The conclusion of the Strategy on Ensuring the Independence and Integrity of the Justice Sector for 2022–2025 marks the end of an ambitious cycle of reforms and the beginning of a less spectacular but more difficult phase: the transformation of the new rules and institutions into a functional normality of the rule of law.
Four years of implementation of the Strategy on Ensuring the Independence and Integrity of the Justice Sector for 2022–2025 provides sufficient distance for an assessment that goes beyond the daily dynamics of reforms and looks at the system as a whole. The period coincided with the profound change in the public policy framework determined by the European path of the Republic of Moldova, and justice became one of the areas where the pace of legislative and institutional interventions was the most intense.
During this period, the constitutional guarantees on the independence of the judiciary were revised, the self-administration bodies were reorganized, the role of the Supreme Court of Justice was reconfigured, extraordinary mechanisms for assessing the integrity of judges and prosecutors were introduced, and the rules of selection, promotion and professional accountability were modified. In parallel, reforms have been initiated on the administration of courts and prosecutors’ offices, digitization of judicial services, access to justice, protection of vulnerable persons and development of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
However, these changes should not be reduced to a list of normative acts and reorganized institutions. The sustainable contribution of the Strategy lies in trying to treat justice as a system, in which independence, integrity, quality of justice, administrative capacity and citizen access are interdependent components. Justice is not only a state power that must be protected against interference, but also a public service that must be administered professionally, transparently and predictably.
This approach also changes the way independence and integrity are understood. Independence cannot be ensured solely by constitutional guarantees, if self-administration institutions do not function effectively, if vacant positions are not filled on time, or if the courts do not have the necessary resources. Integrity cannot remain only an individual requirement addressed to the judge or prosecutor, but must be supported by credible mechanisms for selection, evaluation, prevention and accountability. At the same time, neither independence nor integrity alone is sufficient to produce swift, coherent and accessible justice.
From changing rules to changing institutions
This is the difference between a legislative reform and an institutional one. The first changes the rules; The second changes the way institutions operate every day. A law can be adopted in a single parliamentary cycle and can enter into force immediately. An institution needs time to adapt its procedures, skills, managerial practices and organizational culture.
The justice reform in the Republic of Moldova has reached precisely this point. In recent years, institutions have been called upon to simultaneously implement constitutional amendments, reorganizations, extraordinary evaluation mechanisms, new career procedures and digital transformation projects, without interrupting their current activity. Under these circumstances, the delays in the operationalization of some mechanisms, the duration of the evaluation processes, the slow filling of vacant positions or the difficult development of some information systems cannot be explained exclusively by the quality of the legislation or by the will to reform. They also show the limits of the institutional capacity to simultaneously absorb such a large volume of change.
That finding does not justify the delays or diminish the requirement of liability. However, it indicates where the center of gravity of public policies must be moved. After a period dominated by rule-making and adoption, the success of the reform increasingly depends on management, human resources, infrastructure, digital interoperability, inter institutional coordination and the ability to use data for decision-making.
Therefore, the performance of justice can no longer be measured only by the number of laws adopted, institutions reorganized or actions formally carried out. The relevant test is the effect produced: the duration of the examination of cases, the quality and consistency of decisions, the accessibility of procedures, the effective execution of solutions, the protection of vulnerable persons and the confidence that the system inspires. Formal modernization begins with the change of rules; Effective modernization becomes visible when the citizen feels the change in their concrete interaction with justice.
From this perspective, the Strategy’s assessment should be regarded as an interim one.
A different institutional architecture has been created, transparency and accountability standards have been raised, and the reform agenda has been expanded beyond the traditional theme of independence and anti-corruption. But architecture, no matter how well designed, is not yet equivalent to functioning. The next step must demonstrate that the institutions can deliver consistent results, cooperate and resist political change without reverting to the logic of permanent interventions and exceptional solutions.
After the reform, consolidation begins
The next policy document for the justice sector must therefore have a different mission. If the Strategy for the years 2022–2025 was largely oriented towards rebuilding the regulatory and institutional framework, the new cycle must transform this architecture into a functional, resilient and results-oriented system.
Firstly, the focus must shift from monitoring the implementation of actions to assessing their impact. The adoption of a law or the establishment of a mechanism does not, in itself, represent final results. Each major intervention must be assessed by its effects on the quality of justice, the length of proceedings, the uniformity of practice, access to services and public trust. Quantitative indicators remain necessary, but need to be complemented by result indicators, regular evaluations and independent impact analysis mechanisms.
Secondly, institutional capacity building must become a strategic objective in its own right in the next justice strategy. The management of courts and prosecutors’ offices, resource planning, filling vacant positions, developing administrative skills and investments in infrastructure can no longer be treated as ancillary activities. Without institutions capable of applying the rules coherently, the reform risks remaining dependent on successive legislative interventions.
The human resource must be placed at the center of this effort. Recruitment, continuous training, performance evaluation, motivation and retention of professionals must be integrated into a unitary policy. A system under prolonged reform pressure needs not only increased demands, but also organisational stability, fair distribution of tasks and credible job prospects. The culture of integrity and responsibility is built sustainably when it is accompanied by competence, institutional leadership and adequate working conditions.
Digital transformation must, in turn, go beyond the logic of separate applications and aim to form an interoperable ecosystem. Digitalization is not an end in itself, nor is it just a technological project. It must simplify procedures, reduce administrative burdens, enable the intelligent use of data and improve the litigant experience. A fragmented digital system can reproduce, in electronic form, the same inefficiencies that the reform seeks to eliminate.
The new strategic cycle must look at justice as a broader institutional ecosystem. The functioning of courts and prosecutors’ offices also depends on the quality of the legal profession, notaries, bailiffs, mediators, judicial experts and authorised administrators. Coherence of professional standards, interoperability of procedures and dialogue between these components are essential for reform to deliver results across the entire justice chain.
Equally important is public communication. Trust cannot be obtained only by presenting the number of actions performed. Institutions need to explain decisions, communicate difficulties honestly, consult users of judicial services and turn data on their experience into a management tool. Dialogue with society is not a complementary activity, but a component of good governance of justice.
Finally, the future public policy document for the justice sector must remain flexible in relation to the process of accession to the European Union, without confusing external compliance with the purpose of the reform. European standards provide direction and discipline, but the ultimate goal remains to build a system that works efficiently, independently and predictably for the citizen, regardless of the political cycles and pressures of the moment.
Instead of conclusions
Four years ago, the dominant question was whether the Republic of Moldova can initiate and support a comprehensive justice reform. Today, the question is more demanding: can the institutions created or reorganized function stably, produce results and turn new rules into common practice?
Citizens will not measure their trust by the number of strategies adopted or by the volume of amended legislation. They will measure it by the time spent in court, by the clarity and predictability of the solutions, by the effective access to the defense and by the certainty that the law is applied with the same rigor to everyone.
That is why the next strategic cycle must not abandon reform, but change its pace and tools. Fewer successive regulatory interventions, more evaluation of effects; fewer exceptional solutions, more stable institutional mechanisms; Less focus on formal architecture, more attention to how it works.
If the first strategic cycle required the courage to change, the next will require the patience and discipline to strengthen. Institutions do not become powerful the moment they are created, but when they function naturally, predictably and independently. The real success of the reform will come when society stops perceiving it as a succession of changes and begins to recognize it as normality.
This op-ed is developed within the project “Ensuring the integrity, efficiency and independence of the justice system in Moldova – #Justice4Moldova”, funded by the European Union and co-financed by the Soros Foundation Moldova. The content of the material belongs to the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union and the Soros Foundation Moldova.
