\

QUARTERLY REPORT OCTOBER 1, 2019 – DECEMBER 31, 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

January 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 OCTOBER I, 2019 – DECEMBER 31, 2019

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 January 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...... 4 SECTION I – ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS ...... 6 Open Justice Public Outreach Activities ...... 6 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 8 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 12 SECTION II – REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES ...... 16 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 16 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 16 SECTION III – MAJOR ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER ...... 17 Objective 1: Increased Efficiency of the Justice System ...... 17 Objective 2: Increased Transparency and Accountability of the Justice System...... 17 SECTION IV – PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT ...... 19 SECTION V – ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT ...... 21

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 the Training Activities on the Use of the New 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 January 30, 2020

2. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during October 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 3. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during November 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 4. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during December 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

OBJECTIVE 2 5. Updated Efficiency Action Plan (EAP) for the SCM and Its Subordinated Bodies (Activity 2.2.2.1 & Activity 2.2.3.1 – 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 January 30, 2020 LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACA Agency for Court Administration 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 JSRS Judicial Sector Reform Strategy MELP Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan MOJ Ministry of Justice NGO Non-Governmental Organization NIJ National Institute of Justice NPA National Penitentiary Agency SCM Superior Council of Magistracy SITCS Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security 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 January 30, 2020 ABOUT THE PROJECT

The United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID’s) Open Justice Project is a rule of law project being implemented in Moldova from May 2017 until June 2020. Its purpose is to assist the Government of Moldova to improve the efficiency and transparency of the Moldovan judicial system and improve access to justice for the citizens of Moldova.

The Open Justice 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, and the Agency for Court Administration (ACA), as well as the courts throughout the country.

In addition to court automation and implementing 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 display court performance indicators and a statistical web report card online so that the media and citizens can gain access to information about court performance. The Project also digitized the judicial decisions of the Chisinau District Court issued from 1965 to 2009, which totalled 740,824 decisions. This will enable judges and staff from the Chisinau District Court to access these decisions online and will contribute to more consistent application of the law in court decisions. Together, the Project’s activities will lead to the modernization and automation of the Moldovan courts and will also 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 local 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 January 30, 2020 Open Justice Project by the Numbers — This Quarter

Court Automation

122 electronic statistical 160 computers installed in 96 court employees reports on courts activity 12 courts to facilitate the trained on the use of

developed use of the new ICMS the new ICMS functionalities

Efficiency

One updated six-month One six-month Monitoring Two surveys on the use of Efficiency Action Plan (EAP) for Report on the quality of the videoconferencing system, judicial selection, promotion and reasoning of the SCM’s decisions developed and launched discipline, delivered to the SCM on the selection and career in all national courts and of judges developed penitentiaries

Transparency

2,006 people informed about 3 public outreach events aimed 2 articles and 1 interview the benefits of the E-Systems at raising awareness of the published on the thematic used by the judiciary, benefits of the new ICMS justice website to inform the through public events and functionalities and the upgraded public about judicial reforms published materials Courts’ Web Portal conducted

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

The Open Justice Project is pleased to present its first Quarterly Report for the 2020 Fiscal Year, covering the period from October 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. This report highlights Open Justice’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 the Project’s key achievements, followed by a description of the Project’s specific activities and results attained under each of its two objectives. The performance management section addresses the 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. The Report on the Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (MELP) is included as Annex I.

Under Objective 1, the Project initiated several important activities that will bolster court automation and will consolidate the use of innovative IT solutions in the Moldovan justice sector, thus enhancing its efficiency, transparency, and accountability.

Specifically, during the reporting period, the Project conducted nine on-site visits to district and appellate courts to collect feedback on necessary changes to make the ICMS more user-friendly and facilitate its better absorption. By the end of December 2019, based on the collected feedback, the Project’s subcontracted IT company, AlfaSoft, developed and tested 19 out of 98 new ICMS functionalities requested by court users. In order to abolish paper statistical reports, the Project also developed, refined, and tested a total of 122 electronic statistical reports for the district courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court of Justice. As of March 2020, three pilot courts (the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal) will no longer use paper statistical reports; the rest of the courts will abolish paper statistical reports by June 30, 2020.1

During the reporting quarter, the Project continued to offer significant assistance to ICMS users to facilitate a better use of the system. Thus, throughout October–December 2019, Open Justice processed 661 requests for assistance from courts users on how to use ICMS functionalities. As part of its capacity building effort, in cooperation with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Open Justice also trained 96 judges and court staff on using the ICMS and on electronic statistical reporting. The Project also assigned two full-time attorneys to help the ACA with ICMS implementation and user support, and with implementation of electronic judicial statistics. However, due to the ongoing dispute about the legitimacy of the mandates of the current SCM members and the tensions between the SCM and judges2, Open Justice postponed the secondment of the Project’s consultant to the Judicial Inspection Board, where they will assist the SCM in monitoring and following-up on alleged manipulations in the ICMS random case distribution process. The Project plans to start this activity in early 2020, once the SCM has signaled its readiness and commitment to collaborate on this matter.

1 The abolishing of paper electronic statistical reports by all Moldovan courts depends heavily on the commitment of the ACA and SCM to assist courts to institutionalize the use of electronic judicial statistics reports beyond the Project’s lifetime. 2 On September 27, 2019, a group of judges convened an extraordinary meeting of the General Assembly of Judges and voted for the dismissal of all current SCM members. While the Assembly did not have a quorum, it created a wave of tension between the SCM and the judiciary, which resulted in several court disputes between the SCM and the group of judges who convened the meeting.

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020

In addition to developing new ICMS functionalities and providing ICMS user support, Open Justice continued to improve the IT infrastructure in courts. The Project purchased and installed 160 desktop computers in 12 district courts to ensure an improved ICMS user experience, particularly in the district courts, where court staff are required to introduce a lot more information than the higher courts when they first register a case into the ICMS.

In December 2019, Open Justice contracted the IT company AlfaSoft to upgrade the existing audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida). The development of this IT solution will commence in January 2020 and will provide Moldovan courts with a state-of-the-art media library for centralized storage and retrieval of recorded court hearings, which will be integrated with the new ICMS and the E-File Module.

In December 2019, at the ACA’s request, Open Justice selected the company Omega Trust to conduct an external security audit of the ICMS. The audit will start in early 2020. Based on its findings and recommendations, the Project will assist the ACA to identify and make a plan to address the system’s security vulnerabilities.

During the reporting period, Open Justice also drafted security policies that need to be put in place to effectively enable the ICMS database monitoring software that the Project previously purchased and installed. The Project will finalize the draft policy after accessing and analyzing the test environment for the monitoring solution, which will become accessible with the assistance of the Service for Information Technology and Cyber Security (SITCS) office in early 2020.

In December 2019, Open Justice launched a survey of courts and penitentiaries to gather data on trials conducted via the videoconferencing system that was installed with Open Justice’s assistance for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings. Based on the collected feedback, the Project will cooperate with the ACA/MOJ, the SCM, and the National Penitentiary Agency (NPA) to organize a follow-up workshop in late January 2020 to discuss the findings and ensure that the use of a videoconferencing solution for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings is institutionalized and used properly.

Under Objective 2, the Project continued efforts initiated during the previous phases of the Project aimed at improving the SCM and its subordinated bodies’ institutional capacity. In November 2019, the Project completed a status quo assessment for the implementation of the recommendations made in the Efficiency Action Plan (EAP), which the SCM approved in February 2018. Based on the results of the assessment, Open Justice developed an updated version of the EAP and submitted it to the SCM for review and discussion. As part of its efforts to improve judicial selection processes in the SCM, Open Justice also evaluated the quality of the reasoning in the SCM’s decisions on judicial appointments. During the next quarter, the Project will conduct a meeting with the SCM leadership to discuss the Project’s findings and the assistance needed by the SCM members to implement the new EAP and to draw up well-reasoned decisions on the selection of judges.

During the reporting quarter, the Project representatives met with the MOJ leadership to discuss the assistance required for the upcoming extra-judiciary evaluation, which will assess the integrity and professionalism of Moldovan judges. The end goal of the evaluation is to clean the judiciary of judges who cannot account for the source of their income and property and/or who have been involved in suspicious activities that conflict with the stature accorded to a judge. The extra-judiciary evaluation of judges is a strategic priority of the MOJ, in line with its efforts to increase public confidence in the judiciary.

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

To provide the required support, during this quarter, Open Justice prepared a scope of work to recruit an international consultant. This consultant will review the MOJ’s draft legislative amendments for a new mechanism of judicial evaluation and will develop the operational procedures necessary for the proper functioning of the new extra-judiciary evaluation body, the Judicial Evaluation Commission.

The start of this activity, however, depends on the timing of the Parliament’s approval of the Law on Judicial Evaluation (tentatively expected in April 2020) after the advisory expertise on the draft law is received from the Council of Europe (CoE).

In November 2019, the Project participated at a roundtable entitled “Courts’ Web Portal: Issues and Solutions” organized by the ACA/MOJ to upgrade the Courts’ Web Portal based on feedback collected from litigants. As a result of the roundtable discussions, Open Justice refined the list of change requests and issued a call to identify a qualified IT company to perform upgrades for the Courts’ Web Portal in January–February 2020.

During Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020, the Project’s staff participated in three outreach activities that were jointly organized by the Comrat Court of Appeal, Moldova State University, and the non- governmental organization (NGO) Action for Justice. Open Justice’s participation at these events has contributed to raising public awareness about the new technologies available and the benefits of the new ICMS. Overall, during the reporting period, Open Justice informed a total of 2,006 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 January 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:

• Conducted nine on-site visits to collect feedback on necessary changes and new functions to make the ICMS more user-friendly • Developed 19 new ICMS functionalities • Facilitated one meeting of the ICMS Oversight Committee, which included representatives from the courts, the Supreme Court of Justice, the SCM, and the ACA/MOJ • Trained 127 judges and court staff, in cooperation with the NIJ, on ICMS use, electronic statistical reports, and information security • Processed 661 requests of assistance from court users on ICMS functionalities • Developed, refined, and tested 122 electronic statistical reports, using real data, for all national courts (i.e., first-tier courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court of Justice) • Drafted a guide for court staff on data entry for the electronic statistical reports • Assigned two full-time attorneys to help the ACA with ICMS implementation and user support and the implementation of electronic judicial statistics • Developed three Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts via the ICMS for October–December 2019 and presented them to the ACA/MOJ • Purchased and installed 160 desktop computers in 12 district courts to ensure the smooth running of the new ICMS • Developed a first draft of the security policies that need to be put in place in order to effectively use the ICMS database monitoring solution • Contracted a local IT company to implement a centralized solution for the audio recording of court hearings (a centralized Femida Media Server) • Contracted a local IT company to perform an external security audit of the ICMS • Developed and launched two surveys in courts and penitentiaries to identify problem areas in institutionalizing the use of videoconferencing for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings

OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

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

• Prepared an updated EAP for the SCM and its subordinated bodies

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

• Developed a monitoring report on the quality of reasoning in the SCM’s decisions on the selection and careers of judges, which covers the period from July 2019 to December 2019 • Developed a scope of work for hiring an international consultant to review the MOJ’s legislative changes for judicial evaluation and to develop operational procedures for the Judicial Evaluation Committee

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

OPEN JUSTICE PUBLIC OUTREACH ACTIVITIES

TWO NEW ARTICLES AND ONE INTERVIEW ABOUT THE NEW ICMS PUBLISHED ON THE THEMATIC WEBSITE Open Justice continues to constantly inform its partners, stakeholders, and the public at large about the Project’s main activities and achievements. Thus, during Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020, Open Justice produced and published one article, one success story, and one interview about the benefits of the new ICMS on the thematic website, www.justitie transparenta.md.

The published article informed the website visitors that the Project had completed the implementation of the new ICMS in all national courts. In addition, the success story highlighted the benefits of the new ICMS, and contained a testimonial from a court employee who noted significant improvements in the efficiency of all judicial processes due to the new system’s Figure 1 – The thematic justice website numerous functionalities. www.justitietransparenta.md

In the published interview, a litigant described his experience during a labor dispute in court and mentioned, in this context, the contribution of the new ICMS in enhancing the transparency of the Moldovan judicial system.

Open Justice was also active on its social media channels, publishing two posts about public outreach events attended by the Project’s representatives, in order to raise public awareness of the benefits of the new ICMS. As a result, the number of citizens reached through the Project’s website and social network posts was 1,817.

The aim of these materials was to inform the public about the new technologies available in the judicial system and the way in which the new tools will ensure better court services for litigants.

To achieve this goal, Open Justice made sure to publish the information in an accessible way, so that it would be understandable to all readers. At the same time, the Open Justice’s online presence increased the visibility of the assistance provided by the Project to advance justice sector reforms in Moldova.

YOUNG LAWYERS LEARN ABOUT THE NEW ICMS FUNCTIONALITIES On December 20, 2019, the Open Justice Project team participated in roundtable discussions that brought together more than 22 young lawyers. The event was organized by Action for Justice, the NGO of young law specialists. The topic of the discussion was “Digital solutions and tools in the legal system of the Republic of Moldova.” The Project’s representatives highlighted the ICMS’s newly

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 developed functionalities, its interoperability with other state electronic registries, and explained how the ICMS eased the work of court employees and improved litigants’ access to needed information.

The participants showed great interest in the new ICMS functionalities, asking many questions during the presen- tation. The discussions were very interactive, and they also revealed that the young lawyers perceive the automation of judicial processes as an inherent element of efforts to foster a more efficient and transparent judicial system. Figure 2 – Open Justice’s team discusses the new ICMS functionalities with young lawyers

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES ABOUT THE NEW ICMS FEATURES CONDUCTED AT THE MOLDOVA STATE UNIVERSITY The benefits of the new ICMS, developed with the assistance of the Open Justice Project, were also presented to law students and professors during this quarter. The presentation was delivered during a public conference that the Moldova State University organized on December 12, 2019, on the occasion of the International Day of Human Rights. The conference also brought together experts in the field of information technology, lawyers, and officials from the relevant authorities. The Project’s representatives explained how the new ICMS functionalities will make judicial processes more efficient and transparent, significantly reducing the risk Figure 3 – Open Justice presents the benefits of of corruption. At the same time, Open Justice’s staff explained the ICMS at an event at the Moldova State University how the automation of the courts’ activity will improve the access to justice for all citizens.

OPEN JUSTICE SUPPORTED THE EUROPEAN DAY OF CIVIL JUSTICE AT THE COMRAT COURT OF APPEAL On the occasion of the European Day of Civil Justice, celebrated annually on October 25, the Project’s team organized an Open Day event in partnership with the Comrat Court of Appeal. The event was attended by 88 persons — high school students, law students, and their teachers. During the Open Day event, the Project’s representatives delivered a presentation about the new functionalities and benefits of the ICMS, which was developed and implemented in all national courts. The participants also learned how the Moldovan courts work and were informed about employment opportunities in the judicial system. In addition, the visitors found out about their rights in court and where they should lodge a complaint if those rights are violated. The aim of the event was to increase the transparency of the Comrat Court of Appeal and public access Figure 4 – European Day of Civil Justice to information about the judicial system. organized at the Comrat Court of Appeal

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 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 to build the professional and institutional capacity necessary to implement the CRO reform. In particular, the Project focused its efforts on facilitating the use of the videoconferencing solution to accelerate CRO implementation.

In July 2019, the SCM approved the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries and extended the use of the videoconferencing system to all national courts. During October–December 2019, courts and penitentiaries continued to use the video- conferencing system and carried out a total of 536 hearings for the remote trial participation of inmates. To evaluate further areas for improvement and to extend the use of this IT solution to accelerate CRO, Open Justice researched and identified a series of best international practices on the use of videoconferencing solution in criminal cases. In addition, in December 2019, the Project developed and sent a questionnaire to all national courts to gather data on trials conducted via the videoconferencing system and to assess any further needs of court staff using the system. In December 2019, Open Justice also developed and sent a questionnaire to the employees of the penitentiaries connected to courts through videoconferencing equipment. This second survey will collect feedback on the use of the system within penitentiaries. Based on that feedback, the Project will cooperate with the ACA/MOJ, the SCM, and the NPA to organize a follow-up workshop in late January 2020 to discuss the findings and ensure that the use of videoconferencing for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings is institutionalized. The event will also enable the ACA/MOJ to assess whether and how many videoconferencing systems need to be purchased for the courts’ secondary premises, in addition to the 20 systems already purchased and installed by the Project in the central premises of first-tier courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court of Justice during Fiscal Year 2018.

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued to closely monitor developments pertaining to the new Justice Sector Reform Strategy (JSRS). In December 2019, the newly appointed Government presented its Action Plan for 2020–2023 (available in English at https://gov.md/en/content/ government-action-plan-2020-2023-0). Unfortunately, the plan does not make any reference to the new JSRS or to the CRO process. Nevertheless, a significant activity related to the CRO process, and court specialization in particular, is the government’s plan to perform a study on the creation of a specialized first instance anti-corruption court and on the establishment of anti-corruption units within the Chisinau Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Justice. In 2020, Open Justice will seek to provide further assistance to stakeholders in developing the new JSRS and implementation plan.

The following activities under sub-Objective 1.1 from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second extension are ongoing: Activity 1.1.1.1 and Activity 1.1.1.2.

Activity 1.1.2.1 (Year 3 Work Plan for the second extension) under sub-Objective 1.1 is planned for Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020.

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020

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 in refining the new ICMS system according to ICMS users’ feedback and requirements. The Project conducted nine on-site visits to collect feedback on necessary changes and new functions to make the ICMS more user-friendly. The Project’s team visited the Cahul, Balti, Comrat, and Chisinau Courts of Appeal, as well as the Chisinau, Orhei, Criuleni, Anenii Noi, Causeni, Ungheni, Straseni, and Hincesti District Courts. The collected feedback was Figure 5 – Open Justice’s visit to Cahul Court of presented to the ACA/MOJ and served as the primary Appeal to collect feedback on new ICMS source of change requests embedded in the supplementary functions contract with the Project’s IT developer, AlfaSoft.

By the end of December 2019, in cooperation with AlfaSoft, Open Justice developed and tested 19 out of 98 new ICMS functionalities requested by court users. The most significant changes refer to new processes provided for in the recently adopted Administrative Code. Other changes and refinements pertain to usability, the search module, and case distribution.

The Project also continued to offer support to ICMS users to facilitate better assimilation of the system. Throughout October–December, 2019, Open Justice processed 661 requests from court users on ICMS functionalities. Most of them indicate that training remains a key issue in the judiciary due to the frequent personnel turnover in courts. To mitigate this issue, the Project periodically updated the online version of the ICMS User Guide and made it available to all ICMS users. The Guide proved to be a useful tool for the ACA/MOJ, as it allowed the ACA staff to keep track of the rapidly changing functionalities and improve the quality of their responses to courts’ requests for assistance.

As part of its capacity building effort, in cooperation with the NIJ, Open Justice trained 127 judges, chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, clerks, and specialists from Procedural Tracking and Documentation Divisions. The trainings focused mainly on ICMS use but also covered such aspects as electronic statistical reports and information security.

In addition to user support and functionality development, Open Justice significantly improved the IT infrastructure in the courts. The Project purchased and installed 160 desktop Figure 6 – ICMS training at the NIJ computers in 12 district courts in Criuleni, Hincesti, Orhei, Straseni, Anenii Noi, Causeni, Ungheni, Balti, Drochia, Soroca, Caul, and Edinet. The computers were

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 distributed to ensure an improved ICMS user experience, particularly in the district courts, where staff are required to introduce more information than staff in higher courts.

In November 2019, the Project provided technical support for the ICMS Oversight Committee, which gathered representatives from first-tier courts, appellate courts, the Supreme Court of Justice, the SCM, and the ACA/MOJ. Random case distribution and electronic statistical reporting were the key issues debated during the meeting.

As reflected during the ICMS Oversight Committee discussions, the development of electronic statistical reports has been one of the key areas of the Project’s work during October–December 2019. Overall, the Project developed, refined, and tested, using real data, 122 electronic statistical reports for all national courts — 41 statistical reports for the first-tier courts, 29 statistical reports for the appellate courts, 10 statistical reports for the use of both first-tier and appellate courts, and 42 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice. In addition, Open Justice drafted a Guide for Court Staff on Data Entry for the Electronic Statistical Reports. This will ensure that the staff of the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and Comrat Court of Appeal, which were designated in December 2019 by the SCM as pilot courts for generating electronic statistical reports, have detailed instructions on how to verify the correctness of the reports they must compile in the first quarter of 2020. In February–March 2020, the Project, in cooperation with the NIJ, plans to train court staff on how to introduce data in the ICMS and how to generate and analyze electronic statistical reports. One of the most important training materials to be used is the Guide on Data Entry mentioned above.

In addition to developing new ICMS features and electronic statistical reports, Open Justice also worked on other elements pertaining to the ICMS. Open Justice contracted AlfaSoft to upgrade the existing audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida) to decrease storage require- ments. The development of the Media Management System will commence in January 2020. It will be then integrated with the new ICMS on a dedicated media server. The solution will ensure that, when necessary, the higher courts and E-File Module users have direct access to court hearing Figure 7 – Graphical representation of the recordings, thus contributing to greater transparency of Media Management System to improve court proceedings. audio recording of court hearings In December 2019, at the ACA’s request, Open Justice contracted the company Omega Trust to conduct an external security audit of the ICMS. The audit is planned for early 2020, and based on its findings and recommendations, the Project will assist the ACA to identify and address the system’s vulnerabilities.

