chisinau Court - 651 claims • Orhei Court - 26 claims • Straseni Court - 7 claims • Balti Court - 6 claims • Causeni Court - 3 claims • Criuleni Court - 2 claims • Comrat Court - 1 claim • Soroca Court - 1 claim • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 43 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 35 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 21 cases • Chisinau Court - 6 cases • Balti Court - 6 cases • Hancesti Court - 6 cases • Edinet Court - 4 cases • Straseni Court - 3 cases • Soroca Court - 2 cases • Cahul Court - 1 case • Causeni Court - 1 case

Changes in judge user roles

The ICMS system contains information about changes in the data regarding judge users for each court. According to the data retrieved from the SITCS’s server that hosts the ICMS, throughout February 1-29, 2020, the data on ICMS users who are judges was changed in the following courts:

• Hancesti Court 2 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Victoria Grosu – editing once • Natalia Doroftei – editing once • Orhei Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Alina Balan – editing once

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Erroneous status of claim/case

• Chisinau Court - 7 claims • Cimislia Court - 2 claims • Comrat Court - 1 claim • Hancesti Court - 1 claim • Orhei Court - 1 claim • Straseni Court - 1 claim • Comrat Court - 3 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 2 cases • Comrat Court of Appeal - 1 case • Balti Court - 1 case • Drochia Court - 1 case • Edinet Court - 1 case • Hancesti Court - 1 case • Orhei Court - 1 case

Reversed case distribution

• Comrat Court - 1 claim • Criuleni Court - 1 claim • Comrat Court - 11 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 7 cases • Chisinau Court - 4 cases • Cimislia Court - 3 cases • Balti Court - 1 case • Supreme Court of Justice - 1 case

Panel modification

this functionality when there is a need to modify a panel. Thus, the judge/judges shall be automatically and randomly replaced by another/others. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of panel change, including the reporter judge that have been undertaken in the courts between February 1-29 2020 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 6 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 2 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 1 case • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 1 case

Panel rectification

The section “Reports” from the ICMS system contains additional information on the number of actions of manual panel modification of each court. At the level of Appellate Courts and the Supreme Court of Justice, when there is a need to replace a judge on a panel (not the judge rapporteur) with another judge assigned by the Chair, it is possible to use this functionality, mentioning the judge who has been replaced by a judge assigned by the Chair. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of manual panel modification that have been undertaken in the courts between February 1-29, 2020 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 39 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 27 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 17 cases

Panel settings modification

• Supreme Court of Justice - 7 actions • Chisinau Court - 41 actions • Cimislia Court - 18 actions • Cahul Court - 4 actions • Soroca Court - 5 actions • Cahul Court of Appeal - 4 actions • Balti Court - 4 actions • Comrat Court of Appeal - 3 actions • Edinet Court - 3 actions • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 2 actions • Hancesti Court - 1 action

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Annex 1. List of the courts with the highest number of blocked judges in the period September 2019 – February 2020 (6 months)

February January December November October September

2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

Total Total Total Total Total Total

Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances

number of number of number of number of number of number of number

when judges when judges when judges when judges when judges when judges when

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

were blocked blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were

Chisinau 1 127 14 126 24 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 Court Ungheni 2 11 6 11 5 11 0 8 7 8 4 7 1 Court

Balti 3 24 3 26 3 28 5 24 1 24 4 22 11 Court

Cimislia 4 9 3 9 1 9 1 8 0 9 2 9 3 Court

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Annex 2. The courts with the highest number of blocked judges in the period September 2019 – February 2020 (6 months) 70

60 60

34 32

30 29

14 11 10 7 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 Chisinau Court Ungheni Court Bălţi Court Cimișlia Court

February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Annex 3. Blocked judges during the period of March 2019 – February 2020 (12 months) February January December November October September August March July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

umber of umber

active judges active

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

blocked judges blocked judges blocked

blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked

Total n of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number

Chisinau 1 127 14 126 24 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 122 14 124 11 Court Ungheni 2 11 6 11 5 11 0 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 10 2 10 0 10 2 Court

3 Balti Court 24 3 26 3 28 5 24 1 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 23 4 23 1 Cimislia 4 9 3 9 1 9 1 8 0 9 2 9 3 9 6 8 3 10 2 8 2 8 1 9 1 Court Soroca 5 10 3 11 3 10 2 7 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 8 1 8 1 Court Anenii Noi 6 9 2 9 4 8 0 6 1 6 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 6 3 7 3 7 1 7 0 Court Hancesti 7 12 2 12 1 12 0 12 0 12 3 11 8 9 7 13 8 14 5 14 2 14 0 15 1 Court Cahul 8 11 1 12 2 14 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 10 8 10 7 10 7 Court Straseni 9 13 1 12 3 13 6 11 2 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 12 1 12 0 Court Comrat 10 5 1 5 0 5 1 4 4 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 5 1 5 1 5 3 Court Edinet 11 15 0 15 3 15 1 14 0 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 15 2 15 0 Court Orhei 12 19 0 19 7 21 6 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 18 1 18 1 Court Criuleni 13 9 0 9 0 9 3 7 2 6 3 6 3 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 1 7 1 Court

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

February January December November October September August March July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

umber of umber

active judges active

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

blocked judges blocked judges blocked

blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked

Chisinau 14 Court of 46 0 46 1 45 14 44 1 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 54 9 48 4 49 1 49 0 Appeal Drochia 15 13 0 13 0 13 1 11 0 11 3 10 5 8 2 11 9 11 2 10 3 10 2 10 1 Court Causeni 16 7 0 7 0 7 0 6 0 6 2 6 3 7 5 6 0 8 2 8 2 7 1 8 0 Court Comrat 17 Court of 6 0 6 0 6 2 5 2 5 2 5 4 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 Appeal Balti Court 18 24 0 24 0 24 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 23 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 of Appeal Cahul 19 Court of 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 4 5 0 6 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 Appeal Supreme 20 Court of 20 0 20 0 20 1 21 1 21 0 22 1 23 0 29 0 27 1 23 0 23 0 23 0 Justice

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Annex 4. List the courts with the highest number of judges marked as “disqualified” in the period September 2019 – February 2020 (6 months)

February January December November October September

2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

judges" judges" judges" judges" judges" judges"

stances stances of

Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances In

“ disqualified”

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number

as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified”

marking the judges judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the

actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified Chisinau 1 Court of 691 691 613 613 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 Appeal Supreme 2 Court of 200 200 239 239 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 Justice Balti Court 3 158 158 318 318 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 of Appeal Cahul 4 Court of 99 99 194 194 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 Appeal Chisinau 5 94 94 107 107 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 Court

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Annex 5. The courts with the highest number of judges marked as “disqualified” in the period September 2019 – February 2020 (6 months)

800

691 700

613 600

500 483 424 442 423 432 411 400 375

315 318 300 239 200 194 204 181 200 169 158 150 149 148 138 125 123 132 115 107 109 99 94 100

0 Chisinau Court of Appeal Supreme Court of Justice Balti Court of Appeal Cahul Court of Appeal Chisinau Court

February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

Annex 6. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the period March 2019 – February 2020 (12 months) February January December November October September August March July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

N lified” Court actions f

Total number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number o Total number of actionsTotal number

Instances of marking the of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances

judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqua as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Chisinau 1 Court of 691 691 613 613 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 333 1366 342 1265 Appeal Supreme 2 Court of 200 200 239 239 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 122 498 95 357 Justice Balti Court 3 158 158 318 318 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 91 144 49 163 of Appeal Cahul 4 Court of 99 99 194 194 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 189 189 76 135 Appeal Chisinau 5 94 94 107 107 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 162 934 130 607 Court Comrat 6 Court of 57 57 31 31 30 30 18 18 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 19 19 14 14 Appeal Cahul 7 21 21 4 4 3 3 9 9 10 10 4 4 0 0 3 3 2 2 5 5 4 4 17 30 Court Edinet 8 18 18 5 5 8 8 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 9 9 2 2 5 5 126 135 83 117 Court Soroca 9 16 16 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 8 13 13 6 6 8 8 Court Orhei 10 15 15 20 20 18 18 17 17 10 10 4 4 7 7 14 14 37 44 43 55 39 54 35 37 Court Drochia 11 9 9 21 21 11 11 18 18 11 11 7 7 8 8 7 7 12 12 17 17 117 136 65 80 Court

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, February 2020 February 29, 2020

February January December November October September August March July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

