Updated on: 30.01.08

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE
(initial and in-service training of judges and prosecutors)
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
1) List of the main documents 
a)	Moldovan laws and normative acts:
-	Law on the National Institute of Justice (No. 152-XVI of 08.06.2006, M.O. No. 102-105/484 of 07.07.2006);
-	Law on the status of judge (No. 544-XIII of 20.07.95, M.O. No. 117-119 of 15.08.2002);
-	Law on judicial organisation (No. 514-XIII of 06.07.95, M.O. No. 58/641 of 19.10.95);
-	Law on the Superior Council of Magistrates (No. 947-XIII of 19.07.1996, M.O. No. 64/641 of 10.03.1996);
-	Law on the Qualification Board and attestation of judges (No. 949-XIII of 19.07.1996, M.O. No. 61-62 of 20.09.1996);
-	Law on Public Prosecutor Service (No. 118-XV of 14.03.2003, M.O. No. 73-75 of 18.04.2003);
-	Internal Regulations of the NIJ: 
•	Statute; 
•	Internal Regulation; 
•	Regulation on contest for teaching staff and payment; 
•	Regulation on the admission contest; 
•	Regulation on initial training and graduation; 
•	Regulation on continuous training.
b)	Most relevant Council of Europe documents:
-	Recommendation No. R (94) 12 on independence, efficiency and role of judges (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 13 October 1994 at the 516th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies);
-	Opinion no.4 of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) on appropriate initial and in-service training for judges at national and European levels (from 27/11/2003);
-	Recommendation Rec(2000)19 on the role of public prosecution in the criminal justice system (adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 6 October 2000).
2) Overview of the main laws and normative acts
The objective of the Law on the National Institute of Justice is determined by the law itself (Art. 1) and namely to establish and to provide for the legal status of the National Institute of Justice (hereinafter referred to as “NIJ”), its organizational and functioning principles, the methods of initial and in-service training of judges and prosecutors, as well as of other persons contributing to the well-functioning of justice (court clerks and bailiffs). The Law on the NIJ is therefore the decisive provision in governing the activities of the Institute.
The National Institute of Justice is a public institution, which carries out the vocational training of the candidates for judges and prosecutors, the continuous training of judges and prosecutors, as well as of other persons that contribute to the well-functioning of justice. The Council of the NIJ, composed of 13 members (mainly judges and prosecutors), is the supreme administrative body of the Institute (Art. 6). The Executive Director, appointed by the Council for a term of 5 years, ensures the management of the Institute's activity (Art. 9). 
	The initial training courses for the candidates to the position of judge and prosecutor last 18 months, including a theoretical and practical training. Candidates for the position of judge and prosecutor shall be trained in separate groups (Art. 14). Graduates of the Institute shall take part to the contest for the vacancies for the position of judge or prosecutor according to the procedure provided for by the Law on the status of judges or the Law on the Prosecutor’s office respectively. 
	The NIJ organizes in-service training of judges and prosecutors, according to an annual program, approved by the Council (Art. 7). The judges and prosecutors have the right to in-service training and may choose from the subjects proposed by the program, but they have the duty to cumulate at least 40 hours annually (CCJE opinion no. 4 states that the in-service training for judges should in general not be compulsory). 