In order to ensure sustainability of ICMS management at the national level, the Project assigned two full-time attorneys to help the ACA with ICMS implementation and user support, and with the implementation of judicial statistics. The two attorneys are working closely with the ACA/MOJ staff to prepare answers to requests for assistance from ICMS users. During October–December 2019, under the guidance of one of the full-time attorneys, the ACA/MOJ developed three Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts via the ICMS. The seconded attorneys are thus key for the smooth transfer of knowledge from the Project to the ACA/MOJ staff.

Significant efforts were made by Open Justice during the reporting period to inform the public about the new ICMS features. Thus, during Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020, the Project’s staff participated in

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 three outreach activities organized by the Comrat Court of Appeal, Moldova State University, and the NGO Action for Justice. Open Justice’s participation at the organized events has contributed to raising public awareness on the available new technologies and the benefits of the new ICMS.

Activity 1.2.2.8 (Year 3 Work Plan) under sub-Objective 1.2 was completed during the reporting period.

The following activities under sub-Objective 1.2 from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension are ongoing: Activity 1.2.1.1, Activities 1.2.2.1–1.2.2.4, Activities 1.2.2.6–1.2.2.7, Activities 1.2.2.9–1.2.2.10, Activity 1.2.3.1, Activity 1.2.3.3, and Activity 1.2.4.1.

Activities 1.2.1.2–1.2.1.3, Activity 1.2.2.5, Activity 1.2.3.2, Activity 1.2.3.4, and Activity1.2.4.2. (Year 3 Work Plan for the second extension) under sub-Objective 1.2 are planned for Quarter 2 and Quarter 3 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 3 of Fiscal Year 2019, Open Justice submitted proposed draft amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting to the SCM. In December 2019, the Project submitted a letter to the SCM to highlight the importance of adopting the amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting prior to the implementation of electronic statistical reporting in pilot courts in Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020. During the next reporting period, the Project will provide all the support required by the SCM to adopt the modified instruction.

Due to the recent political context that generated tensions within the judiciary and within the SCM, Open Justice postponed the secondment of a consultant to the Judicial Inspection Board to assist the SCM and ACA in monitoring and following up on alleged manipulations in the ICMS random case distribution process. However, the Project plans to resume this activity in early 2020, once the SCM signals more readiness and commitment to collaborate on this matter. In the meantime, the Project will continue to develop monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts and present them to the SCM and ACA/MOJ.

To provide additional security verification for the ICMS, Open Justice purchased, installed, and configured an IT solution for monitoring the ICMS database during Fiscal Year 2019. During the reporting period, Open Justice developed draft security policies that need to be put in place in order to effectively implement the ICMS database monitoring solution. The Project will finalize the draft policy after accessing and analyzing the test environment of the solution, which will be accessible with SITCS’s assistance in early 2020. The policy will be then vetted with the ACA/MOJ and SITCS. The IT solution will monitor, block, and prevent attempted manipulations and will ensure the safety and integrity of data stored in the ICMS. This is an important development by the Project as it provides a major tool against judicial corruption and will therefore help build public trust in the justice system.

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

Activity 1.3.1.2 (Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) under sub-Objective 1.3 is planned for Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020.

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

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.)

The ICMS piloting period has shown that the integration of the ICMS with five services through the MConnect platform (namely MPay, MPass, MSign, MLog, and MNotify) and with two State Registries (the Population Registry and the Registry of Legal Entities) has significantly improved the security, quality, and efficiency of ICMS use.

During the reporting period, the Project continued the discussions on ICMS integration with the case management system used in the prosecutor offices. In October 2019, the Project participated in a meeting with EU Delegation representatives to discuss the EU’s planned support for the eventual functional integration of the ICMS with the Prosecutor’s E-File system, thus ensuring a consistent and complete electronic record of criminal cases.

To enhance the online access to public services, the e-Gov Agency is currently developing a new M- service — MPower. During the next reporting period, Open Justice will discuss and cooperate with the e-Gov Agency and will evaluate the extent to which the ICMS could and should be interoperable with the MPower service.

In addition, the Project will monitor the Government’s progress on a planned activity under its Action Plan for 2020–2023, which involves the development of a technical concept of the Information System e-Detention, and will assess the feasibility of its interoperability with the ICMS.

Activity 1.4.1.1 (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 October–November 2019, in cooperation with the NIJ, Open Justice delivered three training sessions on ICMS use to judges and court personnel. The training focused on how to correctly use various ICMS function- alities, which is a prerequisite for generating accurate and complete electronic statistic reports. The events were attended by 96 participants. The participants were encouraged to share the knowledge acquired at the trainings with their colleagues.

In addition, on December 6, 2019, Open Justice sent a Figure 8 – ICMS Training at the National Institute request to the NIJ to organize three joint trainings for of Justice court personnel in the early months of 2020. The training

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 objectives are to develop court personnel skills on case information entry into the ICMS to create precise data in the Electronic Judicial Statistics Module (EJSM) and Performance Dashboard and track court performance. The request to the NIJ refers also to the training of court leaders on the use of electronically generated performance and statistical data to improve court performance and services. All trainings are planned to take place between February–March 2020. During the next quarter, Open Justice will also conduct one similar training for the SCM and ACA/MOJ representatives to improve their oversight capacity of court performance.

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.

SUB-OBJECTIVE 2.2: INSTITUTIONALIZE OVERSIGHT OVER JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE

One of the Government’s top priorities is to build a judiciary that fosters integrity and professionalism through, among other things, an extra-judiciary evaluation of judges’ integrity and professionalism and increasing the efficiency of the SCM and the Supreme Court of Justice. On October 14, 2019, the European Commission for Democracy through Law (the Venice Commission) adopted an Interim Opinion on the Draft Law on the Extra-judiciary Evaluation of Judges, which the Moldovan MOJ developed to regulate the upcoming evaluation procedure. The Organization for Security and Co- operation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights also developed a legal opinion on the draft law, made public on October 16, 2019. Based on the recommendations of these two international institutions, the MOJ prepared the draft Law Regarding the Evaluation of Performance and Career of Judges. The draft law is subject to the expert review of the Venice Commission, which will present its final opinion at the end of January 2020.

According to the current version of the draft law, the judicial evaluation will be conducted by the Board for Judicial Evaluation and Career, composed of 10 members selected by the Selection and Monitoring Committee (five national and five international experts). The Board’s technical and material basis shall be ensured by the SCM. The MOJ relies on further CoE expertise to finalize the draft law and have it adopted by the Parliament in its spring session. The Board is due to start its activity in June–July 2020.

Throughout October–December 2019, Open Justice, together with USAID/Moldova representatives, had two meetings with MOJ representatives to discuss the technical assistance needed to further the implementation of the planned reforms in the judiciary. To provide the required support, during this quarter, Open Justice prepared a scope of work to recruit an international consultant who will review the MOJ’s draft legislative amendments for a new mechanism for extra-judiciary evaluation and develop the operational procedures necessary for the proper functioning of the re-evaluation body – the Judicial Evaluation Commission.

During the reporting period, Open Justice continued its efforts initiated during the previous phases of the Project aimed at improving the institutional capacity of the SCM and its subordinated bodies. The Project carried out a status quo assessment of the recommendations made in the EAPs, which the SCM approved in February 2018. The Project concluded, among other things, that one of the aspects still in need of improvement is the quality of reasoning in the SCM’s decisions.

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

As stated in the Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2019, Open Justice had previously developed and presented to the SCM a Guide on Drafting Well-Reasoned SCM Decisions on Judicial Selections, organized meetings with the representatives of the SCM and members of the SCM Secretariat, and discussed the Guide’s application. As a result, the SCM expressed its commitment to use the recommendations from the Guide during the judicial selection round that took place in July 2019. During the reporting period, Open Justice monitored to what extent the SCM followed the Project’s recommendations in the Guide. Open Justice included its findings and conclusions in the Project’s Monitoring Report on the Quality of Reasoning of the SCM’s Decisions on Selection and Career of Judges for the period from July 2019 to December 2019.

Aside from helping the Project prioritize its future tasks, the status quo assessment mentioned above served as a reference for the development of an updated EAP for the SCM and its subordinated bodies. Open Justice shared the updated EAP with the SCM on December 4, 2019, and the Project is currently awaiting the SCM’s feedback.

In addition, in order to assist the SCM to improve judicial selection and evaluation, Open Justice developed a scope of work for a team of one national and one international consultant, whose mission will include, among other tasks, assisting the SCM to refine and implement the regulatory framework and improve the practices for screening, selecting, and promoting judicial candidates. The implementation of this activity is pending approval of the SCM during Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020.

Given the tensions within the judiciary, caused primarily by political factors, the Project temporarily put on hold the assistance planned for the Judicial Inspection Board inspectors on the use of data in the ICMS random distribution module, and the development of a reporting procedure on the performance of courts and individual judges. However, Open Justice remained available to offer on- the-spot assistance on the use of the ICMS random case distribution module to both the Judicial Inspection Board and the ACA/MOJ. The Project expects to second one junior staff attorney to the Board during Quarter 2 of Fiscal Year 2020.

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, Activity 2.2.2.1, Activity 2.2.3.1, and Activity 2.2.3.3.

The following activities under sub-Objective 2.2 (from the Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) will be implemented during Quarter 2 and Quarter 3 of Fiscal Year 2020: Activities 2.2.2.2– 2.2.2.4 and Activity 2.2.3.2.

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.

The Project closely collaborated with the ACA/MOJ to identify needed refinements of the Courts’ Web Portal based on feedback collected from litigants throughout September 2019. On November 7, 2019, the MOJ organized the “Roundtable Dedicated to the Courts’ Web Portal: Issues and Solutions,” with the participation of representatives from the ACA/MOJ, NCPPD, SITCS, the Moldovan Bar Association, the Women's Bar Association, and the Open Justice Project. As a result of the roundtable discussions, in December 2019, Open Justice refined the list of change requests and issued a call to identify a qualified IT company to perform upgrades for the Courts’ Web Portal.

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

The development and implementation of the changes to the Courts’ Web Portal will take place in January– February 2020.

In order to ensure that court personnel can effectively use the courts’ new webpages, Open Justice will conduct a training for webpage administrators and court public relations specialists in March–April 2020.

Among other interventions, Open Justice conducted outreach activities on court automation and the benefits Figure 9 – The MOJ’s State Secretary speaks about of the ICMS. On October 25, 2019, the Project the importance of the Courts’ Web Portal in participated in the Open Doors Day organized at the ensuring access to public information Comrat Court of Appeal on the occasion of the European Day of Civil Justice, where the Open Justice team delivered a presentation about the new functionalities and the benefits of the ICMS.

The aim of the Open Doors Day event was to increase the transparency of the Comrat Court of Appeal and to raise public awareness of the available new technologies for the judicial process. The event was attended by 88 persons — including high school students, law students, and their teachers.

In addition, on December 12, 2019, the Project Figure 10 – Presentation on the new ICMS functionalities at the Open Doors Day participated at the Public Conference “The State, Security, in the Comrat Court of Appeal and Human Rights in the Information Society,” organized by the Moldova State University’s Law Department, on the occasion of the United Nations Human Rights Day. Open Justice supported and delivered a presentation about the new ICMS as a technological platform that streamlines case flow, optimizes court administration and management, and increases the court users’ access to justice. A total of 79 participants attended the event.

On December 20, 2019, the Open Justice team took part in roundtable discussions dedicated to “Digital Solutions and Tools in the Legal System of the Republic of Moldova.” The event was organized by the NGO Action for Justice, which aims to support the professional development of young lawyers. On this occasion, Open Justice delivered a presentation to 22 participants about the new ICMS’s functionalities. Open Justice’s participation at the organized roundtable increased the visibility of the assistance granted by the Project and raised awareness among young lawyers of the available new technologies for the judicial system.

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 and Activity 2.3.1.5 (Year 3 Work Plan for the second Project extension) under sub-Objective 2.3 are planned for Quarter 2 and Quarter 3 of Fiscal Year 2020.

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 SECTION II – REPORTS AND DELIVERABLES

OBJECTIVE 1: INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Report on the Training Activities on the Use of the new 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 October 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during November 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during December 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Updated EAP for the SCM and its subordinated bodies (Activity 2.2.2.1 and Activity 2.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Monitoring Report on the Quality of SCM’s Decisions on Selection and Career of Judges, covering the period from July 2019 to December 2019 (Activity 2.2.3.3 – 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 January 30, 2020 SECTION III – MAJOR ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR NEXT QUARTER

OBJECTIVE 1: INCREASED EFFICIENCY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Develop and implement new ICMS functionalities as part of the second iteration (Activity 1.2.2.4 and Activity 1.2.2.5 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Finalize the development of additional statistical reports as part of the EJSM (Activity 1.2.2.6 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Develop technical requirements for the implementation of the E-File Module, connected to the ICMS, in all courts (Activity 1.2.4.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Continue to conduct trainings on ICMS functions and electronic statistical reports for court leadership teams, judges, and court staff (Activity 1.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Submit, for the SCM’s approval, the amendments to the SCM Instruction on evidence and documentation process in district courts and courts of appeal (Activity 1.2.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Conduct the external security audit of the ICMS (Activity 1.2.2.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Start the upgrade of the audio recording system for court hearings (Activity 1.2.2.10 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Complete development of the security policies that need to be put in place in order to implement the ICMS database monitoring solution (Activity 1.3.1.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • 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) • Assist the SCM and ACA/MOJ with institutionalizing the use of the videoconferencing equipment to ensure the remote participation of inmates in court hearings (Activity 1.1.1.2 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

OBJECTIVE 2: INCREASED TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM

• Upgrade 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) • In partnership with the NIJ, train 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)

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

• Contract one international consultant to provide assistance to the MOJ in reviewing legislative amendments and developing operational procedures for a new mechanism of judicial evaluation (Activity 2.2.1.1 – 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) • Provide support to the SCM and Judicial Inspection Board to use data in the ICMS Performance Dashboard, the EJSM, and the random distribution module (Activity 2.2.2.2 – Activity 2.2.2.4 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) • Conduct outreach activities to raise awareness about the benefits of the new ICMS and the new electronic applications (Activity 2.3.1.4 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 SECTION IV – PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

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

During the reporting quarter, Open Justice made steady progress toward planning and implementing the activities covered by the Project’s second extension (October 1, 2019 – June 30, 2020).

The Project’s activities related to refining the new ICMS and implementing additional IT solutions in the justice sector continued at the usual intense pace. In December 2019, the Project subcontracted the development of 98 additional functionalities for the new ICMS, as requested by court staff during the Project’s on-site visits; these functionalities will ensure a better user experience and will facilitate the absorption of the ICMS by the Moldovan courts. The Project also purchased and installed 160 desktop computers in 12 district courts to ensure that the IT infrastructure in courts supports the use of the new ICMS. To enhance the storage, security, and usability of the audio recordings of court hearings, the Project contracted a local IT company to develop and implement a centralized IT solution for this purpose (Femida Media Server). Significant progress was made towards developing and testing 122 electronic statistical reports for all courts, which will substantially enhance courts’ efficiency, as well as the transparency of and access to statistical data for court leadership, the MOJ, and the SCM. As of March 2020, three pilot courts (the Comrat and Cimislia District Courts and the Comrat Court of Appeal) will no longer use paper statistical reports; the rest of the courts will abolish paper statistical reports by June 30, 2020.3 At the request of the MOJ, as of October 1, 2020, Open Justice delegated two full-time attorneys to help the ACA/MOJ extend ICMS user support to more courts and test the electronic judicial statistics reports that the Project developed.

In December 2019, the Project also selected a local IT company to perform an external security audit of the ICMS, which will scan the ICMS for security vulnerabilities and recommend specific actions to address potential security risks.

While the implementation of the above-mentioned activities was possible due to the Project’s close cooperation with the MOJ, the ACA, and the courts, the SCM, on the other hand, was slow to respond to the Project’s invitations for cooperation. This was due to the ongoing tensions over the legitimacy of current SCM members.4 As a result, the start of several activities that the Project planned for the first quarter of Fiscal Year 2020 — related to judicial selection, evaluation, and discipline, improving the reasoning of judicial selection and promotion decisions, and building capacity of the SCM’s Judicial Inspection Board in the area of random case distribution monitoring and analysis — was delayed.5

3 The abolishing of paper electronic statistical reports by all Moldovan courts heavily depends on the commitment of ACA and SCM to assist courts to institutionalize the use of electronic judicial statistics reports beyond the Project’s lifetime. 4 On September 27, 2019, a group of judges convened an extraordinary meeting of the General Assembly of Judges and voted for the dismissal of all current SCM members. While the Assembly did not have a quorum, it created a wave of tension between the SCM and the judiciary, which resulted in several court disputes between the SCM and the group of judges who convened the meeting. 5 The delayed activities were: Activity 1.2.1.5, Activity 2.2.2.2, Activity 2.2.2.4, and Activity 2.2.3.2.

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

In late December 2019, the SCM agreed to meet with Open Justice to resume cooperation starting January 2020. The Project intends to make as much progress as possible in implementing the delayed activities during the next quarter.

On a different note, during the reporting period, the Project put more effort than initially planned into spearheading the implementation and institutionalization of the videoconferencing solution for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings. To this end, the Project developed and launched two surveys in courts and penitentiaries to identify current technical and legal issues with using the videoconferencing for remote participation of inmates in court hearings. On January 31, 2020, the Project will facilitate a workshop with judiciary, MOJ, and penitentiary representatives to discuss the actions that need to be taken to better institutionalize the use of the videoconferencing solution for conducting remote trials with the participation of inmates. The expected impact of the institutional- ization of the videoconferencing solution and its use on national scale is significant — the piloting of the videoconferencing solution in November 2018 resulted in a 50% decrease in the number of trial continuances involving inmates, as well as considerable time and cost savings for both court and penitentiary personnel.

In conclusion, the Project is on track with the implementation of court automation-related activities, and is ready to move forward with implementing some of the delayed activities during the next quarter, once the SCM agrees to resume cooperation.

Page 20 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020 SECTION V – ADMINISTRATION AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

On September 19, 2019, USAID approved the second extension of the Project’s timeframe 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.

During the reporting period, for Objective 1 activities, the Project promoted six part-time interns to Junior Staff Attorney positions. Open Justice also hired two new staff members for Objective 2 activities: Irina Lupusor, Senior Staff Attorney, and Cornel Sotnic, Junior Staff Attorney. In July 2019, the Project announced an open competition for hiring a full-time Communications and Outreach Specialist to replace Iulia Tvigun who left the Project at the end of September 2019. The Project completed the selection process in September 2019 and in October 2019 received USAID’s approval for hiring Cristina Rau. In addition, in October 2019, the Project hired Iulia Zaharia as Project Assistant to replace Anastasia Jomiru who left the Project on May 15, 2019.

The diagram below shows the Project team as of October 1, 2019.

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

Natalija Stamenkovic, Cristina Malai Moldova COR Technical Director

Remus Turcan, Monitoring, Evaluation, Administration & Finance 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 Increased Transparency Ecaterina Televca, Senior IT and Accountability of the Non-key Support Staff Adviser Justice System Vitalie Levința, IT Manager 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, Anastasia Attorney Victor Bicenco, Driver 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 21 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 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 October 1, 2019 – December 31, 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

January 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.

REPORT ON THE PROJECT MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND LEARNING PLAN

FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1, 2019 – DECEMBER 31, 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

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

Submitted on January 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

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 Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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 ...... 7 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 Moldova, MELP Report January 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 Moldova, MELP Report January 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 accepted the first extension of the Project’s original implementation period for 4.5 months, from May 15, 2019, to September 30, 2019. The first extension was granted for continuing the Project’s Objective I activities only, in order to finalize the implementation of the new Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) in all (20) Moldovan courts. Consequently, 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 four out of the original ten Objective 2 indicators, even if there were no activities under project Objective 2.

In September 2019, USAID extended the Project’s lifetime 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 new performance indicators.

Thus, five new indicators were developed under Objective I. These concern new ICMS’s functionalities, evaluation of the data gathered from the monthly monitoring of random distribution and ICMS’s alleged manipulation, and two new indicators regarding the measurement of the use of videoconferencing solution. One original indicator, which referred to the ICMS’s random distribution, was revised, and is being completed with an additional five (5) sub-indicators (attached is the amended MELP Table approved by USAID).

Thus, during Quarter I of the fiscal year 2020, Open Justice tracked twenty-two indicators, of which one is a Goal indicator. Eleven tracked indicators are Objective I Indicators; of which five indicators are newly developed, namely: 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”. The original indicator, referring to random distribution, namely Indicator 1.3.1,“Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module,” was amended and now has nine sub-indicators, of them five are new sub-indicators, namely: 5) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims

1 The Sandu Government was dismissed in November by a no-confidence vote of the Parliament.

Page 1 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

/file””; 6) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Reversed case distribution””; 7) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Modification of the panel of judges”; 8) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Correction of the panel””; 9) “Number of actions saved as “Activation/deactivation of judge.”