N lified” Court actions f

Instances of marking the of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances

judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqua as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Comrat 12 6 6 10 10 15 15 333 333 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 42 42 4 4 3 3 Court 13 Balti Court 5 5 3 3 3 3 2 2 7 7 0 0 10 10 5 5 11 11 8 8 10 35 13 23 Causeni 14 5 5 4 4 4 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 17 17 16 23 24 25 24 25 Court Straseni 15 4 4 7 7 5 5 5 5 4 4 1 1 2 2 59 74 324 360 186 244 216 240 13 37 Court Ungheni 16 3 3 3 3 9 9 1 1 4 4 2 2 0 0 12 12 18 20 11 15 15 23 10 14 Court Criuleni 17 1 1 1 1 10 10 2 2 4 4 3 3 5 5 62 62 196 197 82 90 108 110 10 10 Court Hancesti 18 0 0 5 5 36 36 20 20 15 15 3 3 3 3 14 14 19 40 5 20 14 39 18 33 Court Anenii Noi 19 0 0 1 1 7 7 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 11 11 12 12 26 55 17 32 5 8 Court Cimislia 20 0 0 2 2 5 5 3 3 7 7 3 3 1 1 5 5 0 0 9 9 7 7 2 2 Court

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

4. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during March 2020 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) QR Y2

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 1–31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

March 31, 2020

DISCLAIMER

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 1–31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

INTRODUCTION

Since November 2013 the monitoring of case distribution by means of the ICMS takes place monthly. From this, monthly reports are submitted to the SCM and the ACA. This is the seventy-sixth monitoring report on random case distribution covering the period of March 1-31, 2020. The data for this report is accessed by the Open Justice Project with the assistance of the Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security (SITCS, formerly CTS). The report is available to the public and is published on the web page of the ACA.

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

MONITORING OF RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION

The random assignment of cases by means of the ICMS during the period of March 1-31, 2020, has the following percentage distribution:

• 96.79 % of the total number of incoming cases were automatically randomly distributed one time • 2.91 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed twice • 0.20 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed three times • 0.11 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed four or more times

The detailed information about these judges in each court is presented in the statistical module (Reports) from the ICMS system.

Blocked Judges

The data analysis on the actions of blocking judges, saved in ICMS, shows the courts with the most frequent instances of blocking judges (Chisinau Court, Straseni Court, Anenii Noi Court, Cahul Court, Ungheni Court). Table 1. Blocked judges Number of Total number of ICMS user who instances when No. Court active judges in performed the judges were March, 2020 action blocked 1 Chisinau Court 129 14 ICMS Manager 2 Straseni Court 13 3 ICMS Manager

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

3 Anenii Noi Court 8 3 ICMS Manager 4 Cahul Court 12 2 ICMS Manager 5 Ungheni Court 11 2 ICMS Manager

Table 2 shows the courts, the names of the blocked judges and the number of judge blocking actions saved in ICMS.

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Table 2. Blocked judges

Chisinau Court Straseni Court Anenii Noi Court Cahul Court Ungheni Court

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of instances when judges were instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges blocked – 14 were blocked – 3 were blocked - 3 were blocked – 2 were blocked – 2 • Andrei Niculcea - • Dorina Croitor - • Maria Chiperi - • Svetlana Caitaz - • Petru Triboi - (blocked 3 times) (blocked once) (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Dorin Dulghieru - • Veaceslav • Aurelia Pleșca - • Ion Cotea - • Mihai Ulinici - (blocked 2 times) Negurița - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Eugeniu Beșelea - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) • Sergiu Osoianu - • Angela Catană - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Valentina Garabagiu - (blocked once) • Angela Vasilenco - (blocked once) • Viorica Puica - (blocked once) • Daria Șușchevici - (blocked once) • Serghei Papuha - (blocked once) • Iraida Secrieru - (blocked once) • Natalia Mămăligă - (blocked once).

For more information on the number of judge blocking actions saved in the ICMS see the Annex 1, Annex 2 and Annex 3 to this Report.

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

“Disqualified” Judges

The Table 3 displays the list of courts using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS.

Table 3. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the ICMS Instances of using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS Total number of Total number of Total number of No. Court active judges in ICMS users who performed instances when the judges marked as March 2020 the actions/ No. actions option was used “disqualified” • Ludmila Calalb - 359 • Mariana Rusu - 102 • Nadejda Ceban - 66 • Aurelia Bumbu - 60 Chisinau Court of 1 46 714 • Ruslana Reuleţ -56 714 Appeal • Ala Bolfa – 29 • Irina Şumleanschi – 28 • Diana Cușnir – 11 • Sergiu Budeci – 3 • Mariana Șveț – 70 • Inga Zaharcu – 51 • Rodica Clapco – 33 • Natalia Solcan – 17 Balti Court of 2 24 214 • Victoria Guțu – 13 214 Appeal • Virginia Banu – 12 • Natalia Snatinschi – 9 • Marina Tilipeț – 4 • Elena Răileanu – 3

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

• ANNA CAMERZAN - 2 • Vera Ioniță – 38 • Valentina Martînenco – 26 • Tatiana Bradu – 21 • Mariana Șișcovschi – 16 • Ala Sîrbu – 12 Supreme Court of 3 20 156 • Olga Trufanova – 11 156 Justice • Angela Matveiciuc – 11 • Iulia Corbu – 9 • Tatiana Mîrzenco – 8 • GHEORGHE CUŢITARU - 3 • Cristina Cebotari - 1 • Ana Nicolaev - 49 • Ana Pîslari – 30 • Nadejda Damaschin - 24 4 Chisinau Court 129 132 132 • Natalia Oprea – 13 • Tatiana Ciobanu – 7 • Ana Zlotescu – 6 • Nellea Sarî - 3 • Tamara Pintilei - 37 • Silvia Lazăr - 24 Cahul Court of 5 9 96 • Maria Daud - 21 96 Appeal • Lidia Bercaru - 11 • Adela Jurca - 3

For more information on courts using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS see the Annex 4, Annex 5 and Annex 6 to this Report.

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Examined by the same judge/panel

In addition, the ICMS system contains information on the use of the option “Examined by the same judge/panel” during the claim or case registration and distribution by means of the ICMS. This option allows automatic direct distribution of the registered claim or case to the judge rapporteur, who is indicated in the case saved previously in the ICMS. The data regarding the use of the option “Examined by the same judge/panel,” saved in ICMS throughout March 1-31, 2020, reveals the following: • Chisinau Court - 865 claims • Orhei Court - 27 claims • Comrat Court - 6 claims • Balti Court - 4 claims • Edinet Court - 3 claims • Straseni Court - 3 claims • Drochia Court - 2 claims • Hancesti Court - 2 claims • Balti Court of Appeal - 37 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 24 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 24 cases • Chisinau Court - 4 cases • Drochia Court - 4 cases • Edinet Court - 3 cases • Straseni Court - 3 cases • Comrat Court - 2 cases • Orhei Court - 2 cases • Hancesti Court - 2 cases • Balti Court - 1 case • Criuleni Court - 1 case

Changes in judge user roles

The ICMS system contains information about changes in the data regarding judge users for each court. According to the data retrieved from the SITCS’s server that hosts the ICMS, throughout March 1-31, 2020, the data on ICMS users who are judges was changed in the following courts:

• Chisinau Court 4 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Arina Ialanji – editing twice • Steliana Iorgov – editing once • Victoria Sanduța – editing once • Orhei Court 2 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Alina Balan – editing once • Vasile Stihi – editing once

Erroneous status of claim/case

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

• Chisinau Court - 2 claims • Supreme Court of Justice - 1 claim • Balti Court - 1 claim • Criuleni Court - 1 claim • Edinet Court - 1 claim • Chisinau Court - 3 cases • Orhei Court - 3 cases • Comrat Court - 2 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 1 case • Cahul Court of Appeal - 1 case • Comrat Court of Appeal - 1 case • Balti Court - 1 case • Edinet Court - 1 case • Hancesti Court - 1 case • Ungheni Court - 1 case

Reversed case distribution

• Chisinau Court - 11 cases • Comrat Court - 4 cases • Edinet Court - 2 cases • Hancesti Court - 1 case

Panel modification

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 30 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 3 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 2 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 1 case

Panel rectification

The section “Reports” from the ICMS system contains additional information on the number of actions of manual panel modification of each court. At the level of Appellate Courts and the Supreme Court of Justice, when there is a need to replace a judge on a panel (not the judge rapporteur) with another judge assigned by the Chair, it is possible to use this functionality, mentioning the judge who has been replaced by a judge assigned by the Chair. According to the information retrieved from the ICMS server hosting the ICMS system, the number of actions of manual panel modification that have been undertaken in the courts between March 1-31, 2020 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 18 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 17 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 4 cases