Following the adoption of the Law on NIJ, the Parliament amended by the Law on amendment to some legislative acts (No. 247-XVI of 21.07.2006, M.O. No. 174 of 10.11.2006) the main legislation on organisation and functioning of the judiciary with the purpose to mainly bring it into consistency with the Law on NIJ. Particularly the procedure of selection and appointment of judges underwent modifications. According to latest changes, as candidate to the position of judge can be a citizen of the Republic of Moldova who meets the following requirements (Law on the status of judge, art. 6, para.1)):
a)	has full legal capacity;
b)	is a licentiate in law;
c)	has graduated from the National Institute of Justice;
d)	does not have a criminal record and enjoys a good reputation;
e)	possesses the official state language;
f)	is able, from medical point of view, to exercise the respective position
	Nevertheless, in deviation from the terms of letter c) above, the Law on the status of judge stipulates also that as candidate to the position of judge can be the person who has worked not less than last 5 years in legal profession (member of parliament, member of Chamber of Accounts, titular law professor in accredited institutions of higher education, prosecutor, criminal investigator, officer of criminal investigation, lawyer, ombudsman, notary, legal adviser, judge assistant, bailiff, consultant (councillor) or secretary of the court, as well as legal positions in the apparatus of the Constitutional Court, Superior Council of Magistrates or public authorities), and who has passed the capacity exam at the Qualification Board (according to the Law on the Qualification Board and attestation of judges). The number of places offered for contest for this category of candidates shall be established by the Superior Council of Magistrates and cannot exceed 20 percent from the total number of places offered in a period of three years (Law on the status of judge, art. 6, para.2)). 
	As mentioned, current legislation allows limited admission to both professions (judges and prosecutors) of other persons than graduates of the NIJ (specific categories of legal professionals with at least 5 years working experience). The wording of the law in this respect is cumbersome and the problem of equal treatment and equal chances of NIJ graduates and other candidates is not solved yet and shall be addressed by the moment of first contest for filling in the vacant positions of judges and prosecutors with participation of NIJ graduates.
3) Latest developments (legislation in the pipeline)
	A set of internal regulations and strategy papers and namely the: 
•	Statute of the NIJ;
•	Internal (order) regulation of the NIJ;
•	Strategy on continuous training of judges and prosecutors;
•	Regulation on initial training, current knowledge assessment and the graduation from the NIJ;
•	Regulation on the admission contest to the NIJ
•	Regulation on the contest for filling teaching positions and payment,
have been drafted by the NIJ Council / Executive Director and discussed with CoE experts during the Third Workshop on the development of the National Institute of Justice of Moldova in Strasbourg, on 1-2 February, 2007 and the Assessment Visit and Working Group on the development of the National Institute of Justice of Moldova, Chisinau, 31 May 2007. The NIJ Council adopted these documents in final reading on 6 June 2007. 
II. INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
1) List of the main stakeholders
-	National Institute of Justice;
-	Superior Council of Magistrates;
-	Supreme Court of Justice;
-	General Prosecutor’s Office; 
-	Ministry of Justice;
-	Qualification Board for judges (operating under the authority of the Superior Council of Magistrates);
-	Centre for training of prosecutors (operating under the authority of the General Prosecutor’s Office).
2) Overview of the current situation

Training institutions
	The NIJ was officially registered as legal entity on 08.11.2006 and by the Governmental Decision no. 25 of 10.01.2007 (the decision has been passed at the Government’s meeting from 27.12.2006) it was allocated the building on 1 Serghei Lazo street, MD-2005, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. Because of the fact that this building was occupied by a faculty of the Institute of Agriculture, and of alleged impossibility of the said institution to liberate the premises due to on-going teaching process, the NIJ got full access to the building in July 2007.  
Before the adoption of the Law on NIJ, the Judicial Training Centre (hereinafter referred to as “JTC”) of the Ministry of Justice was in charge for training of judges and the Centre for Training of Prosecutors (hereinafter referred to as “CTP”), operating under the authority of the General Prosecutor’s Office, conducted the professional training of candidates to the position of prosecutor and in-service training of prosecutors. After the registration of the NIJ and finalisation of the financial year 2006, the JTC was liquidated but the CTP did not cease its activity. 
The budgetary allocations for financing the activity of the NIJ in 2007 constitute 7 mln. MDL (approx. 415.000 EUR). For comparison, the yearly budget of the JTC has not exceeded the equivalent of approx. 10.000 EUR. Still, taking into consideration the expenses of the start up period and especially the until today not specified costs for a complete refurbishment of the future premises, the successful launch of initial training programme of the NIJ shall depend to a certain extent on support from donors and technical assistance providers. In this context the planned contribution of the current JP, like the procurement of hard- and software and the purchase of furniture, will be highly necessary and absolutely welcomed by the local authorities. For further details please consult project’s ToR.