The Project tracks 10 indicators under Objective 2; all these indicators were developed at the beginning of the project. As per agreement with USAID, four out of ten Objective 2 Indicators are tracked and reflected in this MELP Report. The Project’s activities, which correspond to other six Objective 2 indicators, were fully implemented during the previous implementation periods and they will not be continued. Nevertheless, this MELP report includes all project indicators — both new and original indicators, as they are part of the initial and amended Task Order. The numbering of the MELP indicators in the table below is changed, according to the second extension work plan and logic framework.

This actual MELP report describes the progress that Open Justice made during Quarter 1, of FY 2020, (covering October 1–December 31, 2019) against its initial indicators and new indicators approved by USAID.

Thus, out of 22 project indicators monitored, in the case of eight indicators, the targets had been already reached, and some even had significantly exceeded their planned end-of-project values. Of these eight indicators, four are Objective 1 indicators and the other four are Objective 2 indicators, as detailed below:

• Indicator 1.2.1, “Number of district courts utilizing overarching ICMS” has reached the target of 20 courts. Thus, by September 30, 2019, the new ICMS was being used by all 20 courts (46 central and secondary locations), which includes: 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 December 31, 2019 consists of 122 statistical reports, developed with Open Justice assistance during the 2nd project extension, as compared to 90 reports planned for two level of courts- district and Appellate.This indicator has a cumulative value, and the actual achieved metric shows that considerable progress was made during the reporting quarter, as the Project developed an additional 42 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice.

• 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 by September 30, 2019 (the project’s first extension). Despite the complex situation within the SCM, which caused an initial delay in some of the application’s implementation, e.g., the WEB Report Card, during Project Year 3, Open Justice launched all three public-facing applications — the Courts’ Web Portal, the E-File Module, and the Web Report Card (see more details in the narrative part for this indicator, in the Indicators Table below).

• 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, 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

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

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 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 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, during the reporting period, 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.

• 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, a total of 22 SCM sessions were broadcast 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 2.3.6, “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.

Due to the complex and fluid political context in which the Project is being implemented, its limited impact on some judicial reform areas, and external factors beyond the Project’s control, the Project’s Goal Indicator, seven indicators corresponding to Objective 1 and five indicators placed under Objective 2 did not yet achieve their end-of-project targets. Of the five Objective 2 indicators, four are still being monitored, while one indicator, referring to public perception of the judiciary measured via national surveys, is no longer monitored, as the project will not conduct another national survey.

However, since the target values of these indicators are cumulative, the current values indicate a positive dynamic during the reporting quarter. Therefore, the Project expects to fully achieve all planned results by the Project end date.

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

• Goal Indicator, “Increase in the score for court management,” has an End-of-Program target of 0.35 points. The most recent World Justice Project (WJP) report was published in February 2019, and the updated country scores are available for comparison. Moldova’s current WJP Index is 0.34 points, which is below the established target of 0.35 points. As this Index is multifactored and complex one, and mostly is out of Project influence, the Project will only monitor the value of this Index. It is expected that the next WJP report will be published in February 2020.

• Indicator 1.1.1, “Number of approved and implemented amendments, regulations, court rules, and instructions developed with Open Justice Project support,” has a Year 3 new end-of-program target of 40 normative acts. By December 31, 2019, the total number of approved and implemented normative acts had already reached 37. Out of the total 37 normative acts, during the reporting quarter, one normative act was approved with the Open Justice Project’s support.

• 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 an end of project target value of 19 central courts’ premises. In December 2019, 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 courts, during reporting period, out of 19 Central premises of the courts, 18 courts had fully functional videoconferencing system and only 9 courts used the videoconferencing system to conduct video hearings.

• 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)” has an established end-of project target value of 1,500 courts hearings held via videoconferencing system. According to data made available by courts, throughout October – December 2019, nine courts continued to use the videoconferencing system and carried out a total of 536 hearings for the remote trial participation of inmates between courts and penitentiaries.

• 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 project activities related to its achievement started during the reporting quarter. So far, out of 98 end-of-target newly planned functionalities, 19 have been developed and tested and nine functionalities were already implemented on the production module. The dynamics of the development and implementation of the new ICMS functionalities is positive and reflects the actual context in the judiciary.

• Indicator 1.2.3, “Number of justice sector personnel who received training with Open Justice Project support,” has a revised Year 3 target of 4,500 trained justice sector personnel. By December 31, 2019, Open Justice had trained a total of 3,898 persons on judicial reform issues in the subject areas in which the Project works. Of those, 2,946 (76%) were women and 952 (24%) were men. During Quarter 4 of the year 2019 the Project trained 127 persons, of those, 101 were women (80%) and 26 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

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

its new functionalities, the E-File Module, the use of the new videoconferencing equipment, personal data protection, and other topics related to the Project’s activities.

• The Indicator 1.3.1. “Percentage decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module” has nine sub-indicators included in the revised MELP, of those five are newly developed, as follows: 1) Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file”; 2) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Reversed case distribution”; 3) Number of actions saved in ICMS as” Modification of the panel of judges”; 4) “Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Correction of the panel”; 5) “Number of actions saved as “Activation/deactivation of judge”. It should be mentioned that Open Justice tracks one additional functionality, which refers to “Modifications of panel settings”.

The first four sub-indicators listed in the MELP table below are from the original MELP: 1)“Ratio of judges blocked for a period to the total number of judges”; 2) “Number of cases/actions of using the option “incompatible judges”; 3) “Number of times judges saved in the system as “incompatibles”; 4)”Number of cases/actions saved as “examined by the same judge/panel”.

According to the monitoring conducted, four out of a total of nine sub-indicators achieved the targets while five sub-indicators values are still over their targets (negative trend), as the ICMS new functionalities are still in a piloting phase and there has been a big turnover of judges as well.

• 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” is a new indicator, and the project activities related to its achievement started during the current reporting quarter. The established end-of target value of 25% refers to an expectation that at least one fourth of courts’ explanations on SCM’s JIB inquiries will be clearly reasoned. So far, due to the complex internal situation at the SCM, no progress has been made by JIB. To achieve the planned target, starting January 21, 2020, Open Justice will second to the SCM one Project attorney, who will support the SCM’s JIB in investigating possible alleged manipulations of the new ICMS. Also, the Project will continue to develop monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts and present them to the SCM and ACA/MOJ.

• Indicator 2.1.1, “Ratio of judicial cases backlogged to the total number of pending cases,” shows that the most recent backlog, derived from the latest available data provided by ACA (for the period January 01- September 30, 2019) is 6.2%. Thus, the total number of pending cases during January 1 - September 30, 2019 is 47,904 cases, of which 2,972 (6,2%) cases were backlogged cases pending more than 24 and 36 months (including civil, penal and contravention cases). The actual value of this indicator, measured during this quarter, negatively exceeds, by 2.5 percentage points, the established baseline of 3,7% and is higher than the final target value of less than 6%. Generally, the fluctuation of this indicator is a result of the disruption of court processes caused by the ongoing court reorganization and optimization (CRO) reform. 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 case management.

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

• Indicator 2.2.2, “Increase of reasoned, merit-based judicial appointments ensured by the SCM,” had a value of 0%, compared to the established End-of Project 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 include 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.

• Indicator 2.3.1, “Increase public confidence of judicial effectiveness,” was a Project Year 2 indicator that measures 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, trust in the justice system has increased 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 would require a 5% increase over the indicator’s baseline value of 22%. Numerous external factors have influenced the achievement in this indicator, most of which are outside the Project’s control.

The Year 3 Work Plan includes only activities related to the ICMS development and deployment. Thus, 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 December 31, 2019, Open Justice already had reached 48,129 persons, which is under the end-of program value, but as this is cumulative indicator, Open Justice expects to fully achieve it by the established date. This indicator reflects the strong public interest in the Project’s activities as a result of the Project’s outreach efforts, including recently published and distributed outreach materials targeting court users and vulnerable groups, and the frequent updates of 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 new established targets of 80% with regard to women general participants and 15% referring to female panel speakers, because of the numerous trainings involving women judicial specialists. Thus, so far, the Project had reached 75% female general participants and 11% of female panel speakers participating in the Project’s in project’s initiatives and events, conducted by December 31. As this is a cumulative indicator, Open Justice will make every possible effort to increase the involvement of women to achieve the desired targets.

Page 6 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 B. PROJECT INDICATORS

Project Goal Indicator

• Increase in the court management score

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

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

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

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 Project program- assisted activities, initiatives, and events

The table below analyzes the Project’s performance against the revised or newly established targets.

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

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

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) Increase in the score 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.34 for court management

Unit: Number (Scores) COMMENT: Open Justice established the value for this indicator based on an external evaluation source, namely the 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 activities. As a result, Open Justice identified four relevant WJP factors that it will monitor during the life of the Project. 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, published in February 2019, Moldova’s overall score is 0.49 points, which is identical to the overall score for 2016 and 2018.

(https://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/documents/WJP_RuleofLawIndex_2019_Website_ reduced.pdf)

As the Project measures only the four specific factors mentioned above (see Performance Indicator Reference Sheet2), our calculated value for this indicator—comprised of (an average of) these four

2 WJP’s Rule of Law Index reports presents 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

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 factors that the Project is tracking—differs from the country’s overall value of 0.49. Compared to 2018, the value of the four indicators that the Project is monitoring decreased from 0.35 in February 2018 to 0.34 in February 2019. According to the WJP’s latest report, the actual value of this indicator is 0.34, and thus it is below the Year 2 project target of 0.35 points, by 0.01 decimal point. It is expected that the next WJP’s report will be published in February 2020, when new data will be available.

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 Open Justice cannot, given its narrow scope and the short time period of the contract, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Program 2019 (May 14, Target Target Actual 2018) (May 14, (June 30, 2019) 2020) 1.1. 1. Number of 37 8 12 40 37 approved and implemented amendments, regulations, court rules, and instructions developed with Open Justice Project support Unit: Number COMMENT: Throughout the period covering May 15, 2017- May 14, 2019, Open Justice assisted the SCM, ACA, MOJ and courts to draft and approve a total of 37 regulations, decisions and legislative acts.

Thus, by December 31, 2019, Open Justice assisted the SCM, courts and ACA/MOJ to develop and approve the following regulations and decisions: 1) the Regulation on Case Weights for Civil, Administrative, and Criminal Cases, approved by the SCM; 2) the Regulation on Publishing Court

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 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 Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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 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 Ditrict Courts, and Balti and Chisinau Courts of Appeal, and Supreme Court of Justice.

During Quarter 1of fiscal year 2020, covering October 1-December 31,2019, Open Justice developed the draft Regulation for the use of the Imperva monitoring solution of the ICMS (Imperva monitoring system/databases). The Imperva solution is embedded with security, monitoring and audit functionalities, able to help the ACA to identify, investigate and document possible manipulations of ICMS data. During the next reporting period, the draft Regulation has to be adapted to the technical features provided by vendor and consulted with ACA and SCM. During the previous reporting period, Open Justice submitted to the SCM draft amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting. In August 2019, the ACA/MOJ provided the SCM with the full list of updated reports to be integrated into the Instruction. In December 2019, the Project submitted a letter to the SCM to highlight the importance of adopting the amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting prior to the implementation of electronic statistical reporting in pilot courts in the first quarter of 2020.

During the current reporting period, the Project received from SCM a letter requesting assistance in several aspects, including drafting amendments to the SCM’s Instruction on electronic statistical reporting, in order to facilitate the transition toward paperless statistical reporting in courts. In addition, the SCM asked for support in modifying /completing the Regulation on keeping processual evidence and

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 documentation in district and appellate courts; and to modify and complete the Regulation on random distribution in courts, in order to correspond to the enhancement of the new ICMS version.

During the next reporting period, the Project will provide all the support required by the SCM to adopt the modified instructions. 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.1.2. Number of 17 n/a n/a 19* 18 central premises of the courts using the 6 n/a n/a 19* 9 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). Unit: Number COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. Prior to this, with the Project’s assistance, in July 2019, the SCM and MOJ developed and approved the Regulation on the use of teleconferencing in penitentiaries and courts, and extended the use of the videoconferencing system from the pilot to all 20 national courts, endowed with teleconferencing equipment-comprising special devices, such as computer screens, microphones and headsets to allow inmates to participate in court proceedings remotely. The piloting of the teleconferencing 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). In addition, during the fiscal year 2019, the Chisinau, Comrat Courts of Appeal and the Edinet District Court started to use the teleconferencing system for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings.

As a result of all these joint efforts, overall, during the fiscal year 2019, a total of 611 court hearings were organized by six courts (Orhei District Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court,

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

Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Edinet District Court) with penitentiaries using the videoconferencing equipment.

In December 2019, the Project developed and sent a questionnaire to all national courts to gather data on trials conducted via the videoconferencing system and to assess further training needs of court staff on the use of the system. According to data made available by courts, throughout October – December 2019, courts and penitentiaries continued to use the videoconferencing system and carried out a total of 536 hearings with the remote trial participation of inmates. During the reporting period, out of 19 Central premises of the courts, 18 courts had fully functional videoconferencing system and only six courts used the videoconferencing system to conduct video hearings.

On January 31, 2020, Open Justice will organize a roundtable with the representatives of the courts and penitentiary institutions to discuss the results of the questionnaires on the use of the videoconferencing solution in hearings with the remote participation of inmates. The received feedback, both from the penitentiaries and courts, will help the Project to identify problematic areas and prioritize its future tasks in this field. The event will also enable the ACA/MOJ to assess whether and how many videoconferencing systems need to be purchased for the courts’ secondary premises, in addition to the 20 systems purchased and installed by the Project in central premises of first-tier courts, appellate courts and the Supreme Court of Justice.

To evaluate further areas of improvement and extension of the use of IT solutions to accelerate CRO, Open Justice also researched and identified a series of best international practices on the use of videoconferencing solution in criminal cases.

*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 do not have jurisdiction to examine cases related to Articles 469, 4731, 4732 CPC. Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.1.3. Number of courts’ hearings with 598 n/a n/a 1,500 536 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). Unit: Number

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

COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. To date, the total number of courts’ hearings on matters described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the CPC is not available in the ICMS database and may be counted by the courts and National Penitentiary Administration (NPA) staff only manually. Thus, at the Open Justice’s request, the Central premises of the courts informed that during the reporting period, the total number of court’s hearings held via videoconferencing and in-person was 965. Out of 965 court hearings – 536 court hearings were conducted via videoconferences with the participation of inmates.

According to latest data report provided by the NPA, it is noted that, during January 1-December, 31, 2019, an overall number of 2,136 courts’ hearings were conducted using the videoconferencing systems, with the participation of the inmates, between penitentiaries and courts.

The implementation of the videoconferencing system ensures remote participation of inmates in court hearings and is regulated by the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries, which was approved by SCM and MOJ on July 17, 2019, and which establishes the rights and obligations of the courts and the participants to organize and conduct video sessions, according to the requests submitted by inmate.

During the reporting period, Open Justice started collecting information from courts and penitentiaries on the use of the videoconferencing solution for remote trials with participation of inmates. In addition to developing and sending a questionnaire to all courts, Open Justice also developed a second questionnaire addressed to the heads of penitentiary institutions. The survey will take place between December 30, 2019 - January 17, 2020 and will aim at collecting feedback from the penitentiaries on the use of the videoconferencing system. The received feedback, both from the penitentiaries and courts, will help the Project to identify problematic areas and prioritize its future tasks in this field. This activity will help the Open Justice Project and the relevant stakeholders to develop an action plan to extend and institutionalize the use of the videoconferencing system in all national courts and penitentiaries. The video-conferencing system will provide significant cost savings and will help avoid delays and postponements resulting from the need to transport inmates to court locations. 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.2.1. Number of 20 n/a 15 n/a 20 courts utilizing overarching ICMS

Unit: Number

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

COMMENT: The Open Justice worked on developing an overarching ICMS, which was implemented and is in use in all Moldovan courts, by the end of the first extension period of the Project’s implementation (September 30, 2019).

Starting July 8, 2019, to complete the gradual implementation of the ICMS, Open Justice launched the last phase of piloting of the new software in Chisinau Appellate Court circuit (consisting of 21 locations). Thus, the overarching ICMS is used by all 20 Moldovan courts, including the Superior Court of Justice, and has replaced the CMS that the Moldovan courts used before 2019.

The Open Justice assistance will continue during the second extension period and will also focus on ensuring that the Government of Moldova can assume full authority and responsibility for properly operating, maintaining, ensuring data security and sustaining the new ICMS beyond the Project’s lifetime.

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.2.2 Number of new 0 n/a n/a 98 9 ICMS 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 will measure the courts’ progress in implementing the new ICMS, and additional functionalities developed by Open Justice during the second extension. New ICMS functionalities developed and implemented refers to additional features embedded in the ICMS at the request of courts and partners. Overall, by June 2020, the Project plans to implement 98 new ICMS functionalities, coordinated with Project’s stakeholders.

By the end of December 2019, in cooperation with the IT developer AlfaSoft, Open Justice managed to develop and test 19 functionalities and implement 9 new ICMS functionalities, requested by court users. The most significant changes refer to new processes provided for in the recently adopted Administrative Code. Other changes and refinements pertain to usability, search module and case distribution.

In addition to the new ICMS functionalities, Open Justice also worked on other elements pertaining to the ICMS. In order to upgrade the existing audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida) to decrease storage requirements, Open Justice contracted the company AlfaSoft. The development of the solution will commence in January 2020. It will be then integrated with the new ICMS on a dedicated Media Server. The solution will ensure that, when necessary, the higher courts and the E- File users have direct access to court hearing recordings, thus, contributing to more transparency of the court proceedings.

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.2.3. Number of 0 200 1,200 4,500 3,898 justice sector personnel who received training with Open Justice Project support

Unit: Number COMMENT: Since the start of the Project, Open Justice trained a total of 3,898 persons on judicial reform issues in the subject areas in which the Project works. Of those, 2,946 (76%) were women and 952 (24%) were men.

During Quarter 1 of the fiscal year 2020, the Project has trained 127 persons, of those, 101 were women (80%) and 26 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 October-November, 2019, in cooperation with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Open Justice Project delivered:

1) Three workshops on ICMS for judges and court personnel. The training focused on “How to correctly use various ICMS’s functionalities”, which is a basic condition to generate accurate and complete electronic statistic reports. The training events were attended by 79 participants, of them 60 (76%) women, and 19 (24%) -were men.

2) Open Justice organized on October 4, 2019, a workshop on “Collecting, analyzing and use of statistical data/electronic statistical reports” for 17 participants (15 women /88%, and 2 were men /12%). The workshop was attended by chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, clerks, and specialists from the Procedural Tracking and Documentation Divisions (PTDDs).

3) On November 27, 2019, Open Justice trained 31 participants – court clerks and judicial assistants (of them 26 were women (83%) and 5 – men (17%)), on “Information security and ensuring the prerequisite, referring to protection of personal data”.

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

Result 1.3: Case management data generated to streamline case flow and optimize court administration and management Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.3.1. Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module

Units: numeric, percentage

Sub-Indicators: 1. Ratio of judges 159 <30% <20% <50% 77 blocked for a period (41%) (19%) of time to the total * the value number of judges was set during the 1st project month 2. Total number of 4,620 <80% <60% <30% 1,460 actions of using the (100%) (32%) option “incompatible * same as judges” above

3. Total number of 27,988 <80% <60% <5% 1,460 times judges saved as (100%) (5%) “incompatible” * same as above 4. Total number of 213 <95% <90% <60% 125 cases/actions saved as (100%) (59%) “examined by the * same as same judge/panel” above

5. Number of actions 4 n/a n/a <4 28 saved in ICMS as (100%) (700%) “Erroneous status of the claims /file”

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

6. Number of actions 30 n/a n/a <30 30 saved in ICMS as (100%) “Reversed case distribution” 7. Number of actions 33 n/a n/a <33 70 saved in ICMS as (212%) ” Modification of the panel of judges”

8. Number of actions 28 n/a n/a <28 30 saved in ICMS as (107%) “Correction of the panel” 9. Number of actions 29 n/a n/a <29 25 saved as “Activation/ (86%) deactivation of judge”

COMMENT: Since November 2014, all Moldovan courts have been using the CMS automatic random case assignment module to distribute cases to judges. Since December 2014, the previous USAID rule of law project Rule of Law Institutional Strengthening Program (ROLISP) 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 developed 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 random distribution reports with the support of a junior staff attorney, seconded by Open Justice to the ACA/MOJ.

Starting with Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020, the random case assignment monthly reports include data from the pilot courts implementing the new ICMS. The reports include assessment of the trends in the ICMS random case assignment interventions by court representatives and recommendations for eliminating and preventing irregularities.

The new ICMS version is based on a more sophisticated case distribution mechanism because, 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 oversees them via five newly introduced sub-indicators: Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file”, Number of actions saved

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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”.

Compared to the baseline, the data obtained as a result of monitoring random case distribution during the Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020 reveals fluctuations with decreases and increases in most of the sub-indicator values. Nevertheless, six sub-indicators values show a positive trend, while three other sub-indicators values are still over their expected final targets.

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. Indicator and target values must be analyzed in 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 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 CMS in certain courts.