Panel settings modification

• Balti Court of Appeal - 40 actions • Supreme Court of Justice - 19 actions • Orhei Court - 19 actions • Edinet Court - 17 actions • Cimislia Court - 13 actions • Chisinau Court - 12 actions • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 8 actions • Comrat Court of Appeal - 2 actions • Ungheni Court - 2 actions • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 2 actions • Soroca Court - 1 action

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Annex 1. List of the courts with the highest number of blocked judges in the period October 2019 – March 2020 (6 months)

March February January December November October

2020 2020 2020 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

Total Total Total Total Total Total

Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances Instances

number of number of number of number of number of number of number

when judges when judges when judges when judges when judges when judges when

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

were blocked blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were blocked were

Chisinau 1 129 14 127 14 126 24 129 29 125 32 119 34 Court

Straseni 2 13 3 13 1 12 3 13 6 11 2 12 4 Court Anenii 3 Noi 8 3 9 2 9 4 8 0 6 1 6 4 Court Cahul 4 12 2 11 1 12 2 14 5 9 3 10 3 Court

Ungheni 5 11 2 11 6 11 5 11 0 8 7 8 4 Court

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Annex 2. The courts with the highest number of blocked judges in the period October 2019 – March 2020 (6 months) 40

35 34

30 29

25 24

15 14 14

7 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 Chisinau Court Straseni Court Anenii Noi Court Cahul Court Ungheni Court

March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Annex 3. Blocked judges during the period of April 2019 – March 2020 (12 months) March February January December November October September August July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

l number of l number

active judges active

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

blocked judges blocked judges blocked

blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number Tota of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number ofTotal number of Total number of Total number of Total number

Chisinau 1 129 14 127 14 126 24 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 122 14 Court Straseni 2 13 3 13 1 12 3 13 6 11 2 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 12 1 Court Anenii Noi 3 8 3 9 2 9 4 8 0 6 1 6 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 6 3 7 3 7 1 Court Cahul 4 12 2 11 1 12 2 14 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 10 8 10 7 Court Ungheni 5 11 2 11 6 11 5 11 0 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 10 2 10 0 Court Edinet 6 15 1 15 0 15 3 15 1 14 0 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 15 2 Court Orhei 7 19 1 19 0 19 7 21 6 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 18 1 Court Soroca 8 10 1 10 3 11 3 10 2 7 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 8 1 Court Criuleni 9 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 3 7 2 6 3 6 3 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 1 Court Chisinau 10 Court of 46 0 46 0 46 1 45 14 44 1 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 54 9 48 4 49 1 Appeal Drochia 11 13 0 13 0 13 0 13 1 11 0 11 3 10 5 8 2 11 9 11 2 10 3 10 2 Court

12 Balti Court 24 0 24 3 26 3 28 5 24 1 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 23 4 Cimislia 13 9 0 9 3 9 1 9 1 8 0 9 2 9 3 9 6 8 3 10 2 8 2 8 1 Court

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

March February January December November October September August July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

l number of l number

active judges active

active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active judges active

blocked judges blocked judges blocked

blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked judges blocked

Causeni 14 7 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 6 0 6 2 6 3 7 5 6 0 8 2 8 2 7 1 Court Hancesti 15 12 0 12 2 12 1 12 0 12 0 12 3 11 8 9 7 13 8 14 5 14 2 14 0 Court Comrat 16 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 1 4 4 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 5 1 5 1 Court Comrat 17 Court of 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 2 5 2 5 2 5 4 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 1 Appeal Balti Court 18 24 0 24 0 24 0 24 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 23 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 of Appeal Cahul 19 Court of 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 4 5 0 6 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 Appeal Supreme 20 Court of 20 0 20 0 20 0 20 1 21 1 21 0 22 1 23 0 29 0 27 1 23 0 23 0 Justice

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Annex 4. List the courts with the highest number of judges marked as “disqualified” in the period October 2019 – March 2020 (6 months)

March February January December November October

2020 2020 2020 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

lified”

"Disqualified "Disqualified

judges" judges" judges" judges" judges" judges"

Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number

as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqua as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified” as “ disqualified”

marking the judges judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the judges marking the

actions actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified actions "Disqualified Chisinau 1 Court of 714 714 691 691 613 613 411 411 424 424 423 423 Appeal Balti Court 2 214 214 158 158 318 318 149 149 109 109 125 125 of Appeal Supreme 3 Court of 156 156 200 200 239 239 375 375 315 315 432 432 Justice Chisinau 4 132 132 94 94 107 107 204 204 169 169 181 181 Court Cahul 5 Court of 96 96 99 99 194 194 150 150 132 132 148 148 Appeal

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Annex 5. The courts with the highest number of judges marked as “disqualified” in the period October 2019 – March 2020 (6 months) 800

714 691 700

613 600

500

424 423 432 411 400 375

318 315 300

239 214 204 200 194 200 181 169 158 149 156 150 148 125 132 132 109 107 94 96 99 100

0 Chisinau Court of Appeal Balti Court of Appeal Supreme Court of Justice Chisinau Court Cahul Court of Appeal

March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

Annex 6. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the period April 2019 – March 2020 (12 months) March February January December November October September August July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

N udges" Court actions f

Total number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number o Total number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number

Instances of marking the of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances

judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Chisinau 1 Court of 714 714 691 691 613 613 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 333 1366 Appeal Balti Court 2 214 214 158 158 318 318 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 91 144 of Appeal Supreme 3 Court of 156 156 200 200 239 239 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 122 498 Justice Chisinau 4 132 132 94 94 107 107 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 162 934 Court Cahul 5 Court of 96 96 99 99 194 194 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 189 189 Appeal Orhei 6 19 19 15 15 20 20 18 18 17 17 10 10 4 4 7 7 14 14 37 44 43 55 39 54 Court Comrat 7 Court of 18 18 57 57 31 31 30 30 18 18 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 19 19 Appeal Drochia 8 8 8 9 9 21 21 11 11 18 18 11 11 7 7 8 8 7 7 12 12 17 17 117 136 Court Comrat 9 7 7 6 6 10 10 15 15 333 333 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 42 42 4 4 Court Anenii Noi 10 4 4 0 0 1 1 7 7 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 11 11 12 12 26 55 17 32 Court Straseni 11 3 3 4 4 7 7 5 5 5 5 4 4 1 1 2 2 59 74 324 360 186 244 216 240 Court

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, March 2020 March 31, 2020

March February January December November October September August July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2020 2020 2020 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

N udges" Court actions f

Instances of marking the of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances of marking the Instances

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

OBJECTIVE 2

5. Monitoring Report on the Quality of the Reasoning of the Superior Council of Magistracy's Decisions on the Selection and Careers of Judges for the Period from July 2019 to December 2019 (Activity 2.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) \

MONITORING REPORT ON THE QUALITY OF REASONING OF SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRACY'S DECISIONS RELATING TO THE SELECTION AND CAREERS OF JUDGES FOR THE PERIOD FROM JULY 2019 TO DECEMBER 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

March 27, 2020

DISCLAIMER

MONITORING REPORT ON THE QUALITY OF REASONING OF SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRACY'S DECISIONS RELATING TO THE SELECTION AND CAREERS OF JUDGES FOR THE PERIOD FROM JULY 2019 TO DECEMBER 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Submitted on March 27, 2020

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF REASONING OF DECISIONS BY THE SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRACY

BACKGROUND

This Monitoring Report was drafted under Objective 2 of the Open Justice Project and falls under Sub-Objective 2.2, “Oversight over judicial performance institutionalized,” sub-Activity 2.2.3.3. of Open Justice’s Year 3 Work Plan. The purpose of this Monitoring Report is to evaluate the quality of reasoning of decisions by the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) relating to the selection and career of judges.

The relevance of the activity is explained by amendments to the procedures concerning selection, promotion and transfer of judges implemented by the SCM in January 2019, and the need to monitor the quality of reasoning that the SCM provides when it delivers decisions on the appointment or careers of judges. The research period (July 2019 – August 2019) is relevant in the context of the first selection round organized by the SCM under the new rules adopted in August 2019, but also in the context of all transfers and promotions that were subsequently decided. In July and August 2019, the SCM adopted 10 decisions on the appointment and careers of judges. These decisions resulted in 31 appointments, 4 transfers to a different court of same level and 14 promotions to higher courts. Open Justice analysed these decisions and found a number of issues that are further discussed below. The SCM published the decision in late September 2019.

