64 TEODOR VICTOR ALISTAR, CRISTIAN VASILE BITEA
of Europe (COE) defines public prosecutors as “public authorities who, on behalf of
society and in the public interest, ensure the application of the law where the breach of the
law carries a criminal sanction, taking into account both the rights of the individual and the
necessary effectiveness of the criminal justice system6”.
Tranparency International in its Practical guide Enhancing judiciary`s ability to
curb corruption stated that „Judicial and prosecutorial independence helps establish an
impartial judiciary and improves public trust in the courts. Prosecutorial independence,
even in those jurisdictions in which they are not formally part of the judiciary, occurs when
the decision-making of prosecutors is free from interference by any other state entity
including higher prosecutorial offices or courts7”.
Few years ago, the Superior Council of Magistracy adopted the Profile of the
magistrate in the Romanian judicial system and the Evaluation Guide, reference papers
in understanding the vision, the demands and the aims of judicial branch as a
public service and among these a view of the prosecutors’ activity8.
At a glance, the prosecutors have constitutional basis and legal status, are
invested with public authority, carry out specific judicial functions, acting within
hierarchy circle, with proper rights and liabilities, legal restrictions concerning
conflicts of interest and incompatibilities, seeking and pursuing for the jure and the
facto independence on their activity and responding to the need for accountability
and public scrutiny.
The role of the Council for the Judiciary
There are 5 states9 among EU countries that have organised Councils for the
Judiciary including both categories: judges and prosecutors: France, Italy, Belgium,
Romania and Bulgaria, more or less within so called „Southern European Model”10
which are significantly different from Northern European Model.
The design, size, dimension and competences of councils for judiciary are subject
of studies and comparative questions in order to find out and highlight their role in
6 The role of public prosecution in the criminal justice system - Recommendation Rec(2000)19 - adopted by
the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 6 October 2000 and Explanatory Memorandum,
p. 4, para. 1.
7 Alistar, V., co. (2015) Practical guide Enhancing judiciary`s ability to curb corruption. Bucureşti,
Tranparency International, p.12.
8 According to the first document (2006), the magistrates must be able to think independently in
juridical matters, recognize the inner factors that might cloud their judgment, understand the society,
manifest moral integrity, have the capacity and the courage to improve his/her working environment,
communicate clearly and logically and be receptive to the information that might improve his/her
message, be credible and trustworthy, be efficient in the management of his/her own duties and contribute
to the improvement of the court’s administration. The personality profile connects to: independent/
critical thought; moral- cognitive integrity/consistency, social awareness and commitments, being
inclined for hard work and continuous professional training; authenticity; clear and logical communication,
receptivity toward any information that might improve his/her message; self-control; conscientiousness,
diligence, collegial respect.
9 Three of them are EU/EEC founders (1957).
10 Voermans, W., Albers,P. (2003) „Councils for the Judiciary in EU Countries “. Brussels, p. 10.