To ensure the sustainability of this activity and to institutionalize the monitoring of the case random distribution via CMS/ICMS, Open Justice advocated for the secondment of a junior staff attorney from Open Justice to the JIB under the SCM. During the next reporting period, Open Justice will negotiate the terms of secondment and will draft a detailed 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.

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

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

Information on ICMS alleged manipulations

Unit: Percentage COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. 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. To achieve this results, Open Justice has planned to second, to the SCM one Project attorney, who would help and support the SCM’s JIB in investigating an alleged manipulation of the new ICMS.

Due to the recent political context that generated tensions within the judiciary, Open Justice postponed the secondment of a consultant to the Judicial Inspection Board (JIB) to assist the SCM and ACA in monitoring and following-up on alleged manipulations in the ICMS random case distribution process. However, the Project plans to resume this activity starting January 21, 2020, once the SCM signaled its commitment to collaborate on this matter. In the meantime, the Project will continue to develop monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts and present them to the SCM and ACA/MOJ.

During the reporting period, the Open Justice presented to the SCM representatives its Work Plan for the second extension, including actions, referring to monitoring of the ICMS’s functionalities, sensitive to manipulation. In addition, Open Justice included in its MEL Plan nine ICMS actions/functionalities, to be monitored monthly, and presented them to USAID and partners.

Furthermore, Open Justice contracted the company Omega Trust to conduct an external security audit of the ICMS. The audit was requested by the Project’s stakeholders. The audit is planned for early 2020 and based on its findings and recommendations, the Project will assist the ACA to refine the system. Overall, this activity will ensure that the system’s vulnerabilities are identified, including those referring to ICMS manipulation, and are fully addressed prior to the final handover of the ICMS after Project’s activity ends in June 2020.

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.3.3. Number of 0 n/a n/a 51 51 Mandatory Electronic (of them, 41 Statistical Reports reports are generated by pilot specific for courts via ICMS district courts)

Unit: Numeric /a /a 49 39 (of them, 29 reports are specific for district courts)

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

COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project 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 both levels of courts. Mandatory Electronic Statistical Reports refers to specific sets of ICMS statistical reports’ templates, filled in with data by pilot courts’ staff, and electronically generated via ICMS. To date, with the Open Justice’s assistance, the pilot courts were able to generate 80 statistical reports, of them 41 statistical reports are specific for district courts, 29 reports are specific for appellate courts, and 10 more statistical reports are general reports, for both level of courts. Moreover, Open Justice developed 42 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice. Open Justice will pilot these different sets of statistical reports, throughout January - March 2020, in three pilot courts of both levels, according to the SCM’s decision No. 419/3, approved on December 10, 2019.

On November 28, 2019, Open Justice took part in a meeting with the ICMS Working Group. During the meeting, Open Justice representatives informed the members of the Working Group about the planned transition to electronic statistical reporting (instead of paper-based) starting March 2020.

During the reporting period, Open Justice also drafted an action plan on implementation of the Electronic Statistics implementation, which provides capacity building for court leadership and key staff on how to correctly introduce data to generate correct electronic statistical reports, and how to interpret statistical data. The training sessions are planned for 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.4.1. Number of 0 2 4 n/a 4 public-facing 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.

The Business Process Analysis for the new ICMS provides that the ICMS will incorporate 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

Page 21 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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 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 practices3, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.4.2. Number of e- 0 1 3 n/a 8 governance systems/services

3 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 22 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 integrated with 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 provides a brief review of the Project’s results.

During fiscal year 2018, Open Justice assisted the MOJ establish the Working Group on the interoperability of the new ICMS with other e-governance systems. The architecture of the new ICMS is meant 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.

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. Throughout 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

Page 23 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.1.1. Ratio of judicial 3.7% <3% <2% <6% 6.2% cases backlogged to 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.

By December 31, 2019, the ACA/MOJ made available to the Project only the statistical data for the January–September, 2019. Thus, according to latest available data provided by the MOJ/ACA, the total number of pending cases throughout January 1 - September 30, 2019 is 47,904 cases, of which 2,972 (6,2%) cases were backlogged cases pending more than 24 and 36 months (including civil, penal and contravention cases). The actual value of this indicator, measured during this quarter, negatively exceeds by 2.5 percentage points its established baseline and is higher than the final target value of less than 6%.

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).

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

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.

Result 2.2: Oversight over judicial performance institutionalized Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.2.1. Percentage of 23% 13 100% 100% 17 developed performance vs. management standards 11 applied developed versus 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.

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

Open Justice 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 the user guide on the Performance Dashboard, that contribute 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.

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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.2.2. Increase of 20% >40% >70% 25% 0% reasoned, 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 November – December 2017, Open Justice conducted a workshop and a training which were dedicated, inter alia, to improving the quality of reasoning in SCM decisions on judicial appointments. Also, in January 2018, Open Justice sent to the SCM the final Assessment Report on Selection and Evaluation of Judges that expressly stressed the need to improve the quality of reasoning, and efforts that are required to improve selection and evaluation processes in the SCM.

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

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. Further to the above, the Project developed Guidelines for SCM Members on Preparing Well-Reasoned Decisions on the Selection of Judges, which was presented to the SCM in March 2019. The Guide was designed to help the SCM improve the transparency of the process of judicial selection and promotion.

Based on the developed Guidelines and the newly approved regulatory framework, the Project also adjusted its monitoring and assessment methodology for measuring the quality of reasoning of the SCM decisions.

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, which was published in late September 2019. The Project concluded that out of eight main recommendations made in the Guidelines for SCM Members, two required better substantiation, namely the distribution of 20 statutory points attributed to the Plenum of the SCM and the rationale behind the final voting of judicial candidates. Regarding the distribution of the 20 points, the SCM used a standardized wording for every appointment, such as “(…) 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 (…)” to motivate their decision. As to the final voting, the SCM asserted the exclusive right of the SCM members to not be bound by the substantiation requirement.

Thus, since none of the judicial appointments mentioned in the SCM decision incorporated all eight recommendations included in the Guidelines for SCM Members developed by the Project, we consider the current value of this indicator represents a 0% increase.

Further, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020)

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

2.3.1. Increase public 22% n/a >5% n/a 19% confidence of judicial (general public) effectiveness 26% Unit: Percentage (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 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.

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

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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.3.2. Number of 0 2,000 5,000 55,000 48,129 citizens 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 activities and cross-cutting issues. So far, from the Project’s start, a total of 48,129 persons have been informed via different information material and activities. Of those, 21,453 people were informed via the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, 24,293 people via social media channels, and 2,383 people via various public outreach events.

During the Quarter 1 of the calendar year 2020, Open Justice informed 2,006 persons via all means of communication with the public. Of these 2,006 persons, 1,225 persons visited the Project’s webpage, 592 persons engaged on Open Justice’s social media channels (303 persons on Facebook and 289 persons on Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and Vkontakte, combined), and 189 persons attended the public outreach events with the Open Justice Project’s participation. In terms of public events, during the October – December 2019, Open Justice co-participated in three public events, organized in partnership with important state institutions and group initiatives. The first event was organized on October 25, 2019 in partnership with the Comrat Court of Appeal on the occasion of the European Day of Civil Justice. The event was attended by 88 persons - high school and law students, and their teachers. The participants learnt about the new functionalities and benefits of the ICMS and how the Moldovan courts work.

At the second public event, organized on December 12, 2019, at Moldova State University on the occasion of the International Day of Human Rights, Open Justice Project’s Team explained how the new ICMS would improve citizens’ access to justice. The event was attended by 79 persons – law students and professors, IT experts and relevant authorities’ representatives.

The third event with Open Justice participation refers to the information round table, organized by the community of young lawyers “Action for Justice” and carried out on December 20, 2019, focused on the benefits of the new E-Systems used by the Moldovan judiciary. This event was attended by 22 participants.

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

Between October 1 - December, 31, 2019, Open Justice produced and published, on the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, one interview and two articles about the benefits of the new ICMS and the upgraded Courts’ Web Portal, both for court personnel and litigants. The most popular material published was an interview with a litigant, who described his experience during a labor dispute and mentioned, in this regard, the contribution of both the U.S. and the new ICMS in enhancing the transparency of the Moldovan judicial system. The interview was published on the Project’s thematic webpage and was read 809 times.

The second most read piece was the Success Story about the benefits of the new ICMS, which contains also a testimonial from a court employee who noted a significantly improved efficiency of all judicial processes due to the new system’s numerous functionalities. The published Success Story was viewed a total of 368 times (237 times on the Project’s thematic webpage and 131 times on the Project’s social media pages).

The third most popular piece published by Open Justice was an article that informed the thematic webpage visitors that the Project had completed the implementation of the new ICMS in all national courts. The article was read a total of 321 times (179 times on the Project’s thematic webpage and 142 times on the Project’s social media pages).

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

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

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 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.3.4. Proportion of 0 100% 100% n/a 100% SCM 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 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 broadcast 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020)

Page 31 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

2.3.5. Number of pilot 0 1 2 n/a 6 courts 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 during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information briefly reviews the Project’s results.

Open Justice Project supported the SCM and ACA/MOJ to enhance 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. For this purpose, in January 2018, Open Justice completed the installation of 21 sets of videoconferencing equipment, comprising 40 TV screens, 20 computers, and 80 video cameras, in all Moldovan courts and the SCM. The videoconferencing equipment also contributed to facilitating the court reorganization reform by improving communication between the courts and the SCM, which has been a major challenge within the court reorganization process.

At the Project’s request, the SCM adopted Decision No. 829/36 dated December 12, 2017 designating two courts, the Soroca District Court and the Balti Appellate Court, as pilot courts for testing and launching the videoconferencing system. The piloting of the video recording system for court hearings took place from April 2018 through May 2018.

Based on the analysis of the collected data, the Open Justice Project prepared a report for the SCM and ACA/ MOJ. In October 2018, Open Justice met with representatives of the SCM and ACA/MOJ to present the report on the use of the videoconferencing equipment for video recording of court hearings in the Balti Appellate Court and Soroca District Court. The report contained conclusions and recommendations about the use of the video recording of trials in the Moldovan courts in the future.

During the fiscal year 2018, Open Justice facilitated 14 videoconferences organized in the piloting courts, the Balti Court of Appeal and Soroca District Court, as well as in the Chisinau, Comrat, and Cahul Courts of Appeal. Open Justice also assisted the NPA to fulfill all technical requirements necessary to interconnect the selected pilot penitentiaries to the pilot courts and helped with testing the connection in August 2018. During 2019, NPA endowed all 17 prisons with videoconferencing equipment.

Open Justice assisted the ACA/MOJ, NPA and SCM to draft the Regulation on piloting a videoconferencing system for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings. The SCM approved the Regulation on October 2, 2018. After a highly positive evaluation of the initial piloting, the ACA/MOJ and the SCM developed a draft Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries,

(http://www.justice.gov.md/public/files/publication/Regulament_teleconferinta.pdf), in order to expand the use of the videoconferencing equipment in courts and penitentiaries across the country. The Regulation includes provisions related to management and use of the system, technical rules for

Page 32 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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. In July 2019, the SCM approved the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries, and extended the use of the videoconferencing system to all national courts.

As a result of all these joint efforts, overall, during the fiscal year 2019, a total of 611 courts’ hearings were organized by six courts (Orhei District Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Edinet District Court) with penitentiaries using the videoconferencing equipment. The use of the videoconferencing solution for inmates across the country resulted in significant cost savings and will help avoid trial delays and postponements resulting from the need to transport inmates to remote, secondary court locations.

Note: The Project was not be 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. Thus, Open Justice will not implement any activities related to this Indicator during Project Year 3.

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.3.6. Number of 0 97,000 689,000 n/a 740,824 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)

Unit: Number

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

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, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.4.1. Proportion of 0 Female panel Female panel Female panel Female panel female panel speakers speakers speakers speakers speakers and female general – 15% – 25% – 15% -11% participants in Project

Page 34 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 program-assisted Female Female Female Female activities, initiatives, participants participants participants participants and events – 45% – 55% – 80% -75%

Unit: Percentage 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 4,087 participating specialists at various events, including working groups, trainings and public events, 3, 047 (75%) were female participants and 345 (11%) were women who played a central or important role as experts/moderators/ interveners/facilitators.

During October – December 2019, Open Justice Project participated in three public outreach events, as following:

1. October 25, 2019 – Public event dedicated to European Day of Civil Justice at Comrat Court of Appeal. The event was attended by 88 persons, of which 38 were male participants, and 50 – female. 2. December 12, 2019 - Public event dedicated to International Day of Human Rights at Moldova State University. The event was attended by 79 persons, of which 36 were male participants, and 43 – female. 3. December 20, 2019 – Roundtable dedicated to the new e-systems used by courts, organized by the community of young lawyers “Action for Justice”. The event was attended by 22 persons, of which 14 were male participants, and 8 – female.

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

Page 35 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) Increase in the score 0.33 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.34 for court management

Unit: Number (Scores) COMMENT: Open Justice established the value for this indicator based on an external evaluation source, namely the 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 activities. As a result, Open Justice identified four relevant WJP factors that it will monitor during the life of the Project. 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, published in February 2019, Moldova’s overall score is 0.49 points, which is identical to the overall score for 2016 and 2018.

(https://worldjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/documents/WJP_RuleofLawIndex_2019_Website_ reduced.pdf)

As the Project measures only the four specific factors mentioned above (see Performance Indicator Reference Sheet2), our calculated value for this indicator—comprised of (an average of) these four

2 WJP’s Rule of Law Index reports presents 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 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:

Page 36 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 factors that the Project is tracking—differs from the country’s overall value of 0.49. Compared to 2018, the value of the four indicators that the Project is monitoring decreased from 0.35 in February 2018 to 0.34 in February 2019. According to the WJP’s latest report, the actual value of this indicator is 0.34, and thus it is below the Year 2 project target of 0.35 points, by 0.01 decimal point. It is expected that the next WJP’s report will be published in February 2020, when new data will be available.

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 Open Justice cannot, given its narrow scope and the short time period of the contract, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Program 2019 (May 14, Target Target Actual 2018) (May 14, (June 30, 2019) 2020) 1.1. 1. Number of 37 8 12 40 37 approved and implemented amendments, regulations, court rules, and instructions developed with Open Justice Project support Unit: Number COMMENT: Throughout the period covering May 15, 2017- May 14, 2019, Open Justice assisted the SCM, ACA, MOJ and courts to draft and approve a total of 37 regulations, decisions and legislative acts.

Thus, by December 31, 2019, Open Justice assisted the SCM, courts and ACA/MOJ to develop and approve the following regulations and decisions: 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

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

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 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 Ditrict Courts, and Balti and Chisinau Courts of Appeal, and Supreme Court of Justice.

During Quarter 1of fiscal year 2020, covering October 1-December 31,2019, Open Justice developed the draft Regulation for the use of the Imperva monitoring solution of the ICMS (Imperva monitoring system/databases). The Imperva solution is embedded with security, monitoring and audit functionalities, able to help the ACA to identify, investigate and document possible manipulations of ICMS data. During the next reporting period, the draft Regulation has to be adapted to the technical features provided by vendor and consulted with ACA and SCM. During the previous reporting period, Open Justice submitted to the SCM draft amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting. In August 2019, the ACA/MOJ provided the SCM with the full list of updated reports to be integrated into the Instruction. In December 2019, the Project submitted a letter to the SCM to highlight the importance of adopting the amendments to the Instruction on Electronic Statistical Reporting prior to the implementation of electronic statistical reporting in pilot courts in the first quarter of 2020.

During the current reporting period, the Project received from SCM a letter requesting assistance in several aspects, including drafting amendments to the SCM’s Instruction on electronic statistical reporting, in order to facilitate the transition toward paperless statistical reporting in courts. In addition, the SCM asked for support in modifying /completing the Regulation on keeping processual evidence and documentation in district and appellate courts; and to modify and complete the Regulation on random distribution in courts, in order to correspond to the enhancement of the new ICMS version.

Page 38 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

During the next reporting period, the Project will provide all the support required by the SCM to adopt the modified instructions. 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.1.2. Number of 17 n/a n/a 19* 18 central premises of the courts using the 6 n/a n/a 19* 9 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). Unit: Number COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. Prior to this, with the Project’s assistance, in July 2019, the SCM and MOJ developed and approved the Regulation on the use of teleconferencing in penitentiaries and courts, and extended the use of the videoconferencing system from the pilot to all 20 national courts, endowed with teleconferencing equipment-comprising special devices, such as computer screens, microphones and headsets to allow inmates to participate in court proceedings remotely. The piloting of the teleconferencing 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). In addition, during the fiscal year 2019, the Chisinau, Comrat Courts of Appeal and the Edinet District Court started to use the teleconferencing system for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings.

As a result of all these joint efforts, overall, during the fiscal year 2019, a total of 611 court hearings were organized by six courts (Orhei District Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Edinet District Court) with penitentiaries using the videoconferencing equipment.

In December 2019, the Project developed and sent a questionnaire to all national courts to gather data on trials conducted via the videoconferencing system and to assess further training needs of

Page 39 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 court staff on the use of the system. According to data made available by courts, throughout October – December 2019, courts and penitentiaries continued to use the videoconferencing system and carried out a total of 536 hearings with the remote trial participation of inmates. During the reporting period, out of 19 Central premises of the courts, 18 courts had fully functional videoconferencing system and only six courts used the videoconferencing system to conduct video hearings.

On January 31, 2020, Open Justice will organize a roundtable with the representatives of the courts and penitentiary institutions to discuss the results of the questionnaires on the use of the videoconferencing solution in hearings with the remote participation of inmates. The received feedback, both from the penitentiaries and courts, will help the Project to identify problematic areas and prioritize its future tasks in this field. The event will also enable the ACA/MOJ to assess whether and how many videoconferencing systems need to be purchased for the courts’ secondary premises, in addition to the 20 systems purchased and installed by the Project in central premises of first-tier courts, appellate courts and the Supreme Court of Justice.

To evaluate further areas of improvement and extension of the use of IT solutions to accelerate CRO, Open Justice also researched and identified a series of best international practices on the use of videoconferencing solution in criminal cases.

*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 do not have jurisdiction to examine cases related to Articles 469, 4731, 4732 CPC. Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.1.3. Number of courts’ hearings with 598 n/a n/a 1,500 536 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). Unit: Number

COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. To date, the total number of courts’ hearings on matters described in Articles 469, 4731, 4732 of the CPC is not available in the ICMS database and may be counted by the courts and National Penitentiary Administration (NPA) staff only manually. Thus, at the Open Justice’s request, the Central premises of the courts informed that during the reporting period, the total number of court’s hearings held via

Page 40 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 videoconferencing and in-person was 965. Out of 965 court hearings – 536 court hearings were conducted via videoconferences with the participation of inmates.

According to latest data report provided by the NPA, it is noted that, during January 1-December, 31, 2019, an overall number of 2,136 courts’ hearings were conducted using the videoconferencing systems, with the participation of the inmates, between penitentiaries and courts.

The implementation of the videoconferencing system ensures remote participation of inmates in court hearings and is regulated by the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries, which was approved by SCM and MOJ on July 17, 2019, and which establishes the rights and obligations of the courts and the participants to organize and conduct video sessions, according to the requests submitted by inmate.

During the reporting period, Open Justice started collecting information from courts and penitentiaries on the use of the videoconferencing solution for remote trials with participation of inmates. In addition to developing and sending a questionnaire to all courts, Open Justice also developed a second questionnaire addressed to the heads of penitentiary institutions. The survey will take place between December 30, 2019 - January 17, 2020 and will aim at collecting feedback from the penitentiaries on the use of the videoconferencing system. The received feedback, both from the penitentiaries and courts, will help the Project to identify problematic areas and prioritize its future tasks in this field. This activity will help the Open Justice Project and the relevant stakeholders to develop an action plan to extend and institutionalize the use of the videoconferencing system in all national courts and penitentiaries. The video-conferencing system will provide significant cost savings and will help avoid delays and postponements resulting from the need to transport inmates to court locations. 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.2.1. Number of 20 n/a 15 n/a 20 courts utilizing overarching ICMS

Unit: Number COMMENT: The Open Justice worked on developing an overarching ICMS, which was implemented and is in use in all Moldovan courts, by the end of the first extension period of the Project’s implementation (September 30, 2019).

Starting July 8, 2019, to complete the gradual implementation of the ICMS, Open Justice launched the last phase of piloting of the new software in Chisinau Appellate Court circuit (consisting of 21

Page 41 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 locations). Thus, the overarching ICMS is used by all 20 Moldovan courts, including the Superior Court of Justice, and has replaced the CMS that the Moldovan courts used before 2019.

The Open Justice assistance will continue during the second extension period and will also focus on ensuring that the Government of Moldova can assume full authority and responsibility for properly operating, maintaining, ensuring data security and sustaining the new ICMS beyond the Project’s lifetime.

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.2.2 Number of new 0 n/a n/a 98 9 ICMS 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 will measure the courts’ progress in implementing the new ICMS, and additional functionalities developed by Open Justice during the second extension. New ICMS functionalities developed and implemented refers to additional features embedded in the ICMS at the request of courts and partners. Overall, by June 2020, the Project plans to implement 98 new ICMS functionalities, coordinated with Project’s stakeholders.

