Ilan Shor faces a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him

My own conclusion”, Bowring writes, “supported cumulatively by all these reports, is that Mr Shor would have faced (as would any person of his prominence and unpopularity with the regime) a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him in Moldova, of an unfair trial, and of grave violations of his rights under the ECHR.”

A UK law professor has issued a report raising serious concerns in relation to the legal case pending against Israeli Moldovan businessman and politician Ilan Shor, suggesting that Shor “faces a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him in Moldova of an unfair trial, and of grave violations of his rights under the ECHR.1

Professor William Bowring is a Professor of Law at Birkbeck College, University of London and a UK Barrister since 1974, practising at Field Court Chambers. An expert on legal systems in the former Soviet Union, he has given expert evidence since 2003 on more than 100 occasions in a variety of proceedings concerning several countries of the Former Soviet Union.

His expertise on Moldova includes having led a mission to Moldova on behalf of the Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL) of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ). The Mission was led by former ICJ President Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada

Their mission highted serious concerns in relation to the Judicial System being systematically corrupt and lacking real independence. Their report makes comparison between Moldova’s judicial system and that of the Soviet Union, whereas

If a judge was faced with a politically sensitive case, she could be sure to receive a telephone call from the local Party Secretary - the so-called "telephone justice" - if she did not already implicitly know how to decide. The rule of law was in no sense respected.2

The findings of the ICJ/CIJL were that beyond allegations of corruption, “the Moldovan judiciary has substantially regressed2 and that “most worrying is a return to a largely compliant judiciary and to "telephone justice"”2. They also highlight that the county’s Supreme Council of Magistracy (SCM) has become a conduit for the exercise of the President's will.

In his report, Bowring reviewed and summarized a series of published reports showing that the systemic problems of independence of the Moldovan judiciary and adherence to the Rule of Law have regressed, and that the Moldovan criminal justice system is subjected to ongoing political interference. The findings are based on reports from reputable international organs, including the ICJ, The PACE Committee on Legal Affair and Human Rights, Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, IMF, Freedom House, German Institute for International and Security Affairs, U.S. State Department, GRECO and the Council of Europe.

His conclusions are illustrated by the fact that between 1997, when Moldova ratified the ECHR, and 2020, the European Court of Human Rights delivered over 470 judgments on Moldovan cases, 90 per cent of which identify violations by Moldovan courts.

Bowring was instructed by Shor’s legal team to provide an expert view on the Judicial System in Moldova and if the system would guarantee Shor the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

“My own conclusion”, Bowring writes, “supported cumulatively by all these reports, is that Mr Shor would have faced (as would any person of his prominence and unpopularity with the regime) a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him in Moldova, of an unfair trial, and of grave violations of his rights under the ECHR.”1

1.Israel National News. UK Extradition Expert: Ilan Shor faces a real risk and danger of prejudice [Internet]. Israel National News. Israel National News; 2023. Available from: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/377816‌

2.Report of the Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers MOLDOVA: The Rule of Law in 2004. (2004). Available at: https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2004/11/Moldova-rule-of-law-factfinding-report-2004.pdf

Ilan Shor faces a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him:

My own conclusion”, Bowring writes, “supported cumulatively by all these reports, is that Mr Shor would have faced (as would any person of his prominence and unpopularity with the regime) a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him in Moldova, of an unfair trial, and of grave violations of his rights under the ECHR.”

A UK law professor has issued a report raising serious concerns in relation to the legal case pending against Israeli Moldovan businessman and politician Ilan Shor, suggesting that Shor “faces a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him in Moldova of an unfair trial, and of grave violations of his rights under the ECHR.1

Professor William Bowring is a Professor of Law at Birkbeck College, University of London and a UK Barrister since 1974, practising at Field Court Chambers. An expert on legal systems in the former Soviet Union, he has given expert evidence since 2003 on more than 100 occasions in a variety of proceedings concerning several countries of the Former Soviet Union.

His expertise on Moldova includes having led a mission to Moldova on behalf of the Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL) of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ). The Mission was led by former ICJ President Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada

Their mission highted serious concerns in relation to the Judicial System being systematically corrupt and lacking real independence. Their report makes comparison between Moldova’s judicial system and that of the Soviet Union, whereas

If a judge was faced with a politically sensitive case, she could be sure to receive a telephone call from the local Party Secretary - the so-called "telephone justice" - if she did not already implicitly know how to decide. The rule of law was in no sense respected.2

The findings of the ICJ/CIJL were that beyond allegations of corruption, “the Moldovan judiciary has substantially regressed2 and that “most worrying is a return to a largely compliant judiciary and to "telephone justice"”2. They also highlight that the county’s Supreme Council of Magistracy (SCM) has become a conduit for the exercise of the President's will.

In his report, Bowring reviewed and summarized a series of published reports showing that the systemic problems of independence of the Moldovan judiciary and adherence to the Rule of Law have regressed, and that the Moldovan criminal justice system is subjected to ongoing political interference. The findings are based on reports from reputable international organs, including the ICJ, The PACE Committee on Legal Affair and Human Rights, Anti-Corruption Resource Centre, IMF, Freedom House, German Institute for International and Security Affairs, U.S. State Department, GRECO and the Council of Europe.

His conclusions are illustrated by the fact that between 1997, when Moldova ratified the ECHR, and 2020, the European Court of Human Rights delivered over 470 judgments on Moldovan cases, 90 per cent of which identify violations by Moldovan courts.

Bowring was instructed by Shor’s legal team to provide an expert view on the Judicial System in Moldova and if the system would guarantee Shor the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

“My own conclusion”, Bowring writes, “supported cumulatively by all these reports, is that Mr Shor would have faced (as would any person of his prominence and unpopularity with the regime) a real risk and danger of prejudice in the criminal proceedings against him in Moldova, of an unfair trial, and of grave violations of his rights under the ECHR.”1

1.Israel National News. UK Extradition Expert: Ilan Shor faces a real risk and danger of prejudice [Internet]. Israel National News. Israel National News; 2023. Available from: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/377816‌

2.Report of the Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers MOLDOVA: The Rule of Law in 2004. (2004). Available at: https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2004/11/Moldova-rule-of-law-factfinding-report-2004.pdf