According to requests for explanations from the Moldovan Cabinet of Ministers, the ECHR was not convinced that the evidence in the criminal case, which was the basis for the detention and detention of Alexandr Stoianoglo’s home, was sufficient to convince him that he had committed it. the alleged actions for which criminal cases were initiated. The European Court has asked the Chisinau government for explanations to explain why the authorities have banned Stoianoglo from attending public meetings and communicating with the press during criminal proceedings against him.

The court asked the government to justify the suspension

Likewise, the authorities of the Republic of Moldova are to explain whether the detention and house arrest of Alexandr Stoianoglo were in fact justified by the fact that he had repeatedly refused to use the function of Attorney General to initiate criminal cases against representatives of the political opposition in Chisinau.

Last but not least, the Court asked the Government to justify the suspension of Alexandr Stoianoglo from the position of Prosecutor General and to restrict access to national courts to challenge this measure.

The court considered the case of the criminal persecution of Alexandr Stoianoglo and communicated it with priority as a case of “impact”. The Court has those “impact” cases, in which the conclusions of the case may lead to a change or clarification of international or domestic law, if the case addresses the moral or social situation, or a significant violation of human rights.

According to Stoianoglu’s lawyer, the European Court not only asked the Government to justify itself for the political persecution of Alexandr Stoianoglo, but also offered him the opportunity to try to repair the abuses committed against him by initiating the amicable settlement procedure to avoid . to a possible conviction of the Republic Moldavia and to pay damages from citizens’ money.