By the end of December 2019, in cooperation with the IT developer AlfaSoft, Open Justice managed to develop and test 19 functionalities and implement 9 new ICMS functionalities, requested by court users. The most significant changes refer to new processes provided for in the recently adopted Administrative Code. Other changes and refinements pertain to usability, search module and case distribution.

In addition to the new ICMS functionalities, Open Justice also worked on other elements pertaining to the ICMS. In order to upgrade the existing audio recording system for court hearings (SRS Femida) to decrease storage requirements, Open Justice contracted the company AlfaSoft. The development of the solution will commence in January 2020. It will be then integrated with the new ICMS on a dedicated Media Server. The solution will ensure that, when necessary, the higher courts and the E- File users have direct access to court hearing recordings, thus, contributing to more transparency of the court proceedings. Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020)

Page 42 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

1.2.3. Number of 0 200 1,200 4,500 3,898 justice sector personnel who received training with Open Justice Project support

Unit: Number COMMENT: Since the start of the Project, Open Justice trained a total of 3,898 persons on judicial reform issues in the subject areas in which the Project works. Of those, 2,946 (76%) were women and 952 (24%) were men.

During Quarter 1 of the fiscal year 2020, the Project has trained 127 persons, of those, 101 were women (80%) and 26 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 October-November, 2019, in cooperation with the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Open Justice Project delivered:

1) Three workshops on ICMS for judges and court personnel. The training focused on “How to correctly use various ICMS’s functionalities”, which is a basic condition to generate accurate and complete electronic statistic reports. The training events were attended by 79 participants, of them 60 (76%) women, and 19 (24%) -were men.

2) Open Justice organized on October 4, 2019, a workshop on “Collecting, analyzing and use of statistical data/electronic statistical reports” for 17 participants (15 women /88%, and 2 were men /12%). The workshop was attended by chiefs of secretariats, judicial assistants, chiefs of directorates and divisions, clerks, and specialists from the Procedural Tracking and Documentation Divisions (PTDDs).

3) On November 27, 2019, Open Justice trained 31 participants – court clerks and judicial assistants (of them 26 were women (83%) and 5 – men (17%)), on “Information security and ensuring the prerequisite, referring to protection of personal data”.

Page 43 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

Result 1.3: Case management data generated to streamline case flow and optimize court administration and management Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.3.1. Decrease in alleged manipulations of the random case assignment module

Units: numeric, percentage

Sub-Indicators: 1. Ratio of judges 159 <30% <20% <50% 77 blocked for a period (41%) (19%) of time to the total * the value number of judges was set during the 1st project month 2. Total number of 4,620 <80% <60% <30% 1,460 actions of using the (100%) (32%) option “incompatible * same as judges” above

3. Total number of 27,988 <80% <60% <5% 1,460 times judges saved as (100%) (5%) “incompatible” * same as above 4. Total number of 213 <95% <90% <60% 125 cases/actions saved as (100%) (59%) “examined by the * same as same judge/panel” above

5. Number of actions 4 n/a n/a <4 28 saved in ICMS as (100%) (700%) “Erroneous status of the claims /file”

Page 44 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

6. Number of actions 30 n/a n/a <30 30 saved in ICMS as (100%) “Reversed case distribution” 7. Number of actions 33 n/a n/a <33 70 saved in ICMS as (212%) ” Modification of the panel of judges”

8. Number of actions 28 n/a n/a <28 30 saved in ICMS as (107%) “Correction of the panel” 9. Number of actions 29 n/a n/a <29 25 saved as “Activation/ (86%) deactivation of judge”

COMMENT: Since November 2014, all Moldovan courts have been using the CMS automatic random case assignment module to distribute cases to judges. Since December 2014, the previous USAID rule of law project Rule of Law Institutional Strengthening Program (ROLISP) 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 developed 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 random distribution reports with the support of a junior staff attorney, seconded by Open Justice to the ACA/MOJ.

Starting with Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020, the random case assignment monthly reports include data from the pilot courts implementing the new ICMS. The reports include assessment of the trends in the ICMS random case assignment interventions by court representatives and recommendations for eliminating and preventing irregularities.

The new ICMS version is based on a more sophisticated case distribution mechanism because, 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 oversees them via five newly introduced sub-indicators: Number of actions saved in ICMS as “Erroneous status of the claims /file”, Number of actions saved

Page 45 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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”.

Compared to the baseline, the data obtained as a result of monitoring random case distribution during the Quarter 1 of Fiscal Year 2020 reveals fluctuations with decreases and increases in most of the sub-indicator values. Nevertheless, six sub-indicators values show a positive trend, while three other sub-indicators values are still over their expected final targets.

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. Indicator and target values must be analyzed in 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 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 CMS in certain courts.

To ensure the sustainability of this activity and to institutionalize the monitoring of the case random distribution via CMS/ICMS, Open Justice advocated for the secondment of a junior staff attorney from Open Justice to the JIB under the SCM. During the next reporting period, Open Justice will negotiate the terms of secondment and will draft a detailed 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.

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

Page 46 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

Information on ICMS alleged manipulations

Unit: Percentage COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project extension. 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. To achieve this results, Open Justice has planned to second, to the SCM one Project attorney, who would help and support the SCM’s JIB in investigating an alleged manipulation of the new ICMS.

Due to the recent political context that generated tensions within the judiciary, Open Justice postponed the secondment of a consultant to the Judicial Inspection Board (JIB) to assist the SCM and ACA in monitoring and following-up on alleged manipulations in the ICMS random case distribution process. However, the Project plans to resume this activity starting January 21, 2020, once the SCM signaled its commitment to collaborate on this matter. In the meantime, the Project will continue to develop monthly Monitoring Reports on Random Case Distribution in Moldovan Courts and present them to the SCM and ACA/MOJ.

During the reporting period, the Open Justice presented to the SCM representatives its Work Plan for the second extension, including actions, referring to monitoring of the ICMS’s functionalities, sensitive to manipulation. In addition, Open Justice included in its MEL Plan nine ICMS actions/functionalities, to be monitored monthly, and presented them to USAID and partners.

Furthermore, Open Justice contracted the company Omega Trust to conduct an external security audit of the ICMS. The audit was requested by the Project’s stakeholders. The audit is planned for early 2020 and based on its findings and recommendations, the Project will assist the ACA to refine the system. Overall, this activity will ensure that the system’s vulnerabilities are identified, including those referring to ICMS manipulation, and are fully addressed prior to the final handover of the ICMS after Project’s activity ends in June 2020.

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.3.3. Number of 0 n/a n/a 51 51 Mandatory Electronic (of them, 41 Statistical Reports reports are generated by pilot specific for courts via ICMS district courts)

Unit: Numeric /a /a 49 39 (of them, 29 reports are specific for district courts)

Page 47 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

COMMENT: Tracking this indicator started during the second Project 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 both levels of courts. Mandatory Electronic Statistical Reports refers to specific sets of ICMS statistical reports’ templates, filled in with data by pilot courts’ staff, and electronically generated via ICMS. To date, with the Open Justice’s assistance, the pilot courts were able to generate 80 statistical reports, of them 41 statistical reports are specific for district courts, 29 reports are specific for appellate courts, and 10 more statistical reports are general reports, for both level of courts. Moreover, Open Justice developed 42 statistical reports for the Supreme Court of Justice. Open Justice will pilot these different sets of statistical reports, throughout January - March 2020, in three pilot courts of both levels, according to the SCM’s decision No. 419/3, approved on December 10, 2019.

On November 28, 2019, Open Justice took part in a meeting with the ICMS Working Group. During the meeting, Open Justice representatives informed the members of the Working Group about the planned transition to electronic statistical reporting (instead of paper-based) starting March 2020.

During the reporting period, Open Justice also drafted an action plan on implementation of the Electronic Statistics implementation, which provides capacity building for court leadership and key staff on how to correctly introduce data to generate correct electronic statistical reports, and how to interpret statistical data. The training sessions are planned for 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.4.1. Number of 0 2 4 n/a 4 public-facing 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.

The Business Process Analysis for the new ICMS provides that the ICMS will incorporate 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

Page 48 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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 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 practices3, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 1.4.2. Number of e- 0 1 3 n/a 8 governance systems/services

3 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 49 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 integrated with 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 provides a brief review of the Project’s results.

During fiscal year 2018, Open Justice assisted the MOJ establish the Working Group on the interoperability of the new ICMS with other e-governance systems. The architecture of the new ICMS is meant 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.

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. Throughout 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

Page 50 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.1.1. Ratio of judicial 3.7% <3% <2% <6% 6.2% cases backlogged to 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.

By December 31, 2019, the ACA/MOJ made available to the Project only the statistical data for the January–September, 2019. Thus, according to latest available data provided by the MOJ/ACA, the total number of pending cases throughout January 1 - September 30, 2019 is 47,904 cases, of which 2,972 (6,2%) cases were backlogged cases pending more than 24 and 36 months (including civil, penal and contravention cases). The actual value of this indicator, measured during this quarter, negatively exceeds by 2.5 percentage points its established baseline and is higher than the final target value of less than 6%.

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).

Page 51 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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.

Result 2.2: Oversight over judicial performance institutionalized Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.2.1. Percentage of 23% 13 100% 100% 17 developed performance vs. management standards 11 applied developed versus 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.

Page 52 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

Open Justice 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 the user guide on the Performance Dashboard, that contribute 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.

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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.2.2. Increase of 20% >40% >70% 25% 0% reasoned, 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 November – December 2017, Open Justice conducted a workshop and a training which were dedicated, inter alia, to improving the quality of reasoning in SCM decisions on judicial appointments. Also, in January 2018, Open Justice sent to the SCM the final Assessment Report on Selection and Evaluation of Judges that expressly stressed the need to improve the quality of reasoning, and efforts that are required to improve selection and evaluation processes in the SCM.

Page 53 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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. Further to the above, the Project developed Guidelines for SCM Members on Preparing Well-Reasoned Decisions on the Selection of Judges, which was presented to the SCM in March 2019. The Guide was designed to help the SCM improve the transparency of the process of judicial selection and promotion.

Based on the developed Guidelines and the newly approved regulatory framework, the Project also adjusted its monitoring and assessment methodology for measuring the quality of reasoning of the SCM decisions.

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, which was published in late September 2019. The Project concluded that out of eight main recommendations made in the Guidelines for SCM Members, two required better substantiation, namely the distribution of 20 statutory points attributed to the Plenum of the SCM and the rationale behind the final voting of judicial candidates. Regarding the distribution of the 20 points, the SCM used a standardized wording for every appointment, such as “(…) 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 (…)” to motivate their decision. As to the final voting, the SCM asserted the exclusive right of the SCM members to not be bound by the substantiation requirement.

Thus, since none of the judicial appointments mentioned in the SCM decision incorporated all eight recommendations included in the Guidelines for SCM Members developed by the Project, we consider the current value of this indicator represents a 0% increase.

Further, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020)

Page 54 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

2.3.1. Increase public 22% n/a >5% n/a 19% confidence of judicial (general public) effectiveness 26% Unit: Percentage (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 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.

Page 55 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.3.2. Number of 0 2,000 5,000 55,000 48,129 citizens 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 activities and cross-cutting issues. So far, from the Project’s start, a total of 48,129 persons have been informed via different information material and activities. Of those, 21,453 people were informed via the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, 24,293 people via social media channels, and 2,383 people via various public outreach events.

During the Quarter 1 of the calendar year 2020, Open Justice informed 2,006 persons via all means of communication with the public. Of these 2,006 persons, 1,225 persons visited the Project’s webpage, 592 persons engaged on Open Justice’s social media channels (303 persons on Facebook and 289 persons on Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and Vkontakte, combined), and 189 persons attended the public outreach events with the Open Justice Project’s participation. In terms of public events, during the October – December 2019, Open Justice co-participated in three public events, organized in partnership with important state institutions and group initiatives. The first event was organized on October 25, 2019 in partnership with the Comrat Court of Appeal on the occasion of the European Day of Civil Justice. The event was attended by 88 persons - high school and law students, and their teachers. The participants learnt about the new functionalities and benefits of the ICMS and how the Moldovan courts work.

At the second public event, organized on December 12, 2019, at Moldova State University on the occasion of the International Day of Human Rights, Open Justice Project’s Team explained how the new ICMS would improve citizens’ access to justice. The event was attended by 79 persons – law students and professors, IT experts and relevant authorities’ representatives.

The third event with Open Justice participation refers to the information round table, organized by the community of young lawyers “Action for Justice” and carried out on December 20, 2019, focused on the benefits of the new E-Systems used by the Moldovan judiciary. This event was attended by 22 participants.

Page 56 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

Between October 1 - December, 31, 2019, Open Justice produced and published, on the thematic website www.justitietransparenta.md, one interview and two articles about the benefits of the new ICMS and the upgraded Courts’ Web Portal, both for court personnel and litigants. The most popular material published was an interview with a litigant, who described his experience during a labor dispute and mentioned, in this regard, the contribution of both the U.S. and the new ICMS in enhancing the transparency of the Moldovan judicial system. The interview was published on the Project’s thematic webpage and was read 809 times.

The second most read piece was the Success Story about the benefits of the new ICMS, which contains also a testimonial from a court employee who noted a significantly improved efficiency of all judicial processes due to the new system’s numerous functionalities. The published Success Story was viewed a total of 368 times (237 times on the Project’s thematic webpage and 131 times on the Project’s social media pages).

The third most popular piece published by Open Justice was an article that informed the thematic webpage visitors that the Project had completed the implementation of the new ICMS in all national courts. The article was read a total of 321 times (179 times on the Project’s thematic webpage and 142 times on the Project’s social media pages).

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

Page 57 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.3.4. Proportion of 0 100% 100% n/a 100% SCM 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 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 broadcast 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020)

Page 58 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

2.3.5. Number of pilot 0 1 2 n/a 6 courts 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 during the first extension of the Project implementation period. The following information briefly reviews the Project’s results.

Open Justice Project supported the SCM and ACA/MOJ to enhance 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. For this purpose, in January 2018, Open Justice completed the installation of 21 sets of videoconferencing equipment, comprising 40 TV screens, 20 computers, and 80 video cameras, in all Moldovan courts and the SCM. The videoconferencing equipment also contributed to facilitating the court reorganization reform by improving communication between the courts and the SCM, which has been a major challenge within the court reorganization process.

At the Project’s request, the SCM adopted Decision No. 829/36 dated December 12, 2017 designating two courts, the Soroca District Court and the Balti Appellate Court, as pilot courts for testing and launching the videoconferencing system. The piloting of the video recording system for court hearings took place from April 2018 through May 2018.

Based on the analysis of the collected data, the Open Justice Project prepared a report for the SCM and ACA/ MOJ. In October 2018, Open Justice met with representatives of the SCM and ACA/MOJ to present the report on the use of the videoconferencing equipment for video recording of court hearings in the Balti Appellate Court and Soroca District Court. The report contained conclusions and recommendations about the use of the video recording of trials in the Moldovan courts in the future.

During the fiscal year 2018, Open Justice facilitated 14 videoconferences organized in the piloting courts, the Balti Court of Appeal and Soroca District Court, as well as in the Chisinau, Comrat, and Cahul Courts of Appeal. Open Justice also assisted the NPA to fulfill all technical requirements necessary to interconnect the selected pilot penitentiaries to the pilot courts and helped with testing the connection in August 2018. During 2019, NPA endowed all 17 prisons with videoconferencing equipment.

Open Justice assisted the ACA/MOJ, NPA and SCM to draft the Regulation on piloting a videoconferencing system for the remote participation of inmates in court hearings. The SCM approved the Regulation on October 2, 2018. After a highly positive evaluation of the initial piloting, the ACA/MOJ and the SCM developed a draft Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries,

(http://www.justice.gov.md/public/files/publication/Regulament_teleconferinta.pdf), in order to expand the use of the videoconferencing equipment in courts and penitentiaries across the country. The Regulation includes provisions related to management and use of the system, technical rules for

Page 59 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 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. In July 2019, the SCM approved the Regulation on the Use of the Videoconferencing System in Court Hearings and Penitentiaries, and extended the use of the videoconferencing system to all national courts.

As a result of all these joint efforts, overall, during the fiscal year 2019, a total of 611 courts’ hearings were organized by six courts (Orhei District Court, Cahul District Court, Cahul Appellate Court, Chisinau Appellate Court, Comrat Appellate Court, Edinet District Court) with penitentiaries using the videoconferencing equipment. The use of the videoconferencing solution for inmates across the country resulted in significant cost savings and will help avoid trial delays and postponements resulting from the need to transport inmates to remote, secondary court locations.

Note: The Project was not be 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. Thus, Open Justice will not implement any activities related to this Indicator during Project Year 3.

Performance BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.3.6. Number of 0 97,000 689,000 n/a 740,824 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)

Unit: Number

Page 60 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020

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, 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 BL Project Year Project Year End of December 31, Indicator 1 Target 2 Target Program 2019 (May 14, (May 14, Target Actual 2018) 2019) (June 30, 2020) 2.4.1. Proportion of 0 Female panel Female panel Female panel Female panel female panel speakers speakers speakers speakers speakers and female general – 15% – 25% – 15% -11% participants in Project

Page 61 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project Moldova, MELP Report January 30, 2020 program-assisted Female Female Female Female activities, initiatives, participants participants participants participants and events – 45% – 55% – 80% -75%

Unit: Percentage 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 4,087 participating specialists at various events, including working groups, trainings and public events, 3, 047 (75%) were female participants and 345 (11%) were women who played a central or important role as experts/moderators/ interveners/facilitators.

During October – December 2019, Open Justice Project participated in three public outreach events, as following:

1. October 25, 2019 – Public event dedicated to European Day of Civil Justice at Comrat Court of Appeal. The event was attended by 88 persons, of which 38 were male participants, and 50 – female. 2. December 12, 2019 - Public event dedicated to International Day of Human Rights at Moldova State University. The event was attended by 79 persons, of which 36 were male participants, and 43 – female. 3. December 20, 2019 – Roundtable dedicated to the new e-systems used by courts, organized by the community of young lawyers “Action for Justice”. The event was attended by 22 persons, of which 14 were male participants, and 8 – female.

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

Page 62 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020

ANNEX II. QUARTERLY BUDGET ACCRUAL REPORT Open Justice Project in Moldova USAID AID-117-TO-17-00001 May 14, 2017 - December 31, 2019

BUDGET EXECUTION SECTION

Quarterly Report: July - December 2019

Invoiced as of Billed Expenditures Billed Expenditures Billed Expenditures Cummulative Line Item Contract Amount Balance September 30, 2019 October 2019 November 2019 December 2019 Expenditures

1 2 3 4 5 6=2+3+4+5 7=1-6 Salaries and Wages $ 1,287,670 $ 912,280.47 $ 39,794.22 $ 40,767.75 $ 45,014.37 $ 1,037,856.81 $ 249,813.19 Fringe Benefits 310,734 226,271.50 8,953.70 9,115.58 9,987.76 254,328.54 56,405.46 Travel and Per Diem 127,568 77,346.19 - - - 77,346.19 50,221.81 In-Country National, Third Country National 355,547 214,617.16 6,685.67 930.61 1,791.72 224,025.16 131,521.84 Consultants & International Consultants Equipment and Supplies 70,963 65,501.14 1,202.44 2,481.36 503.56 69,688.50 1,274.50 Communications 14,601 10,966.13 312.32 418.31 402.28 12,099.04 2,501.96 Subcontractors 3,901,119 2,595,215.76 150,239.46 31,377.25 21,823.94 2,798,656.41 1,102,462.59 Other Direct Costs 328,328 240,043.67 20,123.93 7,963.17 7,152.96 275,283.73 53,044.27 Program Costs ------

G&A 733,520 618,299.69 - - - 618,299.69 115,220.31 Subtotal Contract Cost 7,130,050 4,960,541.73 227,311.74 93,054.03 86,676.59 5,367,584.09 1,762,465.91 II. Fixed Fee 406,518 297,046.92 13,638.71 5,583.24 5,200.59 321,469.46 85,048.54 III. Total Cost Plus Fixed Fee $ 7,536,568 $ 5,257,588.65 $ 240,950.45 $ 98,637.27 $ 91,877.18 $ 5,689,053.55 $ 1,847,514.45 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Quarterly Report January 30, 2020

ANNEX III. PROJECT’S NEWSLETTER

NEWS BULLETIN October – December 2019

OPEN JUSTICE PILOTS THE ELECTRONIC STATISTICAL REPORTS IN THREE COURTS

At the Open Justice Project’s request, on December 10, 2019, the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) designated three pilot courts for testing the new Electronic Judicial Statistics Module (EJSM). The EJSM is a module connected to the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) that the Project developed. The EJSM will be pilot tested in the Cimislia District Court, the Comrat District Court and the Comrat Court of Appeal during January-March 2020.