This Monitoring Report evaluates the compliance of the respective decisions adopted by the SCM with the recommendations made in the Guidelines for SCM Members in Preparing Well-Reasoned Decisions on the Selection of Judges (hereinafter, “Guidelines”) developed in March 2019 by the Project’s local consultant, Mr. Vladimir Grosu. The Guidelines contained 8 specific recommendations on how the SCM can improve the reasoning of judicial selection and promotion decisions so that civil society, mass-media, and the public can be confident that the SCM based its judicial selection and promotion decisions on objective and transparent criteria. These 8 recommendations are:

1. All SCM decisions on the selection, transfer or promotion of judges shall be motivated both in fact and in law; 2. The reasoning of a decision can be brief, but it must clearly state the arguments for selecting, promoting or transferring a candidate, so as to convince a reasonable observer on the soundness of the SCM’s decision and prove that the respective decision is merit-based and stemming from objective criteria; 3. If the SCM used its discretionary power1, it must stipulate how it reached its final decision;

1 It is the authority granted to the SCM to award up to 20 points of a candidate’s final score, as per the provision of Article 2 para. (11) of the Law no. 154 of 5 July 2012 on selection, performance evaluation and career of judges.

USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Monitoring Report on Reasoning of SCM Decisions March 27, 2020

4. Decisions in contests with several candidates shall provide a thorough assessment of each candidate and give detailed reasons in support of the selection of the winning candidate so as to allow all applicants who failed to be aware of the reasons for such failure; 5. The reasoning must be adjusted to the category of the case (transfer, promotion, appointment, etc.), as well as to the circumstances of every separate case; 6. The SCM must clearly state whether the candidate’s performance had been analysed strictly based on the criteria stipulated in the SCM Regulation or whether additional factors were also considered – this is especially important when the SCM disagrees with the position of its specialized boards that previously screened and recommended the candidates; 7. The motivation of the SCM decision shall clearly reflect the margin of discretion established by law for each body that participated in the selection process before the judge’s candidacy reached the SCM’s Plenum, which will allow clear insight into how the candidate was assessed by those screening bodies; 8. Once the SCM eventually develops a robust decision-making practice on selection and promotion of judicial candidates, the motivation and reasoning can be included as a summary only, making reference to the precedent practice. Under such circumstances, the Judicial Selection Board will be obliged to provide the SCM with a clear analysis of each candidate that it recommended for selection, transfer or promotion, as well as reasoned arguments why the candidate is a suitable one, which the SCM will use as basis for its final decision on judicial candidates.

ISSUES

Monitoring of the SCM decisions adopted during the research period found a number of issues concerning the extent to which these decisions complied with the recommendations made in the Guidelines. These issues are:

1. The Plenum of the SCM does not provide any explanation on how it makes use of its discretion in awarding statutory (up to) 20 points. A standardized wording is used in every decision: “Having regard to the candidates’ motivation, the arguments which determined them to take part in this contest, their achievements, their personal, professional and social skills, as well as their reputation within the judiciary and the society, the Plenum of the SCM awards the following scores (…)”. 2. Only general references were made to the candidates’ personal file, without emphasizing the relevancy of the submitted/collected records that it contains when taking a decision in favor of one candidate or another. The decisions do not indicate the relevance of any particular record in deciding the candidate’s final score; 3. Even if it may seem obvious, the SCM does not explain the causal link between the assessment of records provided in the candidate’s personal file and the decision taken by the SCM based on this information; 4. The existence of the second stage of the contest, i.e., the interview, is barely mentioned. There is no indication that the interview was conducted at all, or that its outcome has

USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Monitoring Report on Reasoning of SCM Decisions March 27, 2020

influenced the final score in any way. No assessment of a candidate’s performance during interviews is made at this stage of the contest; 5. The concept of “untarnished reputation” is always mentioned, but it is never explained. The SCM should clearly state, in each decision on selection and promotion, what “untarnished reputation” means (e.g., for “lack of disciplinary sanctions” or other clear criteria). 6. In at least two decisions concerning promotions to a higher court (Decision No. 321/19 of August 6 ,2019 and Decision No. 319/19 of August 6, 2019), a notice (“notă informativă”) of a potential wrongdoing by a candidate was provided by the Moldovan Security and Intelligence Service (“Serviciul de Informații și Securitate”). The SCM described the situation and the allegation made, heard the candidate and ultimately rejected his/her request for promotion. The SCM failed to describe the pertinence of this information, explain its probatory value, and demonstrate the existence of a causal link between the provided information and the disqualifying effect it had on a candidate’s reputation; 7. Under the provision of Article 3.35 of the Regulations on the way of organization and conducting of the contest for holding the vacant position of the judge of 20 December 2018, approved by the SCM Decision no. 612/29, the final approval of a candidate for first-time appointment or transfer/promotion is subject to confirmation by a majority vote within the Plenum of the SCM. This provision is perceived by the SCM members as an exclusive right, as it limits the authority of the Board for Selection and Career of Judges to make final recommendations on judicial appointments.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the recommendations made in the Guidelines and the issues identified during the monitoring activity, Open Justice is of the opinion that the following recommendations, if applied, could improve the quality of the SCM’s reasoning in decisions pertaining to the selection and career of judges:

1. As a general remark, the distribution of (up to) 20 statutory points attributed to the Plenum of the SCM should be explained. Particularly, the substantiation shall: a. make reference to the candidate’s personal file, specifically to the submitted/collected records, and explain its impact on a candidate’s final score; b. describe the interview and its relevance in the assessment of candidates; indicate the questions asked during the interview, the answers provided, and how these impacted the candidate’s final score; c. properly assess and explain the weight a particular record or item of information provided with respect to a candidate carries, especially when it is used against a candidate or diminishes his/her chances. 2. Amend the Regulations on the way of organization and conducting of the contest for holding the vacant position of the judge or develop additional guidelines describing the interview stage as part of the selection contest; 3. Develop templates and guidelines for the SCM’s mandatory use to improve well-reasoned decisions on the selection and careers of judges;

USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Monitoring Report on Reasoning of SCM Decisions March 27, 2020

4. Eventually, examine the possibility of amending the Regulations on the way of organization and conducting of the contest for holding the vacant position of the judge to involve, to a larger extent, specialised boards in the decision-making process (similar to the practice of the Superior Council of Prosecutors). The SCM should primarily rely on the analysis and reasoning set forth in the decisions of its specialised bodies in relation to contests on the promotion, transfer and first-time appointment of judges.

CONCLUSION

Upon the completion of its monitoring mission, Open Justice concluded that, within the research period, none of the decisions adopted by the SCM pertaining to the selection and careers of judges reached the threshold of a “sufficiently reasoned” decision. Having regard to the recommendations made in the Guidelines, Open Justice found that, although there were considerable improvements in the quality of reasoning of the SCM’s decisions compared to previous years, during this selection round the SCM still failed to adequately substantiate the appointments, promotions and transfers that it carried-out. Hence, these decisions cannot be deemed substantiated. In spite of the Guidelines, the SCM struggled to provide proper reasoning on two aspects in particular - the use of its discretion when it awards points that are attributed to the Plenum of the SCM (the 20 statutory points), and the rationale behind final voting.

Open Justice will continue to assist SCM members in improving appointment and selection processes so that civil society, mass media, and the public can be confident that the SCM bases its judicial selection and promotion decisions on objective and transparent criteria.

USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

6. Report on the Roundtable Discussion on Use of the Videoconferencing Solution in Courts and Penitentiaries, January 31, 2020 (Activities 1.1.1.1 and 1.1.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) \

REPORT ON THE ROUNDTABLE “THE USE OF THE VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION IN COURTS AND PENITENTIARIES”

JANUARY 31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

April 30, 2020

DISCLAIMER

REPORT ON THE ROUNDTABLE “THE USE OF VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION IN COURTS AND PENITENTIARIES”

JANUARY 31, 2020

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Submitted on April 30, 2020

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... iii INTRODUCTION ...... 1 METHODS ...... 1 DATES ...... 2 PARTICIPANTS ...... 2 SPEAKERS/MODERATORS ...... 2 REPORT ...... 3 CONCLUSIONS ...... 3 ANNEX 1. AGENDA ...... 5 ANNEX 2. PHOTOS ...... 6

Page iii USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on January 31 Videoconferencing Roundtable April 30, 2020 INTRODUCTION

Specific Project activities include efforts to institutionalize the use of the videoconferencing solution to ensure remote participation of inmates in court hearings. The Project will continue to assist the SCM, ACA/MOJ and the NPA to implement the Regulation on the use of the videoconferencing solution in court hearings and penitentiaries that the SCM and ACA/MOJ approved in July 2019. The Open Justice’s activities will lead to building a better communication between the courts and penitentiaries, savings of time and fund resources, ensuring security of trial participants and a decrease in the length of court proceedings. As a result, the court system will be able to deal with more hearings per day in a quicker and more efficient manner.