Initial and in-service training of judges:
With respect to judges, the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) states that the authority responsible for the training and the quality of the training programme should be independent from the executive and the legislative power and that at least half of its members should be judges (CCJE Opinion (2003) No. 4: 3). The CCJE also recommends that for the training, an independent body should be established, with its own budget and which is able to devise training programmes. 
Regarding initial training, the CCJE is of the opinion that mandatory initial training should be given to judges appropriate to the professional experience of the appointees. This means that an experienced lawyer needs less training than a judge trainee who has just finished law university (see CCJE Opinion (2003) No. 4: 4). For in-service training, the CCJE recommends that it should normally be based on the voluntary participation of judges and that mandatory in-service training should only be given in exceptional cases (CCJE Opinion (2003) No. 4: 6).
Under the national legislation in force before the adoption of the Law on NIJ and consequent amendments to other legislation related to the status of judge (Law No. 247-XVI of 21.07.2006, M.O. No. 174 of 10.11.2006), there was not specific legal requirement for initial training of candidates to the position of judge. University degree in law (so called licence in law), 30 years of age, length of service in legal professions of not less than 5 years and successful passing of qualification examination (under the Law on the Qualification Board and attestation of judges) were the basic requirements for a candidate to the position of judge. The selected candidates who met the indicated conditions were first appointed as judges for a 5 year term. On the expiration of the 5-year term the judges were proposed by the SCM for appointed to the position until the reach of the age limit of 65 years. 
As a general consequence of this state of affairs, the newly appointed judges were generally unprepared to take over their responsibilities immediately after appointment, were undergoing complicated adaptation periods and were subject to an informal “supervision” by a more experienced judge. It was oftentimes presumed that lack of initial training was one the main prerequisites for poor quality of justice acts on the one hand, and, on the other, together with initial appointment for the period of 5 years, raised serious concerns with regard to the independence of judges at the begging of their professional career (with obvious consequences for the future).     
Since the independence of the Republic of Moldova, in-service training of judges was the prerogative of the Ministry of Justice and, in order to perform this function, JTC was created under the authority of Ministry of Justice in 1996 (Gov. Decision no. 96 of 22.02.1996). Due to financial constraints, lack of appropriate premises (JTC was located in the building of the Supreme Court of Justice, being allocated two classrooms for maximum 25 persons and two offices for staff) and lack of human resources (the staff composition of the JTC have never exceeded 4-5 persons) the JTC was implementing donor-driven programs mainly. There was no training strategy, no medium or long-term planning of training activities, no continuity of training activities, no qualified permanent trainers and no monitoring system that would guarantee involvement of all judges in training activities or would survey their satisfaction. 
In these circumstances, an important role in boosting in-service training and giving it a more established character has been played by the Superior Council of Magistrates. Thus, notwithstanding that formally it was subordinated to the Ministry of Justice, the JTC used to work in much closer cooperation with SCM, which was active in contracting financial means from donors, organising training events, coordinating programmes, delegating participants and involving the most experienced judges as trainers. 
According to the Law on SCM, on exercising its functions the SCM has the following competences in the field of initial and continuous training of judges:
a)	nominates the judges to the composition of the NIJ;
b)	approves the strategy of initial and continuous training of the judges, presents its opinion on the action plan for its implementation;
c)	examines and presents its opinion about the regulation on the organization of the contest for admission to the NIJ, about curricula and course plans of initial and continuous training in the framework of the institute, about regulation of on the organization of the contest for admission to the trainer position, as well as about the composition of the commissions for exams of admission to and graduation from the NIJ;
d)	expresses its opinion on the number of places put forward in the contest of admission to the initial instruction of judges in the National Institute of Justice;
e)	examines the appeals against decisions (recommendations) issued by the Qualification Board for judges (operating under the authority of the Superior Council of Magistrates).
Since the beginning of 2007, the NIJ is the only institution to organise and provide formal training of judges and candidates to judge’s position. 