The EJSM will generate 200 different standard court Graphical representation of a statistical report reports, as well as create customized statistical reports and conduct on-demand subject-matter queries. The Project will also continue to build the capacity of the courts, the SCM and ACA representatives to use the The EJSM will allow the SCM, the Agency for Court electronically-generated judicial statistical data from the Administration (ACA) and the courts to electronically ICMS to track and analyze court performance. In this generate complex statistical data that they can use to regard, Open Justice, in partnership with the National monitor and analyze court performance. The EJSM will Institute of Justice, will organize trainings for court help eliminate time-consuming paper-based statistical personnel during February-March 2020. reporting. By implementing the electronic statistical reporting in all By December 31, 2019, Open Justice has also developed Moldovan courts, Open Justice contributes to the the draft Regulation on the Use of the Electronic Judicial improvement of courts’ efficiency and accountability, and Statistics for the Courts, which it submitted to the SCM frees the courts from the onerous task of manually for review and approval. crunching numbers for the statistical quarterly reports.

160 COMPUTERS INTALLED IN 12 COURTS TO FACILITATE THE USE OF THE NEW ICMS The implementation of the new ICMS in all Moldovan courts was a complex effort that involved, inter alia, an upgrade of the IT infrastructure in the Moldovan courts. The need to install new computers was necessary as the old equipment did not have the IT hardware to support the operation of the new ICMS, which was a serious impediment to harnessing the advanced functionalities and benefits of the upgraded ICMS. Thus, during October – December 2019, in addition to the 400 computers previously installed in courts, the Open Justice Project purchased and installed an additional Court secretary using the new ICMS 160 computers in 12 courts. These were the Criuleni, Hincesti, Orhei, Straseni, Ungheni, Anenii Noi, Causeni, With the new computers from Open Justice, court staff Balti, Drochia, Edinet, Soroca and Cahul District Courts. can make better use of modern ICMS functionalities to Of note, the new computers were installed both in increase the efficiency and quality of court services being primary and secondary courthouse locations, comprising delivered to the people of Moldova. a total of 38 court offices.

AN UPDATED EFFICIENCY ACTION PLAN FOR THE SUPERIOR COUNCIL OF MAGISTRACY DEVELOPED

Open Justice Project developed and delivered an updated version of the Efficiency Action Plan (EAP) to the SCM. The document contains a list of proposed activities to be implemented from December 2019 to June 2020 which are aimed at improving existent practices in the field of judicial selection, evaluation and discipline.

In 2018, the Project developed and delivered to the SCM the initial EAP, which the SCM took into account when developing its Action Plan for 2019. The SCM already implemented many of the activiites from the initial EAP, Open Justice advocates for improvement of the SCM’s especially the ones related to amending judical selection practices on the judges’ career procedures and streamlining the judicial discipline analysis tool that automatically generates court mechanism. performance trends analysis. The upgraded EAP that the Project developed includes The upgraded EAP is structured into several sections: activities targeted to inform the public about the judicial proposed activities and sub-activities, responsible entities, discipline mechanism and how to lodge a complaint time frames, and expected outcomes. Open Justice will against a judge for misconduct in court. The updated EAP continue to provide assistance to the SCM with also contains actions aimed at increasing judicial implementing the upgraded EAP, which will enhance performance monitoring by relying more on the modern the capacity of the SCM to ensure more transparent and IT tools that Open Justice Project developed, such as the efficient procedures related to judicial careers, discipline, new Electronic Judicial Statistics Module from the new and performance. This, in turn, will improve public ICMS and the ICMS-incorporated Business Intelligence perception about the judiciary.

MONITORING OF THE QUALITY OF REASONING OF THE SCM’S DECISIONS ON JUDGES’ CAREER The Open Justice Project analyzed the quality of reasoning in the SCM’s decisions on judges’ career issued between July – December 2019. The Project developed a Monitoring Report that includes the main findings and provides recommendations for improvement. The report evaluates the compliance of the decisions with the recommendations made in the Guidelines for the SCM Members on Preparing Well-Reasoned Decisions on the Selection of Judges developed in March 2019 by the Project’s local consultant, Mr. Vladimir Grosu. The main conclusions of the monitoring activities are that the SCM followed the Guidelines in all areas except two. Open Justice supports implementation of judicial selection First, the guideline that the SCM should develop clear and promotion on transparent and merit-based criteria rules for distribution of 20 statutory points expressly Secondly, the Project found that the SCM failed to mandated by law to the Plenum of the SCM within the enhance the quality of the reasoning of its final decisions process of selection, promotion and transfer of judges on selection and appointment of judges by not providing was not followed. The SCM must assign 20 points (out of a justification based upon merits, and by relying too a maximum of 100) to a candidate during his/her bid for a heavily on opinion. judicial selection, promotion or transfer.The Project’s monitoring report concluded that in assigning these Implementing the recommendations from the Open points the SCM overly used its discretionary powers and Justice Monitoring Report will contribute to building the that a clear methodology was lacking to justify the points trust of civil society, journalists and the general public in awarded to each judicial candidate. the objectivity of the SCM’s judicial selection and evaluation process.

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 January 30, 2020

ANNEX IV. SUCCESS STORY

SUCCESS STORY

UPGRADED COURTS’ WEBSITES IMPROVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT THE JUDICIARY

Modernization of the Moldovan Public access to information about the activity of courts is courts’ websites has significantly paramount for bolstering public confidence in the judiciary and improved access to information providing parties to a case and their lawyers with the information about the judiciary for case they need to more successfully defend their rights and follow the parties, lawyers, journalists, and progress of their cases in court. the general public The USAID-funded Open Justice Project has significantly enhanced the transparency of the Moldovan judiciary by

redesigning and modernizing the websites of the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM), the Agency for the Courts Administration (ACA), the Courts’ Web Portal, and the individual webpages of all Moldovan district and appellate courts.

A plethora of information about the structure of the Moldovan judiciary and governing legislation, courts’ territorial and subject- matter competencies, model acts that individuals can use to file lawsuits, jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights on cases filed against Moldova, and real-time information about Photo: Open Justice Project OpenJustice Photo: each court’s performance against key performance indicators are A screenshot of the updated all now available on the upgraded court webpages and can be Courts’ Web Portal accessed via the single entry point provided by the Courts’ Web Portal. In addition, 100% of all SCM meetings for the last six months are placed on the SCM website for the public to view. From the ACA website, the Random Case Distribution Reports via the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) can be accessed and downloaded. This information can be used by law enforcement bodies and mass-media to investigate suspicious activity and perceived manipulation of the random case distribution in courts. The individual courts’ webpages draw on information from the database of the ICMS, to which they are connected, and publish The new interface of the Chisinau Court of comprehensive information about filed lawsuits, status of cases Appeal’s webpage under examination, scheduled trials, summons, and court

decisions and rulings.

U.S. Agency for International Development January 2020 www.usaid.gov

This makes the activity of the courts fully transparent, with the information is available online to anyone who has Internet connection — from anywhere in the world.

Upgraded websites incorporate feedback collected from stakeholders The need to modernize the websites of the SCM, the ACA, and the Moldovan courts was triggered by the deficiencies reported by lawyers, civil society, and media institutions and their recommendations for the necessary improvements.

In 2017–2018, Open Justice conducted extensive public The modernized version of the SCM’s consultations with a variety of stakeholders — including website journalists, civil society, lawyers, judges, business association representatives, and court goers. Open Justice used the collected feedback and the received recommendations to upgrade the judiciary websites.

User-friendly interfaces and advanced features

The new court webpages have intuitive interfaces and advanced features, so browsing is much faster and easier. Due to the new features, the information from the websites is also accessible to visually and hearing challenged users. Users can now change the The new features enabling to access the font size and adjust the contrast or color saturation. The text hearings agenda, court rulings and synthesizer reads the information on the webpages out loud. decisions, summonses, etc. Thus, the Open Justice Project has facilitated access for people with sensory disabilities to the information about the judiciary, facilitating their social inclusion. Radu Cotorobai, an intern lawyer in a law firm in Chisinau, who is writing his doctoral thesis on court automation in Moldova, stated: “The improvements of the courts’ webpages are noticeable, and are also expected, mainly as a result of their interconnection with the new version of the ICMS. We are talking, first of all, about a higher level of transparency of the judicial activity. And this is because, now, we can check online the status of a case examination and the court trial schedule, without having to visit or call the courts to receive The additional features this information. Especially for the litigants, the respective procedure for visually impaired users involved extra costs and travel time, and for the court staff - additional work.”

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

ANNEX V. PROJECT DELIVERABLES

OBJECTIVE 1 1. Report on the Training Activities on the Use of the New 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 October 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 3. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during November 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 4. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during December 2019 (Activity 1.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension)

OBJECTIVE 2 5. Updated Efficiency Action Plan (EAP) for the SCM and Its Subordinated Bodies (Activity 2.2.2.1 & Activity 2.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) 6. Monitoring Report on the Quality of Reasoning of the SCM's Decisions on the Selection and Career of Judges for the Period from July 2019 to December 2019 (Activity 2.2.3.3 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) (Note: This report is being updated with new information and will be submitted with the next quarterly report on April 30, 2020.)

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

OBJECTIVE 1

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

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

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

December 31, 2019

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.

REPORT ON THE 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 December 31, 2019

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, Report on Training Activities for ICMS 5.0 December 31, 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ...... 1 Methods ...... 1 Dates ...... 1 Participants ...... 2 Speakers/Trainers ...... 2 Report...... 3 Report on the Training Activities on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS 5.0)...... 3 Final Conclusions ...... 4 Annex 1. Agenda ...... 5 Annex 2. Brief Guide on the Use of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) ...... 8 Annex 3. Photos ...... 10

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 December 31, 2019 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. This report describes the training activities carried out as part of the Open Justice Project’s efforts to develop court employees’ capacity to handle cases through the new Integrated Case Management System (ICMS Version 5.0).

Throughout October-November 2019, the Open Justice Project delivered a total of 4 trainings on the use of the ICMS, Version 5.0. for 96 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 trainings took place at the National Institute of Justice, outfitted for computer-based practical exercises. During the trainings, the participants received detailed information about the functionalities added to the new Version 5.0 of the ICMS.

The Open Justice Project’s representative Mihai Grosu and the NIJ’s trainer Tatiana Ciaglic 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 the new version of the ICMS.

DATES

Open Justice organized the trainings on the following dates:

• Day 1, October 3, 2019 • Day 2, October 4, 2019 • Day 3, November 6, 2019 • Day 4, November 7, 2019

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 December 31, 2019

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 96 participants were trained, 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 October 3, 1. 1 0 6 11 7 241 2019 October 4, 2. 1 0 2 1 14 172 2019 November 6, 3. 1 3 11 5 5 243 2019 November 7, 4. 1 12 5 8 6 314 2019 TOTAL: 15 24 25 32 96

1 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Chisinau Court of Appeals, Ungheni District Court, Cahul Court of Appeals, Comrat Court of Appeals, Comrat District Court, Straseni District Court, Supreme Court of Justice, Chisinau District Court, Balti District Court, Soroca District Court, Balti Court of Appeals.

2 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Criuleni District Court, Soroca District Court, Chisinau Court of Appeals, Comrat District Court, Hincesti District Court, Straseni District Court, Orhei District Court, Balti Court of Appeals, Ungheni District Court, Cahul Court of Appeals, Supreme Court of Justice, Balti District Court, Anenii Noi District Court.

3 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Drochia District Court, Balti District Court, Comrat District Court, Chisinau District Court, Chisinau Court of Appeals, Orhei District Court, Cahul Court of Appeals, Straseni District Court.

4 The participants of the training were from the following courts: Balti District Court, Ungheni District Court, Cahul District Court, Comrat District Court, Chisinau Court of Appeals, Chisinau District Court, Causeni District Court, Balti District Court, Orhei District Court.

SPEAKERS/TRAINERS

• 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, the training materials and photos from the trainings are attached as Annexes 1-3 to this report.

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 December 31, 2019

REPORT

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

The 4 trainings held at the National Institute of Justice were developed by Open Justice to present Version 5.0 of the ICMS, which is a modern, complex system that replaced the Case Management System (CMS). The trainings were tailored to the beneficiaries needs and presented detailed information about changes introduced through the new functionalities of the software.

The trainings focused on the following main topics:

• General description of the ICMS, 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 new ICMS includes all functionalities contained in the Version 4.1.4 of the CMS. Additionally, the new ICMS includes the following essential functionalities and improvements:

• ICMS is built on a modern technological platform; • ICMS includes logical flows for examination of each casefile; • The system is integrated with modern government e-services (M-Pass, M-Sign, M-Notify, M- Log, M-Pay); • ICMS has an increased security level; • The system is integrated with the M-Connect Government Interoperability Platform; • The system is integrated with the E-File Module, which will allow case parties and lawyers to electronically submit procedural documents to courts and to observe the progress of the court proceedings.

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 December 31, 2019

The trainers used Power Point presentations and handed out the User Guide about Version 5.0 of the ICMS.

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

• The system improves the judiciary’s administration, increases transparency and public access to justice; • The ICMS automates the current manual work in courts; • The software removes duplication of data and facilitates the work of the 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 the data sharing between various institutions of the judiciary; • The system automates the secretarial work in courts.

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

FINAL CONCLUSIONS

Following the organization of 4 trainings on the use of the new 5.0 version of the ICMS between October-November 2019, the participants will be able to examine more efficiently the cases registered in the courts.

The participants (judges, judicial assistants, secretaries) asked for more trainings in the future both within the National Institute of Justice and in the central and secondary offices of the courts. They also asked that the users be assisted by trainers while inserting real data in the ICMS in order to offer answers on the use of certain ICMS functionalities used by different user categories.

The participants showed a keen interest in the ICMS modules intended for the automatic transmission of judicial acts via e-mail to the participants of the trial, integration of the ICMS with other state information systems (State Population Register, State Register of Legal Entities), the possibility to electronically sign judicial acts, the possibility to automatically retrieve data from the system in the form of 180 statistical reports, and the possibility to assess the performance of the judges based on the performance indicators available in the system.

The participants were encouraged to share the knowledge acquired at the trainings with their colleagues. At the end of the trainings, the beneficiaries asked for additional trainings in the courts after completion of the piloting period of the new ICMS.

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 December 31, 2019 ANNEX 1. AGENDA

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

AGENDA FOR ALL GROUPS OF TRAINEES

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

Organizer: Open Justice Project

Participants: Courts staff

09:00 – 10:30 General description of the ICMS and of its functionalities

General rules of system operation: • Logs, menus, search engine, users’ roles, court case, case number, connection to files from the same pending case in a different court. Search engine within the system sections: • Court proceedings initiation • Casefiles • Lists

Archiving Module: • Applications to court • Case files

DISTRICT COURT

Actions to start the proceedings: • Civil proceedings: o Filing a law suit (general data, incompatible judges, participants, court fees and payments, documents, measures to secure the court action, case assignment). o Case registration • Penal proceedings: claims registration/ bill of indictment. • Contravention proceedings. Minutes record / record of the appeals.

Practical tasks performed in a simulated environment in ICMS Q & A session

10:30 – 10:45 Coffee Break

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 December 31, 2019

10:45 – 12:15 DISTRICT COURT

How to start a court action: • Special court procedures: o Insolvency cases o Retrial cases o Review of the case file Casefiles: • Casefiles documents (civil, penal and contravention cases): General Data, Trial participants, Documents, Measures to secure the action, Payments, Summary of the case, Court sessions, Judicial documents, Statistical Fiche. • Audit: Case distribution, Judicial incompatibility, Judge’s team, Status of the file, Actions, Notifications. • Procedural actions: o Court remedies (Case registration and case transmission to the hierarchically superior court) o Other actions (Recusal of judges/ abstention of judges, conflict of jurisdiction, case transfer)

Practical tasks performed in a simulated environment in ICMS Q & A session

12:15 – 13:15 Lunch

13:15 – 14:45 APPEAL COURT

How to start a court action: • Special court procedures: o Insolvency cases o Retrial cases o Review of the case file Casefiles: • Casefiles documents (civil, penal and contravention cases): General Data, Trial participants, Documents, Measures to secure the action, Payments, Summary of the case, Court sessions, Judicial documents, Statistical Fiche. • Audit: Case distribution, Judicial incompatibility, Judge’s team, Status of the file, Actions, Notifications. • Procedural actions: o Court remedies (Case registration and case transmission to the hierarchically superior court) o Other actions (Recusal of judges/ abstention of judges, conflict of jurisdiction, case transfer)

Practical tasks performed in a simulated environment in ICMS Q & A session

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 December 31, 2019

14:45 – 15:00 Coffee Break

15:00 – 16:45 Lists: • Cases: Claims to court, Casefile examined by a district court, Casefile examined by the appellate court, Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Justice, Casefile examined by the Supreme Court of Justice • Recusal of judges/ abstention of judges: Requests, case files.

Anonymization of court decisions and publishing: • Requests (Court orders) • Files (Court decisions and orders)

Specific actions of courts: • Planning court sessions • Generate the list of court sessions • Generate the standardized court letters • Generate summons • Registration of court hearings in the SRS Femida • Generate minutes of the court sessions

Practical tasks performed in a simulated environment in ICMS Q & A session

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 December 31, 2019

ANNEX 2. BRIEF GUIDE ON THE USE OF THE INTEGRATED CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ICMS)

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 December 31, 2019

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 December 31, 2019 ANNEX 3. PHOTOS

October 3, 2019 – Training at the National Institute of Justice

November 6, 2019 - Training at the National Institute of Justice

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

2. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during October 2019 (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 OCTOBER 1–31, 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

October 31, 2019

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.

1

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF OCTOBER 1–31, 2019

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

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, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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-first monitoring report on random case distribution covering the period of October 1-31, 2019. 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, October 2019 October 31, 2019

MONITORING OF RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION

The random assignment of cases by means of the ICMS during the period of October 1-31, 2019, has the following percentage distribution:

• 93.34 % of the total number of incoming cases were automatically randomly distributed one time • 5.90 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed twice • 0.64 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed three times • 0.12 % 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, Soroca Court, Orhei Court, Edinet Court, Balti Court, Straseni Court). Table 1. Blocked judges Number of Total number of ICMS user who instances when No. Court active judges in performed the judges were October, 2019 action blocked 1 Chisinau Court 119 34 ICMS Manager 2 Soroca Court 7 11 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, October 2019 October 31, 2019

3 Orhei Court 18 5 ICMS Manager 4 Edinet Court 14 4 ICMS Manager 5 Balti Court 24 4 ICMS Manager 6 Straseni Court 12 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, October 2019 October 31, 2019

Table 2. Blocked judges

Chisinau Court Soroca Court Orhei Court Edineț Court Balti Court Straseni Court

Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges were blocked – 34 were blocked – 11 were blocked – 5 were blocked - 4 were blocked - 4 were blocked - 4 • Alexandru Arhip - • Cristina Botnaru - • Alina Balan - • Aurelia • Hristina Craveț - • Iana Talmaci - (blocked 2 times) (blocked 3 times) (blocked once) Andronache - (blocked once) (blocked 2 times) • Angela Braga- • Ghenadie Tocaiuc • Eugeniu (blocked once) • Igor Mozgovoi - • Igor Chirosa - (blocked 2 times) - (blocked 2 times) Ciubotaru - • Elena (blocked once) (blocked once) • Igor Bațalai - • Petru Cocitov - (blocked once) Tverdohleb - • Ion Popescu- • Silvia Slobodzean- (blocked 2 times) (blocked 2 times) • Gheorghe Popa - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Mihai Murguleţ - • Ghenadie Mîțu - (blocked once) • Aurelia • Svetlana Bubuioc - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) • Vasile Stihi - Procopişina- (blocked once) • Petru Harmaniuc- • Ghenadie Purici - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) • Veaceslav • Natalia Bobu - • Ana Cucerescu - • Marcela Nicorici - Caragia - (blocked (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) once) • Andrei Ojoga- • Vadim Belous- (blocked once) (blocked once) • Angela Catană - (blocked once) • Angela Ciubotaru - (blocked once) • Cristina Cheptea - (blocked once) • Denis Guzun - (blocked once) • Elena Cojocari - (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, October 2019 October 31, 2019

• Ina Dutca- (blocked once) • Irina Paduraru - (blocked once) • Livia Mitrofan- (blocked once) • Nadejda Mazur - (blocked once) • Natalia Lupașcu - (blocked once) • Nicolae Şova - (blocked once) • NINA Arabadji - (blocked once) • Renata Popescu- Balta - (blocked once) • Roman Mazureț - (blocked once) • Serghei Papuha - (blocked once) • Sergiu Bularu - (blocked once) • Sergiu Ciobanu - (blocked once) • Sergiu Stratan - (blocked once) • Svetlana Garştea- Bria - (blocked once) • Tudor Stambol - (blocked once)

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

• Veniamin Chihai - (blocked once) • Zinaida Talpalaru - (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” (Supreme Court of Justice, Chisinau Court of Appeal, Chisinau Court, Cahul Court of Appeal, Balti Court of Appeal 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 Total Instances of using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS number of active Total number of Total number of No. Court ICMS users who performed the judges in instances when the judges marked as actions/ No. actions October option was used “disqualified” 2019 • Tatiana Bradu – 163 • Olga Trufanova – 84 • Iulia Corbu – 74 • Parascovia Vutcariova – 23 1 Supreme Court of Justice 21 432 • Valentina Martînenco – 22 432 • Ala Sîrbu – 21 • Vera Ioniță - 13 • Zinaida Dioguta – 9 • Gheorghe Cuțitaru – 8 Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