Under Objective 1 of the Project, as part of monitoring the implementation of the videoconferencing solution, Open Justice developed two questionnaires for the chiefs of court secretariats and the employees of the penitentiaries connected to courts through videoconferencing equipment. The surveys took place during December 18, 2019 – January 17, 2020 and aimed at collecting feedback from each Central premises of the courts and relevant penitentiaries on the use of the system between October, 2019 – December, 2019.

On January 31, 2020, Open Justice organized a roundtable with the representatives of the courts and penitentiary institutions to discuss the results of the surveys on the use of the videoconferencing solution in hearings with the remote participation of inmates.

The general objectives of the roundtable were:

• To present the results of the surveys on the use of videoconferencing solution in courts and penitentiary institutions; • To evaluate the practices on the use of the videoconferencing solution; • To identify problematic areas and possible solutions to institutionalize and extend the use of the videoconferencing solution in all national courts and penitentiaries.

METHODS

Open Justice invited representatives of Moldovan judiciary and penitentiary system, the SCM, the ACA/MOJ and the NPA to discuss the use of the videoconferencing solution, its operation and utility as an alternative to in-person interactions between inmates and courts during hearings.

The roundtable provided an interactive platform for discussions, by sharing the findings, the benefits, the difficulties and the solutions identified after analyzing the feedback of participants. The issues were tackled in two separate groups - one representing the judiciary and the other the penitentiary system. Each group developed a list of deficiencies, solutions and actions required to institutionalize and extend the use of the videoconferencing solution in all Moldovan courts and penitentiaries. At the

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on January 31 Videoconferencing Roundtable April 30, 2020 end, each group prepared joint recommendations, taking into account the particularities of the activity that its representatives carry out.

DATES

Open Justice organized the roundtable on January 31, 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

The roundtable gathered 33 participants – representatives of the SCM, ACA/MOJ, NPA, judges, chiefs of court secretariat, guardians, and development partners.

SPEAKERS/MODERATORS

• Cristina Malai, Open Justice Chief of Party • Irina Lupusor, Open Justice Senior Staff Attorney • Veronica Mocanu, Open Justice Staff Attorney

The agenda and photos from the roundtable are attached as Annexes 1- 2 to this report.

Page 2 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on January 31 Videoconferencing Roundtable April 30, 2020 REPORT

ROUNDTABLE ON “THE USE OF VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION IN COURTS AND PENITENTIARIES”

The roundtable started with introductory remarks on the activities that Open Justice carries out to assist the local counterparts to streamline the complex court reorganization and optimization reform (CRO). The Open Justice’s efforts include monitoring the use of the videoconferencing solution that the Project purchased and installed in courts during fiscal year 2018. As part of the planned assistance, Open Justice aims to provide support in ensuring that the use of the videoconferencing solution for remote participation of inmates in court hearings is institutionalized and the necessary regulations with regard to fairness of the court proceedings and access to justice are in place.

Open Justice’s Staff Attorney, Veronica Mocanu, opened the first working session of the roundtable by informing the participants about the results of the surveys conducted throughout December 18, 2019 – January 17, 2020. Ms. Mocanu presented the Project’s findings from the conducted surveys on the use of the videoconferencing solution in trials involving inmates, deficiencies encountered by participants in the surveys and the Project’s draft recommendations for remedying the deficiencies.

During the second stage of the organized roundtable, the participants continued to evaluate in two groups the practices of using the videoconferencing solution. Ms. Veronica Mocanu and Ms. Irina Lupusor, the Open Justice’s Staff Attorneys, moderated the participants’ discussions in the organized groups. Each group had the task of preparing a list of deficiencies, accompanied with solutions and recommendations to improve the situation and identify the responsible authorities for implementing recommended actions.

During the final session of the roundtable, the participants had the opportunity to hear the views and the opinions of the other group on the use of the videoconferencing solution and the proposed improvements. The roundtable participants agreed that the use of the videoconferencing solution boosts the efficiency of courts and penitentiaries, saves time, reduces travel expenses, and requires collaboration between courts and penitentiaries. The participants showed proactive attitude towards the institutionalization of the videoconferencing solution in the process of performing justice.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions of the participants at the roundtable were as follows:

1. Implementation of the videoconferencing solution should be expanded in all national courts and penitentiaries. 2. Use of videoconferencing solution should be considered for other court cases as well. Therefore, the legislation should be revised to add other categories of cases in which videoconferencing solution could be used.

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on January 31 Videoconferencing Roundtable April 30, 2020

3. Videoconferencing solution improves courts’ and penitentiaries’ efficiency. Inmates can have their cases settled in timely manner, the burden of heavy backlogs of cases can be alleviated and fewer resources are spent. 4. To streamline the process of using videoconferencing solution, the existing legal framework should be improved as follows: • the process of planning hearings via videoconferencing solution should be regulated; • the planning process should be coordinated between courts and penitentiaries to avoid delays and overlaps; • the duties of each participant to hearings should be clearly regulated; • the use of the videoconferencing solution should be indicated in the courts’ summons; • the rules on communication of court documents and evidences (via email, fax) should be clearly regulated; • the procedure for communication between inmates and their lawyers should be clarified; • the application of the electronic signature on the minutes of the court hearing should be ensured; • the rules of the audio recording of court hearings conducted remotely should be regulated. 5. The Regulation on the use of the videoconferencing solution in court hearings and penitentiaries approved in 2019 and the Penal Procedure Code should be amended to ensure all procedural safeguards of a fair trial during hearings conducted remotely. 6. Additional videoconferencing equipment for courts and penitentiaries should be purchased. In some cases, it is necessary to purchase additional sets of equipment to equip several courtrooms in a court. 7. The court equipment (including SRS Femida) must be upgraded to ensure the quality of the image and sound, and its compatibility with the equipment installed in penitentiaries. 8. Technical solutions should be identified to avoid disruption of hearings conducted remotely, for reasons independent of the participants (weather conditions, internet connection /slowed down/stopped working/, electricity shortages, etc.). 9. Initial and ongoing training of the court and penitentiary personnel regarding their duties during the hearings conducted remotely is required. 10. The SCM, ACA/MOJ and the NPA will commit to achieving the objectives of institutionalization of the application of the videoconferencing solution in all domestic courts. As a result of the organized roundtable, Open Justice will prepare a comprehensive report with findings, recommendations and actions to be carried out by the Project’s stakeholders to institutionalize the use of videoconferencing solution in all national courts and penitentiaries. Therefore, the report will serve as a roadmap for future actions to be implemented by the Project’s partners.

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on January 31 Videoconferencing Roundtable April 30, 2020 ANNEX 1. AGENDA

ROUNDTABLE “THE USE OF VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION IN COURTS AND PENITENTIARIES”

Chisinau, Jolly Alon Hotel 37, Maria Cebotari Street, Chisinau

January 31, 2020

09.30 – 10.00 Registration of participants Welcome coffee

10.00 – 10.15 Opening remarks Ms. Cristina Malai, Open Justice Project Mr. Victor Micu, Superior Council of Magistracy Ms. Elena Corolevschi, Agency for Court Administration Mr. Vladimir Cojocaru, National Penitentiary Administration 10.15 – 10.45 Presentation of the results on the surveys on the use of videoconferencing solution in courts and penitentiary institutions Ms. Veronica Mocanu, Open Justice Project ***division into working groups*** 10.45 – 11.00 Coffee break 11.00 – 12.15 Evaluation of the practices on the use of the videoconferencing solution in courts and penitentiary institutions Panel 1 - room No. 1 (1st floor, right wing). Moderator: Ms. Veronica Mocanu, Open Justice Project Panel 2 - room No. 2 (2nd floor). Moderator: Ms. Irina Lupușor, Open Justice Project ***the participants return to the main hall*** 12.15 – 13.00 Concluding remarks 13.00 – 14.00 Lunch break

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Report on January 31 Videoconferencing Roundtable April 30, 2020 ANNEX 2. PHOTOS

Ms. Cristina Malai, Open Justice Chief of Party, speaks about the importance of institutionalizing the use of videoconferencing solution in court proceedings

Participants at the round table share their experience of using the videoconferencing solution in court proceedings conducted remotely

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report April 30, 2020

7. Synopsis of the Report on the Use of the Videoconferencing Solution in Moldovan Courts and Penitentiary Institutions (Activity 1.1.1.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

SYNOPSIS OF THE REPORT ON THE USE OF THE VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS AND PENITENTIARY INSTITUTIONS

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

April 30, 2020

DISCLAIMER

SYNOPSIS OF THE REPORT ON THE USE OF THE VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS AND PENITENTIARY INSTITUTIONS