Initial and in-service training of prosecutors:
As regards the training of prosecutors, Recommendation Rec(2000) 19 on the role of public prosecution in the criminal justice system provides that "training is both a duty and a right for all public prosecutors, before their appointment as well as on a permanent basis. States should therefore take effective measures to ensure that public prosecutors have appropriate education and training, both before and after their appointment".
As in the case of judges, the Moldovan legislation prior to the Law on NIJ did not specify concrete requirements either for professional initial training of candidates to the position of prosecutor or for their in-service training. 
The current wording of the Law on Public Prosecutor Service (art. 19) provides that to the position of prosecutor can be appointed a citizen of the Republic of Moldova permanently domiciled on its territory, and who meets the following requirements: 
a) licensed in law;
b) with full legal capacity;
c) with necessary length of service to be appointed to the respective position and enjoying good reputation;
d) with no criminal record;
e) knows the state language; 
f) capable from medical (according to a health certificate) viewpoint for exercising public prosecutor’s competencies;
g) having passed qualification exam. 
Moreover, according to art 21 (1)-(2): 
“(1) To the position of the prosecutor may be appointed a person who graduated from courses of initial training of prosecutors in the framework of the National Institute of Justice and who has passed the qualification exam.
(2) In derogation of the provisions of the paragraph (1), may be candidate to the position of the prosecutor a person who has worked at least last 5 years as a Parliament Member, member of the Chamber of Accounts, titular legal professor in accredited institutions of higher education, prosecutor, criminal investigator, officer of criminal investigation, lawyer, ombudsman, notary, legal adviser, judge assistant, bailiff, consultant (councilor) or court clerk, as well as legal positions in the apparatus of the Constitutional Court, Superior Council of Magistrates or public authorities, and who has passed the capacity exam. The number of places offered for contest for this category of candidates shall be established by the General Prosecutor’s Office and cannot exceed 20 percent from the total number of places in a period of three years. 
The cited provisions are very recent and were adopted in order to harmonise the Law on PPS with the Law on NIJ (this new wording shall enter into force upon graduation of the first class of graduates of the NIJ), nevertheless it is obvious that they are still not fully compatible with the scope of the Law on NIJ.  The new wording of the law is cumbersome (see esp. last sentence of art. 21 para. (2)) and the problem of equal treatment and equal chances of NIJ graduates and other candidates is not solved yet and shall be addressed by the moment of the first contest for filling in the vacant positions of prosecutors with participation of NIJ graduates. 
	Although art. 32 of the Law on Public Prosecutor Service provides in general terms that “public prosecutors are obliged to increase their professional level at least once every 3 years by attending professional training courses with specialized training institutions, higher educational or other training providers”, there was only one training institution that could provide short and sporadic courses – the CTP, created on 11.10.2004 by an Order of the Prosecutor General, under the Directorate of Human Resources of the GPO. The CTP had a conference room for up to 50 participants, three small classrooms, an IT classroom, a forensic laboratory and a small library. Generally, the CTP organised courses for probationer prosecutors and seminars or other short-term training events for prosecutors and civil servants employed in the prosecutor service, depending very much on external financing. In 2007, after the National Institute of Justice became operational, CTP sized its existence.  
3) Latest developments
	Under the final and transitory provisions of the Law on NIJ, the National Institute of Justice shall be operational as of September 1st, 2007. Although it is not explicit, the common understanding of this provision was that as of September 1st, 2007 will start the implementation of the first initial training programme for candidates to the positions of judge and prosecutor. In practice, first initial training course for judges (10 candidates) and prosecutors (20 candidates) started in October 2007 It is noteworthy that, presuming successful implementation of the first initial training course, the first graduates of the NIJ will be ready for nomination as judges and prosecutors not earlier than April-May 2009. 
•	 Set up of the NIJ’s premises
Despite the fact that NIJ got its own premises very late, and had very limited technical equipment, the newly created institution started its activity already in November 2006 and first in-service training activities were initiated under the actual state of affairs in January 2007. 