• Tatiana Mîrzenco – 7 • Marina Șișcovschi – 4 • Ludmila Batîr – 2 • Cristina Salagor – 1 • Dorin Casapu - 1 • Nadejda Ceban – 123 • Mariana Rusu – 94 • Ala Bolfa – 48 • Irina Șumleanschi – 40 • Dian Cușnir – 37 • Aurelia Bumbu – 22 2 Chisinau Court of Appeal 45 423 423 • Ruslana Reuleț – 20 • Ludmila Calalb – 18 • Zinaida Nuța -14 • Vadim Hariton – 3 • Vitalie Goraș – 3 • Irina Joltoianu -1 • Ana Chistol – 101 • Ana Nicolaev – 36 • Ana Pîslari – 29 3 Chisinau Court 119 181 181 • Nadejda Damaschin – 12 • Ana Gumennii – 2 • Natalia Oprea - 1 • Silvia Lazăr – 84 • Tamara Pintilei – 40 4 Cahul Court of Appeal 9 148 148 • Lidia Bercaru – 18 • Adela Jurca – 6 • Rodica Clapco – 40 5 Balti Court of Appeal 22 125 • Inga Zaharcu - 39 125 • Mariana Șveț – 15

Page 9 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

• Elena Chefu - 6 • Natalia Snatinschi – 6 • Victoria Guțu - 6 • Marina Tilipeț – 5 • Natalia Solcan – 3 • Virginia Banu - 3 • Vitalina Cristal - 2 • Tatiana Odnostalco - 12 6 Comrat Court of Appeal 5 23 • Anna Topal - 9 23 • Olga Gorelco - 2

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 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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 October 1-31, 2019, reveals the following: • Chisinau Court - 432 claims • Orhei Court - 44 claims • Balti Court - 16 claims • Criuleni Court - 7 claims • Balti Court of Appeal - 42 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 38 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 36 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 October 1-31, 2019, the data on ICMS users who are judges was changed in the following courts:

• Causeni Court 3 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Maria Tertea – editing once • Veronica Nichitenco – editing once • Mihail Țurcan – editing once • Orhei Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Alina Balan – 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 October 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Balti Court - 2 claims • Comrat Court - 10 cases • Ungheni Court - 4 cases

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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 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 October 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court - 3 claims • Chisinau Court - 18 cases • Balti Court - 5 cases

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 October 1-31 2019 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 23 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 3 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 2 cases

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 October 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 12 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 13 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 2 cases • Cahul Court of Appeal - 2 cases

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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 October 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 52 actions • Edinet Court - 35 action • Orhei Court - 29 actions • Comrat Court of Appeal - 28 actions • Cimislia Court - 23 actions • Hincesti Court - 9 actions • Straseni Court - 9 actions • Anenii Noi Court - 7 actions • Ungheni Court - 5 actions

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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

October September August July 2019 June 2019 May 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 1 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 Court Soroca 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 Court

Orhei 3 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 Court

Edinet 4 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 Court

Balti 5 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 Court

Straseni 6 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 Court

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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

100 96

90 87

80

70

60 60

50

40 34 29 30

20 16 15 13 14 11 11 12 9 8 8 8 10 6 6 6 7 7 7 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 3 2 3 0 0 Chisinau Court Soroca Court Orhei Court Edinet Court Balti Court Straseni Court October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May-19

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

Annex 3. Blocked judges during the period of November 2018 – October 2019 (12 months) October September August March February January December November July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018 2018

No. Court

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

Chisinau 1 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 122 14 124 11 123 24 118 25 117 31 121 28 Court Soroca 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 8 1 8 1 8 0 8 4 9 3 9 1 Court Orhei 3 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 4 17 4 17 3 Court Edinet 4 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 15 2 15 0 16 2 16 0 15 1 15 0 Court Balti 5 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 23 4 23 1 23 0 23 1 22 1 24 2 Court Straseni 6 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 12 1 12 0 12 3 12 3 12 0 13 3 Court Anenii 7 Noi 6 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 6 3 7 3 7 1 7 0 7 1 7 2 8 0 8 1 Court Ungheni 8 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 10 2 10 0 10 2 10 0 12 3 12 3 11 6 Court Cahul 9 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 10 8 10 7 10 7 10 0 10 1 10 0 11 0 Court Criuleni 10 6 3 6 3 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 1 7 1 7 1 8 0 8 1 8 1 Court Chisinau 11 Court of 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 54 9 48 4 49 1 49 0 42 2 49 3 49 2 50 2 Appeal Drochia 12 11 3 10 5 8 2 11 9 11 2 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 10 2 10 1 10 0 Court

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018 2018

No. Court

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

Hancesti 13 12 3 11 8 9 7 13 8 14 5 14 2 14 0 15 1 15 0 15 0 15 1 15 6 Court Cimislia 14 9 2 9 3 9 6 8 3 10 2 8 2 8 1 9 1 10 0 9 1 8 0 8 0 Court Causeni 15 6 2 6 3 7 5 6 0 8 2 8 2 7 1 8 0 7 0 7 1 7 2 7 0 Court Comrat 16 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 5 1 5 1 5 3 5 2 5 2 5 0 6 2 Court Comrat 17 Court of 5 2 5 4 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 6 1 Appeal Balti 18 Court of 22 0 22 0 22 0 23 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 3 Appeal Cahul 19 Court of 9 0 9 4 5 0 6 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 1 9 0 9 0 9 1 Appeal Supreme 20 Court of 21 0 22 1 23 0 29 0 27 1 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 26 0 Justice

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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

October September August July 2019 June 2019 May 2019

2019 2019 2019

No. Court judges

number of number

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

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

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

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

marking the judges judges marking the judges marking the 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 Supreme 1 Court of 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 Justice Chisinau 2 Court of 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 Appeal Chisinau 3 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 Court Cahul 4 Court of 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 Appeal Balti Court 5 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 of Appeal Comrat 6 Court of 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 Appeal

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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

1600 1475

1400

1200 1085

1000 885

800

603 600 545 483 432 443 423 442 400 358 250 318 252 181 202 185 200 148 170 160 163 138 115 125 123 109 103 34 48 26 27 27 0 23 19 18 0 Supreme Court of Justice Chisinau Court of Appeal Chisinau Court Cahul Court of Appeal Balti Court of Appeal Comrat Court of Appeal

October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May-19

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

Annex 6. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the period November 2018 – October 2019 (12 months) October September August March February January December November July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018 2018

N ctions Court

o.

“ disqualified” “ disqualified”

tances of marking the tances 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 actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of a Total 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 Ins 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 as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Supreme 1 Court of 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 122 498 95 357 96 427 81 388 79 404 84 591 Justice Chisinau 2 Court of 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 333 1366 342 1265 342 1200 395 1394 334 1266 340 1232 Appeal Chisinau 3 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 162 934 130 607 656 6703 280 2368 491 3171 500 2969 Court Cahul 4 Court of 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 189 189 76 135 38 176 34 133 4 4 25 95 Appeal Balti Court 5 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 91 144 49 163 72 306 94 361 72 254 74 280 of Appeal Comrat 6 Court of 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 19 19 14 14 29 29 19 32 8 18 20 41 Appeal Hancesti 7 15 15 3 3 3 3 14 14 19 40 5 20 14 39 18 33 17 31 30 53 34 44 24 34 Court Drochia 8 11 11 7 7 8 8 7 7 12 12 17 17 117 136 65 80 6 9 6 6 15 16 22 24 Court Orhei 9 10 10 4 4 7 7 14 14 37 44 43 55 39 54 35 37 28 33 29 32 25 33 37 50 Court Cahul 10 10 10 4 4 0 0 3 3 2 2 5 5 4 4 17 30 19 89 5 5 4 4 5 14 Court Soroca 11 9 9 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 8 13 13 6 6 8 8 6 6 4 4 4 5 14 19 Court 12 Balti Court 7 7 0 0 10 10 5 5 11 11 8 8 10 35 13 23 2 7 0 0 1 6 1 3 Page 20 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, October 2019 October 31, 2019

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

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018 2018

N ctions Court

o.

“ disqualified” “ disqualified”

tances of marking the tances 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 actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of actionsTotal number of a Total 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 Ins 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 as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as judges as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Cimislia 13 7 7 3 3 1 1 5 5 0 0 9 9 7 7 2 2 4 4 6 6 9 14 13 23 Court Criuleni 14 4 4 3 3 5 5 62 62 196 197 82 90 108 110 10 10 10 12 6 7 11 11 9 10 Court Straseni 15 4 4 1 1 2 2 59 74 324 360 186 244 216 240 13 37 13 27 31 108 8 16 7 6 Court Ungheni 16 4 4 2 2 0 0 12 12 18 20 11 15 15 23 10 14 17 34 10 10 9 20 27 33 Court Comrat 17 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 42 42 4 4 3 3 7 7 2 5 39 23 11 23 Court Causeni 18 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 17 17 16 23 24 25 24 25 15 15 11 12 16 20 15 18 Court Edinet 19 1 1 1 1 3 3 9 9 2 2 5 5 126 135 83 117 61 83 68 82 58 69 82 102 Court Anenii Noi 20 0 0 2 2 1 1 11 11 12 12 26 55 17 32 5 8 6 6 13 15 3 5 6 6 Court

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

3. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during November 2019 (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 NOVEMBER 1–30, 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

November 30, 2019

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.

1

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 1–30, 2019

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

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, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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-second monitoring report on random case distribution covering the period of November 1-30, 2019. 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, November 2019 November 30, 2019

MONITORING OF RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION

The random assignment of cases by means of the ICMS during the period of November 1-30, 2019, has the following percentage distribution:

• 91.34 % of the total number of incoming cases were automatically randomly distributed one time • 7.32 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed twice • 1.19 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed three times • 0.16 % 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 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 the ICMS, shows the courts with the most frequent instances of blocking judges (Chisinau Court, Ungheni Court, Orhei Court, Comrat Court, Cahul Court). Table 1. Blocked judges Number of Total number of ICMS user who instances when No. Court active judges in performed the judges were November, 2019 action blocked 1 Chisinau Court 125 32 ICMS Manager 2 Ungheni Court 8 7 ICMS Manager 3 Orhei Court 19 4 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, November 2019 November 30, 2019

4 Comrat Court 4 4 ICMS Manager 5 Cahul Court 9 3 ICMS Manager

The 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, November 2019 November 30, 2019

Table 2. Blocked judges

Chisinau Court Ungheni Court Orhei Court Comrat Court Cahul 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 – 32 were blocked – 7 were blocked – 4 were blocked - 4 were blocked - 3 • Serghei Papuha - • Vasile Şchiopu - • Eugeniu Ciubotaru • Alexandra Peni - • Inga Gorlenco - (blocked 3 times) (blocked 4 times) - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Angela Braga - • Dumitru Racoviță - • Mihail Proca - • Igor Botezatu - • Dumitru Bosîi - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Georgeta Grozav - • Mihai Ulinici - • Viorica Severin - • Ion Cojocari - • Leonid Turculet - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Irina Paduraru - • Valentina Stratulat - • Nadejda Lazareva - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Mihai Murguleţ - (blocked 2 times) • Serghei Lazari - (blocked 2 times) • Veniamin Chihai - (blocked 2 times) • Alexandru Arhip - (blocked once) • Andrei Niculcea - (blocked once) • Angela Catană - (blocked once) • Constantin Roșca - (blocked once) • Diana Tricolici - (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, November 2019 November 30, 2019

• Djeta Chistol - (blocked once) • Maria Alexei - (blocked once) • Maria Muruianu - (blocked once) • Nadejda Mazur - (blocked once) • Natalia Mămăligă - (blocked once) • Octavian Dvornic - (blocked once) • Petru Harmaniuc - (blocked once) • Sergiu Ciobanu - (blocked once) • Tudor Stambol - (blocked once) • Veaceslav Nicula - (blocked once) • Victor Sandu - (blocked once) • Vladislav Holban - (blocked once)

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

Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

“Disqualified” Judges

The data analysis on the actions of ”Disqualified judges”, saved in ICMS shows the courts with the most frequent instances of “Disqualified Judges” (Chisinau Court of Appeal, Comrat Court, Supreme Court of Justice, Chisinau Court, Cahul Court of Appeal and Balti 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 Total Instances of using the option “Disqualified Judges” in the ICMS number of active Total number of Total number of No. Court ICMS users who performed the judges in instances when the judges marked as actions/ No. actions November option was used “disqualified” 2019 • Ludmila Calalb - 110 • Mariana Rusu - 101 • Nadejda Ceban - 85 • Irina Şumleanschi - 74 • Ala Bolfa - 22 1 Chisinau Court of Appeal 44 424 • Diana Cușnir - 14 424 • Aurelia Bumbu - 7 • Irina Joltoianu - 4 • Ruslana Reuleţ - 3 • Sergiu Budeci - 2 • Zinaida Nuța - 2 • Liudmila Ivanciuc - 202 • Liubovi Demerji - 79 2 Comrat Court 4 333 • Babaian Evghenia - 44 333 • Oxana Ratcova - 5 • Natalia Topal - 3 3 Supreme Court of Justice 21 315 • Tatiana Bradu - 117 315

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

• Olga Trufanova - 77 • Iulia Corbu - 41 • Parascovia Vutcariova - 26 • Tatiana Mîrzenco - 18 • Valentina Martînenco - 13 • Marina Şişcovschi - 9 • Vera Ioniţă - 9 • Gheorghe Cuţitaru - 4 • Ala Sîrbu - 1 • Ana Nicolaev - 84 • Ana Pîslari - 50 • Natalia Oprea - 17 4 Chisinau Court 125 169 169 • Nadejda Damaschin - 7 • Svetlana Sîrbu - 6 • Ana Chistol - 5 • Silvia Lazăr - 72 • Tamara Pintilei- 37 5 Cahul Court of Appeal 9 132 • Lidia Bercaru - 15 132 • Adela Jurca - 6 • Maria Daud - 2 • Mariana Șveț - 27 • Inga Zaharcu - 22 • Rodica Clapco - 18 • Elena Răileanu - 17 6 Balti Court of Appeal 22 109 • Victoria Guțu - 9 109 • Natalia Solcan - 7 • Natalia Snatinschi - 6 • Vitalina Cristal - 2 • Virginia Banu - 1

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, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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 November 1-30, 2019, reveals the following: • Chisinau Court - 467 claims • Orhei Court - 23 claims • Balti Court - 7 claims • Criuleni Court - 6 claims • Balti Court of Appeal - 42 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 35 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 21 cases • Chisinau Court - 14 cases • Balti Court - 7 cases • Hâncești Court - 7 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 November 1-30, 2019, the data on ICMS users who are judges was changed in the following courts:

• Anenii Noi Court 2 actions for the option „Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”. • Ghenadie Mîra – editing twice • Chisinau Court of Appeal 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”. • Iulia Cimpoi – editing once • Chisinau Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”. Georgeta Grozav – editing once • Comrat Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”. Alexandra Peni – editing once • Drochia Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”. Valeriu Ghedreuţan – editing once • Straseni Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”. Diana Cristian – editing once

Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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 November 1-30, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court - 6 claims • Balti Court - 2 claims • Cimislia Court - 2 claims • Chisinau Court - 6 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 2 cases • Cimislia Court - 2 case • Hancesti Court - 2 cases.

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 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 November 1-30, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court - 6 claims • Supreme Court of Justice - 73 cases • Comrat Court - 13 cases • Chisinau Court - 10 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 3 cases • Orhei Court - 2 cases

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 November 1-30 2019 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 86 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 3 cases

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

• Cahul Court of Appeal - 2 cases

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 of 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 November 1-30, 2019 is as follows:

• Balti Court of Appeal - 21 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 7 cases • Cahul 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 November 1-30, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 52 actions • Edinet Court - 29 actions • Comrat Court - 15 actions • Causeni Court - 9 actions • Cimislia Court - 9 actions • Orhei Court - 9 actions • Straseni Court - 5 actions • Supreme Court of Justice - 2 actions • Comrat Court of Appeal - 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, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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

November October September August July 2019 June 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 1 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 Court Ungheni 2 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 Court

Orhei 3 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 Court

Comrat 4 4 4 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 Court

Cahul 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 Court

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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

100 96

87

80

60 60

40 34 32 29

20 16 15 13 9 7 8 8 5 5 6 5 6 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 1 2 1 0 Chisinau Court Ungheni Court Orhei Court Comrat Court Cahul Court

November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

Annex 3. Blocked judges during the period of December 2018 – November 2019 (12 months) November October September August March February January December July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018

No. Court

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

Chisinau 1 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 122 14 124 11 123 24 118 25 117 31 Court Ungheni 2 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 10 2 10 0 10 2 10 0 12 3 12 3 Court Orhei 3 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 4 17 4 Court Comrat 4 4 4 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 5 1 5 1 5 3 5 2 5 2 5 0 Court Cahul 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 10 8 10 7 10 7 10 0 10 1 10 0 Court Criuleni 6 7 2 6 3 6 3 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 1 7 1 7 1 8 0 8 1 Court Straseni 7 11 2 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 12 1 12 0 12 3 12 3 12 0 Court Soroca 8 7 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 8 1 8 1 8 0 8 4 9 3 Court Comrat 9 Court of 5 2 5 2 5 4 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 Appeal Chisinau 10 Court of 44 1 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 54 9 48 4 49 1 49 0 42 2 49 3 49 2 Appeal Anenii 11 Noi 6 1 6 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 6 3 7 3 7 1 7 0 7 1 7 2 8 0 Court Balti 12 24 1 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 23 4 23 1 23 0 23 1 22 1 Court

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018

No. Court

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

Supreme 13 Court of 21 1 21 0 22 1 23 0 29 0 27 1 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 Justice Edinet 14 14 0 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 15 2 15 0 16 2 16 0 15 1 Court Drochia 15 11 0 11 3 10 5 8 2 11 9 11 2 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 10 2 10 1 Court Cimislia 16 8 0 9 2 9 3 9 6 8 3 10 2 8 2 8 1 9 1 10 0 9 1 8 0 Court Causeni 17 6 0 6 2 6 3 7 5 6 0 8 2 8 2 7 1 8 0 7 0 7 1 7 2 Court Hancesti 18 12 0 12 3 11 8 9 7 13 8 14 5 14 2 14 0 15 1 15 0 15 0 15 1 Court Balti 19 Court of 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 23 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 Appeal Cahul 20 Court of 9 0 9 0 9 4 5 0 6 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 1 9 0 9 0 Appeal

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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

November October September August July 2019 June 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019

of of

No. Court

lified”

"Disqualified "Disqualified

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

Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances 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 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 Appeal Comrat 2 333 333 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 Court Supreme 3 Court of 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 Justice Chisinau 4 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 Court Cahul 5 Court of 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 Appeal Balti Court 6 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 of Appeal

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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

1200

1085

1000

885

800

545 603 600

483 424 423442 432 400 358 333 315 250 202 181 185 200 169 170 160 163 138 132 148 109 115 109 125 123 48 20 34 3 3 13 8 0 0 Chisinau Court of Appeal Comrat Court Supreme Court of Justice Chisinau Court Cahul Court of Appeal Balti Court of Appeal

November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

Annex 6. Judges marked as “disqualified” in the period December 2018 – November 2019 (12 months) November October September August March February January December July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018

lified” N actions Court

o.

“ disqualified”

"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 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 as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqua as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Chisinau 1 Court of 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 333 1366 342 1265 342 1200 395 1394 334 1266 Appeal Comrat 2 333 333 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 42 42 4 4 3 3 7 7 2 5 39 23 Court Supreme 3 Court of 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 122 498 95 357 96 427 81 388 79 404 Justice Chisinau 4 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 162 934 130 607 656 6703 280 2368 491 3171 Court Cahul 5 Court of 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 189 189 76 135 38 176 34 133 4 4 Appeal Balti Court 6 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 91 144 49 163 72 306 94 361 72 254 of Appeal Hancesti 7 20 20 15 15 3 3 3 3 14 14 19 40 5 20 14 39 18 33 17 31 30 53 34 44 Court Comrat 8 Court of 18 18 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 19 19 14 14 29 29 19 32 8 18 Appeal Drochia 9 18 18 11 11 7 7 8 8 7 7 12 12 17 17 117 136 65 80 6 9 6 6 15 16 Court Orhei 10 17 17 10 10 4 4 7 7 14 14 37 44 43 55 39 54 35 37 28 33 29 32 25 33 Court Cahul 11 9 9 10 10 4 4 0 0 3 3 2 2 5 5 4 4 17 30 19 89 5 5 4 4 Court

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, November 2019 November 30, 2019

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

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2018

lified” N actions Court

o.