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

Prepared by: Cristina Malai, COP Activity Office: USAID/Moldova COR: Scott DePies

Submitted on April 30, 2020

Contract: AID-OAA-I-13-00029 Order: AID-117-TO-17-00001

Implemented by: Millennium DPI Partners, LLC Two Boar’s Head Place, Suite 130 Charlottesville, VA 22903

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... iii LIST OF ACRONYMS ...... iv I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1 II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...... 3 III. THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ON COURT HEARINGS HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE ...... 4 IV. TECHINCAL PREREQUISITES FOR COURT HEARINGS HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE... 5 A. Technical infrastructure of courts ...... 5 B. Technical infrastructure of penitentiaries ...... 6 V. THE EXPERIENCE OF THE DOMESTIC COURTS IN USING VIDEOCONFERENCE ...... 7 VI. THE EXPERIENCE OF PENITENTIARIES IN USING VIDEOCONFERENCE ...... 9 VII. THE EXPERIENCE OF USING VIDEOCONFERENCING DURING THE STATE OF EMERGENCY ...... 10 VIII. THE BEST PRACTICE OF USING VIDEOCONFERENCE IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE LIGHT OF THE CASE LAW OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE EXPERIENCE OF OTHER STATES ...... 11 IX. CONCLUSIONS ...... 12 X. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 13 A. Recommendations on the harmonization and expansion of the use of the videoconferencing solution ...... 13 B. Recommendations on strengthening the technical capacity on the use of videoconferencing solution ...... 13 C. Recommendations for improving the videoconferencing practice in matters under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC...... 15 D. Recommendations for the applications during the state of emergency ...... 15

Page iii USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACA Agency for Court Administration CiPC Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Moldova CrPC Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Moldova ECHR European Convention on Human Rights ECtHR European Court of Human Rights EU European Union ICMS Integrated Case Management System JIS Judicial Information System NPA National Penitentiaries Administration SCM Superior Council of Magistracy SITCS Service for Information Technology and Cybersecurity Service

Page iv USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020

This document is a Synopsis of the Report on the Use of the Videoconferencing Solution in Courts and Penitentiary Institutions (hereinafter referred to as “the Report”). The Report offers an overview on the efficiency of the use of videoconferencing in courts and penitentiaries and examines the prospects of its implementation on a large scale in legal proceedings in the Republic of Moldova. This Synopsis summarizes the main findings, conclusions and recommendations included in the full Report.

The full Report consists of ten chapters, the content of which is summarized in this document. The used methodology and relevant international best practices are described in detail in the full version of the Report. The bibliography, the questionnaires and the technical specifications for videoconferencing equipment installed in Moldovan courts are in included as annexes to the full Report.

I. INTRODUCTION

Millennium DPI Partners, LLC is a US-based international consultancy firm that implements the USAID-funded Open Justice Project in the Republic of Moldova. The Project’s main purpose is to promote a transparent, efficient and accessible justice system for all members of society by strengthening institutional capacity and implementing advanced information technology solutions.

In October 2017, the rules of criminal procedures were amended as to allow the examination of matters arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) via videoconference. In January 2018, in order to implement these amendments, the Open Justice Project offered assistance to the Moldovan judiciary in installing 20 videoconferencing equipment sets (15 at trial courts’ head offices, four at appellate courts, and one at the Supreme Court of Justice), thus enabling the organization of remote court hearings. Meanwhile, during 2018 and 2019, the National Administration of Penitentiaries (NPA) purchased and installed 17 videoconferencing equipment sets for all national penitentiaries. Thus, the technical prerequisites for hearing cases under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC via videoconference were implemented.

The use of the videoconferencing solution in judicial proceedings started with piloting activities with assistance from the Open Justice Project. By Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) Decision No. 322/16 of July 3, 2018, the Orhei Trial Court, the Cahul Trial Court, the Chisinau Court of Appeal, the Cahul Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Justice were assigned as pilot courts to use the videoconferencing system for hearing cases under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC. The pilot courts held hearings via videoconference with the Penitentiary of Branesti and the Penitentiary of Taraclia. The piloting of the videoconferencing solution took place between November 2018 – February 2019. After the piloting phase, the Open Justice team prepared and submitted to the SCM a report with recommendations regarding the institutionalization of the use of videoconferencing solution for the entire judicial system. Based on that report and on a request from the Agency for Court Administration (ACA), the SCM issued Decision No. 108/6 of March 26, 2019, whereby it was decided to expand the use of the videoconferencing solution nationwide in order to hear cases arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC.

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020

After nine months of use, the Open Justice Project assessed the experience gained by courts in working with the videoconferencing system in order to identify opportunities for expanding its use to other legal proceedings, in addition to those provided under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC, as well as to civil cases. The assessment of the videoconferencing experience and the analysis of the relevant legal framework concluded with the drafting of the Report on the Use of Videoconferencing Solution in Courts Penitentiary Institutions. The Report contains relevant conclusions reached and recommendations made by the Project’s team regarding the expansion of the use of videoconferencing in courts and penitentiary institutions.

Page 2 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Assessment period: October 1, 2019 – March 31, 2020.

Research and analysis period: monitoring, research and analyses were carried out from December 20, 2019 to March 31, 2020.

Applied methodology:

• Drafting and distribution of online questionnaires, collection and processing of the feedback provided by corrections officers and courts staff members regarding their experience on the use of the videoconferencing solution • Planning and hosting a roundtable event with the participation of corrections officers and courts staff members • Information gathering visits to courts • Interviews with lawyers • Analysis of international standards and best practices on the use of the videoconferencing solution • Monitoring of the use of the videoconferencing solution by the courts during the state of emergency due to COVID–19 • Analysis of the legal framework and other considerations affecting the expansion of the videoconferencing solution to other legal proceedings in addition to those provided under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC, including civil cases

Page 3 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 III. THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ON COURT HEARINGS HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE

Currently, the laws of the Republic of Moldova that would allow videoconferencing as a means of conducting hearings are the CrPC and the Civil Procedure Code (CiPC). The relevant provisions contained in the civil procedure and criminal procedure laws refer to the following:

CiPC:

• Article 154. The rights and obligations of experts • Article 213. Explanations by case participants • Article 216. The procedure for interviewing witnesses

CrPC:

• Article 32. The location of criminal trials • Article 90. The witness • Article 110. Special ways for interviewing witnesses and witness protection • Article 471. The resolution of matters concerning the enforcement of judgments • Article 469. The matters that courts must address during the enforcement of convictions

• Article 4731. Complaints against entities that enforce prison sentences

• Article 4732. Complaints against the management of penitentiaries about the conditions of detention that severely violate the rights of convicts or detainees

The experts of the Open Justice Project have studied these provisions and concluded that they do not offer sufficient clarity with respect to the IT platform that would be suitable for judicial communication or about the procedure for holding court hearings via videoconference.

Page 4 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 IV. TECHINCAL PREREQUISITES FOR COURT HEARINGS HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE

For a court or a penitentiary to be considered technically fit to hold hearings via videoconference, it must have at least one room equipped with the following prerequisites:

• A secured licensed videoconferencing application for corporate communication and court hearings • At least four microphones connected to the secured licensed application • Video cameras for image transmission • An Internet connection with a sufficient bandwidth for allowing to hold hearings via videoconference1 Considering these technical prerequisites, the Open Justice Project assessed the condition of the domestic courts and penitentiaries for holding court hearings via videoconference and came to the conclusions that are presented further in this document.

A. TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE OF COURTS

The assessment of the courts’ technical capacity found that:

• All head offices of the first instance courts and appellate courts, as well as of the Supreme Court of Justice and of the Superior Council of Magistracy have videoconferencing equipment in place and are technically fit to hold hearings via videoconference. • None of the courts’ secondary offices have videoconferencing equipment in place. • At the appellate courts, a single set of the videoconferencing equipment is insufficient. Due to a large caseload and narrow timeframes for case examination, several judicial panels often need to use the videoconferencing equipment simultaneously. This is also true where the videoconferencing equipment is necessary for other cases than those currently allowed under the CrPC. • In some courts, Internet speed is below the required standard. The available Internet contracts and data traffic are inappropriate for current needs. • The provision of videoconferencing equipment for all secondary offices will help to extend the use of videoconference to other types of cases.

1 The technical parameters for Internet connection are included in Annex 5 to the Report;

Page 5 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 B. TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE OF PENITENTIARIES

The acquisition of the videoconferencing equipment for penitentiaries was part of the National Action Plan on Human Rights for 2018 –2022, approved by Parliament Decision No. 89 of May 24, 2018. In order to reduce the number of detainees escorted to court, the Ministry of Justice, along with the NPA, committed themselves to equipping the penitentiaries with special rooms designed to allow the detainees to take part in court hearings via videoconference.