“ disqualified”

"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 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 as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqua as “judges disqualified” as “judges disqualified” Soroca 12 8 8 9 9 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 8 13 13 6 6 8 8 6 6 4 4 4 5 Court Straseni 13 5 5 4 4 1 1 2 2 59 74 324 360 186 244 216 240 13 37 13 27 31 108 8 16 Court Cimislia 14 3 3 7 7 3 3 1 1 5 5 0 0 9 9 7 7 2 2 4 4 6 6 9 14 Court 15 Balti Court 2 2 7 7 0 0 10 10 5 5 11 11 8 8 10 35 13 23 2 7 0 0 1 6 Causeni 16 2 2 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 17 17 16 23 24 25 24 25 15 15 11 12 16 20 Court Criuleni 17 2 2 4 4 3 3 5 5 62 62 196 197 82 90 108 110 10 10 10 12 6 7 11 11 Court Edinet 18 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 9 9 2 2 5 5 126 135 83 117 61 83 68 82 58 69 Court Anenii Noi 19 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 11 11 12 12 26 55 17 32 5 8 6 6 13 15 3 5 Court Ungheni 20 1 1 4 4 2 2 0 0 12 12 18 20 11 15 15 23 10 14 17 34 10 10 9 20 Court

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

4. Report on Automatic Random Distribution of Cases in Moldovan Courts during December 2019 (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 DECEMBER 1–31, 2019

USAID’S OPEN JUSTICE PROJECT IN MOLDOVA

December 31, 2019

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.

1

REPORT ON THE AUTOMATIC RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION IN MOLDOVAN COURTS FOR THE PERIOD OF DECEMBER 1–31, 2019

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

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, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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-third monitoring report on random case distribution covering the period of December 1-31, 2019. 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, December 2019 December 31, 2019

MONITORING OF RANDOM CASE DISTRIBUTION

The random assignment of cases by means of the ICMS during the period of December 1-31, 2019, has the following percentage distribution:

• 91.32 % of the total number of incoming cases were automatically randomly distributed one time • 7.86 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed twice • 0.65 % of cases were automatically randomly distributed three times • 0.17 % 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, Chisinau Court of Appeal, Orhei Court, Straseni Court, Cahul Court, Balti Court). Table 1. Blocked judges Number of Total number of ICMS user who instances when No. Court active judges in performed the judges were December, 2019 action blocked 1 Chisinau Court 129 29 ICMS Manager Chisinau Court of 2 45 14 ICMS Manager Appeal

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, December 2019 December 31, 2019

3 Orhei Court 21 6 ICMS Manager 4 Straseni Court 13 6 ICMS Manager 5 Cahul Court 14 5 ICMS Manager 6 Balti Court 28 5 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, December 2019 December 31, 2019

Table 2. Blocked judges Chisinau Court of Chisinau Court Orhei Court Straseni Court Cahul Court Balti Court Appeal Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of Total number of instances when judges instances when judges instances when judges instances when instances when instances when judges were blocked – 29 were blocked – 14 were blocked – 6 judges were blocked - judges were blocked - were blocked - 5 6 5 • Angela Vasilenco - • Domnica Manole - • Vasile Stihi - • Ala Ucraințeva - • Aliona Sârbu - • Adrian Cerbu - (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked 2 times) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Alexandru Mardari • Elena Cobzac - • Igor Negreanu - • Elena Lupan - • Andrei Mironov - • Dumitru - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) Gherasim - • Alexei Paniș - • Galina Moscalciuc • Ludmila Tetiu - • Iana Talmaci - • Marina Curtiș - (blocked once) (blocked once) - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Ion Ghizdari - • Constantin Roșca - • Gheorghe Iovu - • Steliana Lazari - • Mihaela Grosu - • Mihail Buşuleac - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Oxana Mironov - • Dorin Munteanu - • Iulia Cimpoi - • Viorica Severin - • Sergiu Osoianu - • Svetlana Caitaz - (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) (blocked once) • Viorel Pușcaș - • Ecaterina Silivestru • Liuba Pruteanu - • Silvia Slobodzean (blocked once) - (blocked once) (blocked once) - (blocked once) • Elena Cojocari - • Liubovi Brînza - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Galina Ciobanu - • Ludmila Ouș - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Georgeta Grozav - • Maria Moraru - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Gheorghe Balan - • Nina Vascan - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Grigorii Cazacu - • Sergiu Arnaut - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Ina Dutca - (blocked • Ștefan Niță - once) (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, December 2019 December 31, 2019

• Ion Chirtoaca - • Svetlana Balmuș - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Irina Țonov - • Valeriu Efros - (blocked once) (blocked once) • Maria Alexei - (blocked once) • Maria Tertea - (blocked once) • Nadejda Mazur - (blocked once) • Nina Arabadji - (blocked once) • Olga Bejenari - (blocked once) • Serghei Lazari - (blocked once) • Sergiu Daguța - (blocked once) • Sergiu Suvac - (blocked once) • Tatiana Avasiloaie - (blocked once) • Tudor Stambol - (blocked 2 times) • Veniamin Chihai - (blocked once) • Victoria Hadîrca - (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. Page 7 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

“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, Chisinau Court, Cahul Court of Appeal and Balti 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 December 2019 the actions/ No. actions option was used “disqualified” • Ludmila Calalb - 166 • Mariana Rusu - 78 • Nadejda Ceban - 53 • Irina Şumleanschi - 47 Chisinau Court of 1 45 411 • Ala Bolfa - 28 411 Appeal • Aurelia Bumbu - 18 • Diana Cușnir - 11 • Ruslana Reuleţ - 6 • Sergiu Budeci - 4 • Tatiana Bradu - 134 • Olga Trufanova - 60 • Parascovia Vutcariova - 44 • Iulia Corbu - 27 Supreme Court of 2 20 375 • Marina Şişcovschi - 25 375 Justice • Valentina Martînenco - 25 • Vera Ioniţă - 22 • Tatiana Mîrzenco - 21 • Ala Sîrbu - 16

Page 8 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

• Constantin Chilian - 1 • Natalia Oprea - 93 • Ana Nicolaev - 67 • Ana Pîslari - 17 • Svetlana Sîrbu - 15 3 Chisinau Court 129 204 • Natalia Petriman - 5 204 • Nadejda Damaschin - 4 • Agafia Ohrim - 1 • Liliana Ranciuc - 1 • Svetlana Rudei - 1 • Silvia Lazăr - 74 Cahul Court of • Tamara Pintilei – 61 4 9 150 150 Appeal • Adela Jurca - 9 • Lidia Bercaru - 6 • Inga Zaharcu - 46 • Natalia Solcan - 28 • Rodica Clapco - 18 • Victoria Guțu - 13 5 Balti Court of Appeal 24 149 • Mariana Șveț - 11 149 • Virginia Banu - 11 • Natalia Snatinschi - 10 • Vitalina Cristal - 9 • Elena Răileanu - 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, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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 December 1-31, 2019, reveals the following: • Chisinau Court - 529 claims • Orhei Court - 20 claims • Balti Court - 8 claims • Criuleni Court - 8 claims • Supreme Court of Justice - 35 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 29 cases • Balti Court of Appeal - 29 cases • Chisinau Court - 8 cases • Balti Court - 6 cases • Criuleni 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 December 1-31, 2019, the data on ICMS users who are judges was changed in the following courts:

• Chisinau Court 9 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Elisaveta Buzu – editing 5 times • Alina Gorceac – editing twice • Dorin Munteanu – editing once • Gheorghe Balan – editing once • Soroca Court 4 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Dinu Braşoveanu – editing 4 times • Chisinau Court of Appeal 2 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Ina Dutca – editing once • Elena Cojocari – editing once • Comrat Court of Appeal 2 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Andrei Mironov – editing twice • Cahul Court 2 actions for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Andrei Mironov – editing twice • Anenii Noi Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: Page 10 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

• Olga Fiodorov – editing once • Causeni Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Aliona Postu – editing once • Criuleni Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Boris Talpă – editing once • Hancesti Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Viorica Alexeeva – editing once • Straseni Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Elena Lupan – editing once • Ungheni Court 1 action for the option “Change of the Judge, Active/Not active”: • Constantin Chilian – 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 December 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 1 claim • Chisinau Court - 1 claim • Causeni Court - 1 claim • Criuleni Court - 1 claim • Drochia Court - 1 claim • Straseni Court - 1 claim • Chisinau Court - 4 cases • Balti Court - 2 cases • Causeni Court - 2 cases • Cahul Court - 1 case • Criuleni Court - 1 case • Drochia Court - 1 case • Ungheni 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

Page 11 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

Judge Rapporteur that have been undertaken in the courts between December 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court - 1 claim • Drochia Court - 1 claim • Comrat Court - 13 cases • Edinet Court - 4 cases • Chisinau Court - 5 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 3 cases • Cahul Court - 1 case • Drochia Court - 1 case • Hancesti 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 December 1-31 2019 is as follows:

• Supreme Court of Justice - 67 cases • Chisinau Court of Appeal - 1 case • Cahul Court of Appeal - 1 case • Comrat 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 December 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Balti Court of Appeal - 24 cases • Supreme Court of Justice - 4 cases • Chisinau 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,

Page 12 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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 December 1-31, 2019 is as follows:

• Chisinau Court of Appeal - 45 actions • Comrat Court of Appeal - 19 actions • Orhei Court - 18 actions • Edinet Court - 17 actions • Balti Court of Appeal - 6 actions • Supreme Court of Justice - 5 actions • Soroca Court - 3 actions • Anenii Noi Court - 2 actions • Causeni Court - 2 actions • Cimislia Court - 2 actions • Hancesti Court - 2 actions • Straseni Court - 2 actions • Comrat Court - 1 action

Page 13 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

December November October September August July 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

No. Court

judges

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 active

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

Chisinau 1 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 Court Chisinau 2 Court of 45 14 44 1 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 Appeal Orhei 3 21 6 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 Court

Straseni 4 13 6 11 2 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 Court

Cahul 5 14 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 Court

Balti 6 28 5 24 1 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 Court

Page 14 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

100 96

87

80

60 60

40 34 32 29

20 16 15 14 13 14 11 12 8 8 9 6 6 5 6 5 6 5 5 5 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 1 2 1 0 Chisinau Court Chisinau Court of Appeal Orhei Court Straseni Court Cahul Court Balti Court

December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019

Page 15 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

2019 2019 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 1 129 29 125 32 119 34 105 60 96 96 112 87 128 29 122 9 122 14 124 11 123 24 118 25 Court Chisinau 2 Court of 45 14 44 1 45 3 47 6 46 6 47 5 54 9 48 4 49 1 49 0 42 2 49 3 Appeal Orhei 3 21 6 19 4 18 5 17 13 16 16 17 15 18 8 18 4 18 1 18 1 18 1 18 4 Court Straseni 4 13 6 11 2 12 4 11 8 9 4 11 8 12 4 12 3 12 1 12 0 12 3 12 3 Court Cahul 5 14 5 9 3 10 3 9 3 9 9 9 5 15 6 10 8 10 7 10 7 10 0 10 1 Court Balti 6 28 5 24 1 24 4 22 11 19 12 26 14 25 7 23 2 23 4 23 1 23 0 23 1 Court Criuleni 7 9 3 7 2 6 3 6 3 7 5 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 1 7 1 7 1 8 0 Court Soroca 8 10 2 7 2 7 11 9 4 7 4 5 6 8 6 8 0 8 1 8 1 8 0 8 4 Court Comrat 9 Court of 6 2 5 2 5 2 5 4 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 1 5 0 5 0 5 1 Appeal Edinet 10 15 1 14 0 14 4 14 3 14 6 10 7 16 7 16 5 15 2 15 0 16 2 16 0 Court Drochia 11 13 1 11 0 11 3 10 5 8 2 11 9 11 2 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 10 2 Court Cimislia 12 9 1 8 0 9 2 9 3 9 6 8 3 10 2 8 2 8 1 9 1 10 0 9 1 Court

Page 16 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

2019 2019 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

Comrat 13 5 1 4 4 4 2 5 5 4 1 5 6 7 4 5 1 5 1 5 3 5 2 5 2 Court Supreme 14 Court of 20 1 21 1 21 0 22 1 23 0 29 0 27 1 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 Justice Anenii 15 Noi 8 0 6 1 6 4 6 4 6 3 6 4 6 3 7 3 7 1 7 0 7 1 7 2 Court Causeni 16 7 0 6 0 6 2 6 3 7 5 6 0 8 2 8 2 7 1 8 0 7 0 7 1 Court Ungheni 17 11 0 8 7 8 4 7 1 7 3 9 8 9 4 10 2 10 0 10 2 10 0 12 3 Court Hancesti 18 12 0 12 0 12 3 11 8 9 7 13 8 14 5 14 2 14 0 15 1 15 0 15 0 Court Balti 19 Court of 24 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 23 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 22 0 Appeal Cahul 20 Court of 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 4 5 0 6 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 1 9 0 Appeal

Page 17 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

December November October September August July 2019

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

of of

No. Court

lified”

"Disqualified "Disqualified

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

Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances of Instances 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 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 Appeal Supreme 2 Court of 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 Justice Chisinau 3 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 Court Cahul 4 Court of 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 Appeal Balti Court 5 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 of Appeal

Page 18 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

1000

885 900

800

700

603 600 545

500 483 442 432 411 424 423 400 375 315 300 250 204 200 169 181 170 150 148 149 160 132 125 138 109 115 109 123 100 34 48 0 0 Chisinau Court of Appeal Supreme Court of Justice Chisinau Court Cahul Court of Appeal Balti Court of Appeal

December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019

Page 19 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

N lified” Court

o.

of marking the 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 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

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 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 411 411 424 424 423 423 442 442 545 545 686 885 317 1085 391 1475 333 1366 342 1265 342 1200 395 1394 Appeal Supreme 2 Court of 375 375 315 315 432 432 483 483 603 603 250 250 358 358 146 443 122 498 95 357 96 427 81 388 Justice Chisinau 3 204 204 169 169 181 181 138 138 34 34 98 109 96 202 125 318 162 934 130 607 656 6703 280 2368 Court Cahul 4 Court of 150 150 132 132 148 148 115 115 0 0 48 48 185 185 252 252 189 189 76 135 38 176 34 133 Appeal Balti Court 5 149 149 109 109 125 125 123 123 170 170 160 160 163 163 103 103 91 144 49 163 72 306 94 361 of Appeal Hancesti 6 36 36 20 20 15 15 3 3 3 3 14 14 19 40 5 20 14 39 18 33 17 31 30 53 Court Comrat 7 Court of 30 30 18 18 23 23 26 26 19 19 18 18 27 27 27 27 19 19 14 14 29 29 19 32 Appeal Orhei 8 18 18 17 17 10 10 4 4 7 7 14 14 37 44 43 55 39 54 35 37 28 33 29 32 Court Comrat 9 15 15 333 333 3 3 3 3 13 13 20 20 8 8 42 42 4 4 3 3 7 7 2 5 Court Drochia 10 11 11 18 18 11 11 7 7 8 8 7 7 12 12 17 17 117 136 65 80 6 9 6 6 Court Criuleni 11 10 10 2 2 4 4 3 3 5 5 62 62 196 197 82 90 108 110 10 10 10 12 6 7 Court

Page 20 USAID Contract AID-117-TO-17-00001 Millennium DPI Partners USAID’s Open Justice Project in Moldova, Automatic Random Case Distribution, December 2019 December 31, 2019

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

2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019

N lified” Court

o.

of marking the 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 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

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 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” Ungheni 12 9 9 1 1 4 4 2 2 0 0 12 12 18 20 11 15 15 23 10 14 17 34 10 10 Court Edinet 13 8 8 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 3 9 9 2 2 5 5 126 135 83 117 61 83 68 82 Court Soroca 14 7 7 8 8 9 9 7 7 6 6 6 6 8 8 13 13 6 6 8 8 6 6 4 4 Court Anenii Noi 15 7 7 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 11 11 12 12 26 55 17 32 5 8 6 6 13 15 Court Straseni 16 5 5 5 5 4 4 1 1 2 2 59 74 324 360 186 244 216 240 13 37 13 27 31 108 Court Cimislia 17 5 5 3 3 7 7 3 3 1 1 5 5 0 0 9 9 7 7 2 2 4 4 6 6 Court Causeni 18 4 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 7 7 7 7 17 17 16 23 24 25 24 25 15 15 11 12 Court 19 Balti Court 3 3 2 2 7 7 0 0 10 10 5 5 11 11 8 8 10 35 13 23 2 7 0 0 Cahul 20 3 3 9 9 10 10 4 4 0 0 3 3 2 2 5 5 4 4 17 30 19 89 5 5 Court

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

OBJECTIVE 2

5. Updated Efficiency Action Plan (EAP) for the SCM and Its Subordinated Bodies (Activity 2.2.2.1 & Activity 2.2.3.1 – Year 3 Work Plan, second extension) Draft ACTION PLAN December 2019 – May 2020 Beneficiaries: Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) and its specialized bodies (Judicial Performance Evaluation Board (JPEB), Judges Selection Board (JSB), Judicial Inspection Board (JIB) and Disciplinary Board (DB)) Objectives: è Apply performance management standards to increase judicial efficiency è Institutionalize oversight over judicial performance è Improve the regulatory framework, procedures and practices of the SCM’s specialized bodies è Improve the reasoning of SCM decisions on judicial selection and promotion è Improve the public perception about the judicial system Partner organizations: Courts Administration Agency (ACA), National Institute of Justice (NIJ), Open Justice Project

Responsible for Partner Proposed Expected outcomes Estimated long-term Planned Actions implementation organizations deadline impact

1. Improve the regulatory framework and the appropriate practices in the field of judicial selection and career

1.1. Improve the legal and SCM, JPEB, Open Justice December Recommendations Establishment of a operational framework on judicial JSB Project 2019 – April made (if necessary) transparent, objective and selection, performance evaluation 2020 merit-based Amendments made (if and career advancement system/mechanism for necessary) selection/performance evaluation of candidates/judges

1.2. Monitor and improve the SCM, JPEB, Open Justice December Practices improved (as The work of the JPEB, procedures for judicial selection, JSB Project 2019 – May necessary) JSB and SCM’s performance evaluation and career 2020 Secretariat is streamlined advancement The process of preparation/examination 1

of information for competitions is optimized

1.3. Improve the process of SCM Open Justice December Implementation of the The image of the justice reasoning the SCM’s decisions Project 2019 – May Guidelines developed system is improved 2020 by the Open Justice The litigants’ trust in the Project SCM’s activity is The SCM prepares and increased uses decision – The transparency in templates for the most decision-making is common situations of

increased judicial promotion/appointment /transfer

1.4. Organize a workshop on the SCM Open Justice March – May One workshop The work of the SCM and best practices for screening, Project 2019 organized its specialized bodies is selecting and promoting judicial streamlined candidates/judges 30 participants trained

1.5. Develop and implement IT SCM, JPEB, JIB Open Justice December Development of The capacity of the JPEB tools to retrieve ICMS data Project 2019 – statistical reports with and JIB to use IT tools necessary for judicial performance January 2020 performance indicators and ICMS data for an evaluation for judges objective evaluation of

judges is improved

2. Improve the regulatory framework and the appropriate practices in the field of judicial discipline 2.1. Improve the legal framework SCM, JIB, DB Open Justice December Recommendations are The establishment of a and the procedures in the field of Project 2019 – May made (if necessary) transparent, objective and judicial discipline 2020 impartial system/ Amendments made (if mechanism for handling necessary) notifications against judges and applying disciplinary sanctions

2.2. Organize training activities for SCM, JIB, DB NIJ, Open February – The training/ The number of lawyers, paralegals and litigants on informative activities notifications compliant 2

filing notifications to the JIB and the Justice Project May 2019 performed with form/admissibility DB requirements at the JIB/DB is increased The number of groundless notifications is decreased The number of notifications filed online is increased 2.3. Prepare and disseminate SCM, JIB, DB Open Justice February – The preparation and The number of informative, explanatory materials Project May 2019 distribution of the notifications compliant (booklets, leaflets) for the general informative materials with form/admissibility public regarding online and offline requirements before the tools that can be used to file a JIB/DB is increased notification with the JIB and the DB The number of groundless notifications decreased The number of notifications filed online increased 2.4. Prepare the Guidelines on the SCM, JIB Open Justice December The SCM Guidelines is The use of the Random JIB’s working procedures for Project 2019 – March prepared and approved Case Distribution Module monitoring case distribution in 2020 in ICMS is improved courts 3. Use the performance management standards to increase judicial efficiency 3.1. Train court personnel to SCM ACA, NIJ, Open January – Three workshops The entered data is correctly enter data in the ICMS to Justice Project February 2020 organized complete and accurate enable automatic the collection of and describes the real 100 employees trained statistics on the court performance situation of judges’/courts’ work; this information is used in evaluating judges’ performance 3.2. Conduct training for SCM SCM ACA, NIJ, Open February – Three workshops The performance and members, ACA, court Justice Project March 2020 quality of the services Ten SCM presidents/chiefs of secretariats in provided by the courts is 3

using electronically generated representatives trained increased, as a result of: statistics to improve courts’ 65 judges/employees - the measures ordered performance and services trained by the court presidents to improve judges’ performance; or - the measures ordered by the JPEB following the performance evaluation 3.3. Conduct training for JIB SCM, JIB Open Justice January 2020 One workshop The quality of the inspectors on the interpretation and Project organized informative notes use of ICMS statistics, including prepared by the JIB on those regarding the random 15 representatives of the random distribution of SCM, JIB, DB trained distribution of cases cases submitted to the SCM is improved

3.4. Assist JIB in analyzing the SCM, JIB Open Justice December Assistance for The capacity of the JIB to Random Distribution Module data Project 2019 – April inspectors in preparing monitor and review the from ICMS and in monitoring the 2020 requests/information randomized assignment courts notes on the of cases in ICMS randomized increased assignment of cases

4

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