During the years 2018 and 2019, the NPA purchased and installed 17 videoconferencing equipment sets for all Moldovan penitentiaries.

The assessment of the penitentiaries’ technical capacity found that:

• While videoconferencing equipment is in place in all penitentiaries, some penitentiaries do not provide a complete picture of the room where the detained person is held in order to take part in the proceedings. The adjustment of the video cameras’ shooting angles or the installment of additional video cameras will help to prevent potential complaints from detainees about potential pressure from penitentiary guards during hearings; • The videoconferencing equipment installed in penitentiaries is technically different from the equipment installed in courts, and this can cause difficulties with sound and/or image transmission; • The Internet bandwidth used in penitentiaries is insufficient.

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 V. THE EXPERIENCE OF THE DOMESTIC COURTS IN USING VIDEOCONFERENCE

The use of the videoconferencing solution in courts is framed in the Regulation on conducting court hearings via videoconference in courts and penitentiary institutions, approved by the Ministry of Justice Order No. 189 of July 17, 2019, and SCM Decision No. 301/18 of July 30, 2019.

To assess the courts’ videoconferencing practice, the Open Justice Project drafted and circulated among the courts two online questionnaires (Annexes 1 and 4 to the Report). The questions asked concerned the organization and the use of videoconferencing for matters provided under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC and the courts’ needs for additional equipment and training.

The answers provided to the questionnaires showed that, from October 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, the courts made use of the videoconferencing solution as follows:

• Of a total of 771 hearings under Article 469 of the CrPC, only 446 were conducted via videoconference;

• Of a total of 40 hearings under Article 4731 of the CrPC, only 5 were conducted via videoconference.

• Of a total of 154 hearings under Article 4732 of the CrPC, only 85 were conducted via videoconference. • Overall, out of 965 court hearings, 536 were conducted via videoconference. After processing the answers from the first questionnaire, on January 31, 2020, the Open Justice Project held a roundtable event with representatives of all the stakeholders — the NPA, SCM, ACA, 24 court staff members, chief judges, judges, and secretariat chiefs. The participants discussed the results of the first completed questionnaire, their challenges in organizing court hearings via videoconference and recommendations for improving their working methods.

The information from the second questionnaire, which comprised the period between January 2020 — March 2020, showed a significant increase in the number of hearings held via videoconference.

Question asked 1. How many hearings 2. How many hearings 3. How many hearings under Article 469 of the under Article 4731 of the under Article 4732 of the CrPC took place via CrPC took place via CrPC took place via teleconference from teleconference from teleconference from January 1 through March January 1 through March January 1 through March 31, 2020? 31, 2020? 31, 2020? No. of 976 211 626 hearings TOTAL 1,813 hearings held via videoconference

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020

Based on the answers received, the Open Justice team concluded the following:

• Although the legal framework allows the use of videoconferencing for other categories of cases, the courts used it only to examine matters arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC. • The courts avoided using videoconferencing for hearing cases under the provision of the CiPC due to the lack of relevant regulations. They invoked the lack of rules regarding the type of the application that parties could use, the lack of clear rules on its procurement and the need to ensure the confidentiality of data. • Lawyers welcomed the initiative of using videoconferencing in courts but drew attention to the importance of ensuring efficient communication between courts and penitentiaries. They particularly highlighted poor sound quality during court hearings. The lawyers also noted that they preferred to represent their clients from the courtroom; • At the national level there are no qualitative technical standards regarding videoconferencing equipment that public entities can take into account when procuring it. • The public sector lacks a central level approach to the compatibility of videoconferencing equipment, and there is no interoperability assessment of the purchased equipment. In some cases, the incompatibility of the videoconferencing systems managed by the courts and the penitentiaries caused difficulties with image and/or sound transmission, which hinders the wider use of videoconferencing in legal proceedings. • The technical maintenance provided by the SITCS (Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security) to ensure the operation of the videoconferencing equipment is superficial and not technically correlated with all functional components of the Judicial Information System (JIS). SITCS representatives offer maintenance for the videoconferencing equipment with no consideration to the technical and operational needs of other applications supporting the courts’ work (for example, Integrated Case Management System (ICMS), Femida), which causes issues with operating the equipment. The judges interviewed during the data collection phase confirmed that the examination of matters arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC using a videoconferencing application was much faster than the usual procedure because it required escorting fewer prisoners per day. It is also worth mentioning that 14 offices, including the head offices and secondary offices, do not have waiting rooms for detainees, 12 offices have only one waiting room each, six have two waiting rooms each, and 13 have three or more waiting rooms each. These rooms are small and can accommodate only a limited number of people. Over the course of a day, these rooms are usually overcrowded by the detainees escorted to court for criminal proceedings that require their attendance.

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 VI. THE EXPERIENCE OF PENITENTIARIES IN USING VIDEOCONFERENCE

The experience of using the videoconferencing solution in all 17 penitentiaries was documented through an online questionnaire which covered the period between October 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. The Open Justice Project also requested the NPA to provide it with statistical data on the use of the videoconferencing equipment between January 2020, through March 2020. The questionnaire concerned the statistics regarding the number of complaints filed by the detainees under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC and the number of court hearings held via videoconference. The results were discussed at a roundtable event held on January 31, 2020. The conclusions were as follows:

• From January 1 through March 31, 2020, a total number of 2,358 detainees attended court hearings in person. According to the NPA’s data for the same period, 615 hearings were held via videoconference for matters arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC. This, however, was almost three times less than the figure reported by the courts, which showed 1,813 hearings held via videoconference. • Even though all penitentiaries have videoconferencing equipment in place, approximately 30% of the respondents said that they did not use videoconference for matters arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC. The main reasons cited were detainees’ complaints about the quality of Internet connection and the lack of equipment in some courts, especially in secondary offices. • Despite the clear rules laid down in Chapter V of the Regulation on conducting court hearings via videoconference in courts and penitentiary institutions, not all penitentiaries keep records of court hearings held via videoconference. • The penitentiaries that do keep records of court hearings held via videoconference usually enter different and unrelated information into the registries. • Approximately 30% of the respondents answered that they encountered difficulties using the videoconferencing equipment. The main causes referred to by the respondents included technical issues and poor Internet connection. • Half of the respondents said that they had registered detainees’ refusals to participate in court hearings via videoconference. During the roundtable event, the corrections officers mentioned the lack of clear legal provisions regarding the registration and examination of such refusals. • Many penitentiaries mentioned the lack of communication and coordination with the courts on the organization, preparation and holding of court hearings via videoconference. Cases are not examined in the same order as in the lists of hearings published on the courts’ web portal. • Approximately 45% of the respondents said that, in the penitentiaries where they serve, the security guards supervising the detainee during hearings via videoconference had not been trained on the detainees’ procedural rights regarding remote participation in hearings.

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 VII. THE EXPERIENCE OF USING VIDEOCONFERENCING DURING THE STATE OF EMERGENCY

On March 18, 2020, the Emergency Committee issued Order No. 1, under which courts could carry out certain types of proceedings via videoconference (restraining orders, forfeiture of property, authorization of forced medical treatment). Para. 10 (6) of the Order No. 1 also prescribed that hearings with persons kept in custody must be carried out via videoconference at the place of detention or in rooms that complied with the lockdown rules, without requiring consent of the person in custody.

On March 27, 2020, in order to assess the videoconferencing practice during the state of emergency and to identify opportunities for expanding its use for the future, the Open Justice Project asked the courts to share their experience using an online questionnaire (see Annex 4 of the Report). The questionnaire consisted of ten questions and referred to the period from March 18, 2020, through March 31, 2020. Based on the answers received, the Open Justice Project found that the courts had been using videoconferencing from the very first day after the state of emergency was declared. Also, according to the collected data, during the lockdown, courts extended videoconferencing to other categories of cases in order to communicate with parties remotely. Thus, from March 18, 2020, through March 31, 2020, videoconferencing was used in the following types of proceedings:

• Authorization of arrests pending trial • Extension of arrests pending trial • Enforcement of sentences • Pardoning • Release on parole • Commutation of sentences The assessment of the use of the videoconferencing solution as of the beginning of the state of emergency showed that in just 14 days, 11 courts held 173 hearings via videoconference in urgent criminal cases.

The Open Justice Project found that the use of videoconferencing for judicial communication during the lockdown had enabled the courts to hear urgent legal matters, thus helping to maintain public order and to provide a guarantee against violations of human rights, as detainees did not lose their right to a hearing. Considering the practices initiated by other countries and the undeniable advantages of the use of videoconferencing solution in ensuring respect for public health, we believe that there is an acute need for this technology and that it must be utilized to its full potential.

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 VIII. THE BEST PRACTICE OF USING VIDEOCONFERENCE IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE LIGHT OF THE CASE LAW OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE EXPERIENCE OF OTHER STATES

Technology tools are widely used both by the member states of the Council of Europe and in the European Union. Acknowledging this, the Open Justice Project examined the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law and the experience of European Union (EU) member states and concluded that their experience and legal arguments supported the expansion of the use of videoconferencing solution to other types of legal proceedings in the courts of Moldova. The case law of the ECtHR, for example, attaches great importance to a smooth operation of the equipment used in remote hearings in order to guarantee the right to a fair trial; the safety of detainees and witnesses; and the effectiveness of justice by reducing the time for case examination. The High Court also highlights the beneficial role of videoconferencing for the optimization of court administration and the reduction of costs.

EU member states have similar approaches. In Austria, all courts, prosecution offices and penitentiaries have at least one videoconferencing system in place. Starting in 2011, Poland, which has launched E-protocol, and Estonia, which has upgraded its courts’ information system, allow the use of videoconferencing during court hearings to interview experts, witnesses and parties.

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 IX. CONCLUSIONS

1. Survey results indicate that the videoconferencing system is easy to use; corrections officers and court staff members do not feel reluctance in using it. 2. Videoconferencing is imperative in exceptional situations such as the COVID-19 crisis in order to protect public health of justice system staff, and when communication is possible only remotely. 3. The use of videoconferencing solution has allowed the courts to hear complaints in a reasonable time leading to a decrease in the number of postponed hearings. According to the information collected by the Open Justice Project, approximately 90% of cases examined under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC were resolved in one hearing. For comparison, prior to the videoconferencing practice, the examination of cases of this type used to span three or four hearings on average. 4. The use of the videoconferencing solution has significantly reduced public spending for detainees’ participation in hearings held in courts. According to the NPA’s data and the Open Justice Project’s estimations, during 2019, the Ministry of Justice saved approximately MDL 414,084.95 thanks to the videoconferencing solution. 5. Under the current legal framework, videoconferencing can also be used as a means for communication for types of actions other than those provided under Articles 469, 4731 and 4732 of the CrPC. Thus, under Article 213 of the CiPC, the use of the videoconferencing solution is allowed for legal proceedings where one of the parties is a detainee. Furthermore, if the SCM adopts the necessary organizational measures, videoconferencing will also be allowed in situations described in Articles 154 (4) and 216 (11) of the CiPC and Articles 90 (12) para. 5, 110 (5), and 471 (31) of the CrPC. 6. Considering its advantages, the videoconferencing solution can also be used to examine other types of cases and to conduct other procedural actions.

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 X. RECOMMENDATIONS

A. RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE HARMONIZATION AND EXPANSION OF THE USE OF THE VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION

1. Harmonize the legal concepts used in the CiPC and the CrPC. Currently, the CiPC uses the concept of “videoconferencing”, whereas the CrPC uses the concept of “teleconferencing”. Considering international approaches, the term “videoconferencing” seems more appropriate. 2. The SCM should develop guidelines on the use of videoconferencing solution for cases arising under Articles 154 (4) and 216 (11) of the CiPC; Articles 90 (12) para. 5, 110 (5), and 471 (31) of the CrPC. 3. Revise the provisions of Articles 311–314 of the CrPC to expand case categories for which videoconference is allowed (for example, the application of arrest pending trial, the extension of arrest pending trial, the enforcement of criminal sentences, pardoning, release on parole, actions for the commutation of sentences). 4. Expand the use of videoconferencing solution to more categories of criminal cases where the defendants are kept in custody. 5. Ensure cooperation between the ACA, the SCM, the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Social Protection to develop a secondary regulatory framework necessary to implement the provisions of Article 213 of the CiPC on civil proceedings held via videoconference to interview participants located within a diplomatic mission or consular offices of the Republic of Moldova, also in penitentiaries, medical facilities, social assistance facilities, offices of guardianship authorities, or probation offices that have the necessary technical capacity and can confirm the identities of the participants 6. Explore the possibility of expanding the use of the videoconferencing equipment for interviewing child victims who might be intimidated in a court room. 7. SCM and the ACA to develop guidelines on the participation of witnesses in court hearings via videoconference (including at the district level) in order to provide procedural clarity to the practical use of the regulations regarding special means of witness protection, as described in Articles 90 and 110 of the CiPC (closed-circuit videoconference with distorted image and voice); also to reduce the number of trips to courts and to cut spending.

B. RECOMMENDATIONS ON STRENGTHENING THE TECHNICAL CAPACITY ON THE USE OF VIDEOCONFERENCING SOLUTION

1. The Ministry of Justice and the Electronic Governance Agency should develop common technical standards for the videoconferencing equipment that will be acquired in future;

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020

2. Purchase additional videoconferencing equipment for secondary court offices and appellate courts, especially for the following: • Bender Office of the Causeni Court; • Ciocana Office of the Chisinau Court; • Rezina Office of the Orhei Court; • Leova Office of the Cimislia Court; • Calarasi Office of the Straseni Court; • Floresti Office of the Soroca Court; • Chisinau Court of Appeal; • Balti Court of Appeal; • Cahul Court of Appeal; • Comrat Court of Appeal. 3. Audit the technical capacity of the penitentiaries and install additional video cameras in those penitentiaries where the shooting coverage is incomplete 4. Audit the compatibility of the courts’ equipment with the penitentiaries’ equipment and replace technically incompatible equipment in accordance with technical standards (see Annex 5 to the Report) 5. Equip the penitentiary rooms and courtrooms used to conduct hearings via videoconference with scanners for a fast transmission of procedural documents submitted during hearings by means of the “Trueconf” secured software installed in courts and penitentiaries 6. Adapt the functionality of JIS components (Femida, ICMS, the videoconferencing application) so that they do not interfere with one another when in operation 7. Assess the Internet service contracts and amend them as necessary to ensure an optimal and qualitative Internet connection for holding hearings through videoconference 8. Purchase and install backup power sources in the rooms equipped with the videoconferencing systems to ensure uninterrupted videoconferences regardless of power failures 9. Consider setting up videoconference centers for court users in courts’ head offices and at appellate courts. This will reduce parties’ expenses for trips to other courts of law; 10. ITCS to offer complex technical maintenance for JIS components (Femida, ICMS, the videoconferencing application) so that they do not interfere with one another when in operation 11. Integrate the “Trueconf” videoconferencing application purchased and installed with assistance from the Open Justice Project into the functional structure of “e-Dosar” and expand its use to all cases where videoconferencing is deemed necessary

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Synopsis of Report on Use of Videoconferencing April 30, 2020 C. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING THE VIDEOCONFERENCING PRACTICE IN MATTERS UNDER ARTICLES 469, 4731, AND 4732 OF THE CRPC

1. Implement the videoconferencing solution as a communication method used for hearing matters arising under Articles 469, 4731, and 4732 of the CrPC in all courts that have penitentiary institutions within their jurisdiction (see Annex 6 to the Report), including in their secondary offices 2. Draft directories with penitentiaries’ contact information and distribute them among the courts to ensure the efficient and timely communication of court staff members with corrections officers 3. Ensure efficient communication between courts and penitentiaries for planning and holding hearings through videoconference, including for coordinating the order in which detainees participate in hearings, the approximate examination time, the time required to deliver a judgment, etc. 4. Provide training for the courts staff members and corrections officers on the use of the videoconferencing application, including behavioral guidelines to be followed during a hearing held via videoconference; 5. Ensure an accurate statistical record of hearings held via videoconference. 6. Ensure that lawyers are well informed through the Bar Association and its branches about the possibility of using the videoconferencing solution for certain types of legal proceedings. The Bar Association should also encourage lawyers to participate in court hearings from their clients’ location, i.e., the penitentiaries, rather than from courtrooms only. In this manner the detainees will feel better represented and will be less reluctant to participate in hearings via videoconference.

D. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATIONS DURING THE STATE OF EMERGENCY

1. SCM should pass a decision based on the Emergency Committee’s Order No. 1 of March 18, 2020, whereby it shall inform all courts about the possibility to use the videoconferencing solution in cases when one of the parties is in custody; 2. The Ministry of Justice and the SCM should pass a regulation granting temporary permission to use free online audio/video communication tools that allow remote participation of parties in court hearings.

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-168-TO-14-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Justice Activity in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Quarterly Report January 31, 2016

OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT

27, Armeneasca str., 2nd floor Chisinau, Moldova MD 2012 e-mail: [email protected]

Page 1