As mentioned before, moving the NIJ to its permanent premises implied serious repairs of the allocated building and its equipping from scratch. The training process within NIJ requires not only auditoriums and classrooms but also IT classrooms with Internet access, a solid library, a courtroom for practical exercises, laboratories and a conference room (with simultaneous translation equipment, if possible). The existing budgetary constraints have been described above. In these circumstances, and taking into consideration that NIJ was ensured full access to the building on S. Lazo 1 only in mid June, the minimum necessary repairs and refurbishing were accomplished only by 1 October 2007. 
On 27-28 February, 2007 an assessment visit to the NIJ was conducted by Mr. Mihai SELEGEAN, Council of Europe expert, Director of the National Institute for Magistracy, Bucharest, Romania. The objectives of the assessment visit were the following:
•	After consultations with the relevant members of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), to advise the NIJ of Moldova on equipping their new premises;
•	To discuss the on-going implementation of the NIJ Action Plan; 
•	To prepare a Draft List of the necessary equipment for the NIJ
As a result of the visit, the expert produced a report on the equipment needed for the proper functioning of the National Institute of Justice, comprising references to: Furnishing and equipping the classrooms; Hardware; Software; Printing and photocopying; Internet access; Website; Telephony; Library; Security; other aspects. The JP technical assistance promised to the NIJ shall be fully based on this report.  
•	Staffing
A successful training activity requires beside appropriate facilities a body of qualified administrative, teaching and technical staff. NIJ’s personnel structure approved by the Government provides for a total number of 46 employees which should be more than sufficient according to experts’ estimates. On 1 June, 2007 only 14 employees of administrative and technical staff have been employed and no teaching staff have been selected and appointed. The NIJ draft Statute, Internal Regulation and Regulation on contest organization for filling teaching positions have been discussed with CoE experts during the meetings on the development of the National Institute of Justice. 
•	Drawing up and adopting training programme and curricula for initial training of judges and prosecutors
During the Workshop on NIJ in Strasbourg the Executive Director and the Council of the NIJ assumed the obligation to finalise the training programme and curricula for initial training of judges and prosecutors by 1st of May 2007. Unfortunately this plan was not respected and the activity was carried out by a working group organised in the framework of a cooperation programme between NIJ and UNDP-Moldova, with expert assistance form the CoE. The fact that (future) teaching staff was not involved (as it is not selected and employed) in the process of drawing up training programmes and curricula can be seen as a serious shortcoming. In June-July 2007 CoE experts submitted to the NIJ Reports on the Study plan of the NIJ and on its Curricula.  
•	Further clarifying the competences of the Qualification Board operating under the authority of the Superior Council of Magistrates and Attestation Commission of the Board of Public Prosecutor’s Service
The Law on the Qualification Board and attestation of judges (No. 949-XIII of 19.07.1996, M.O. No. 61-62 of 20.09.1996) was amended in July 2006 as most of the laws on organisation and functioning of the judiciary. Nevertheless, some provisions of this law still raise concern with regard to their synergy with the purpose of the Law on NIJ. 
Thus, the Qualification Board shall perform the following activities:
a)	holding of capacity exams for the candidates to the position of judge, indicated in the art. 6, para (3) of the Law on the status of the judge (non-graduates of the NIJ);
b)	submission of recommendations on the candidate for the position of judge, and recommendations for the promotion of judges to a higher court; 
c)	attestation of judges and awarding of qualification degrees.
Taking into consideration that 20 % of the available vacancies for the position of judge can be awarded to other persons than graduates of the NIJ, it is important to ensure that the capacity examination within the Qualification Board is held according to the same (objective) criteria and evaluation methodology as the graduation examination at the NIJ. It should be avoided that weaker candidates are appointed to judges’ positions only because there is a quota in the law for each category of candidates. It is also crucial to ensure that both, graduates of the NIJ and candidates who passed the examination in front of the Qualification Board are offered equal chances to choose the most prestigious workplaces according to their merits.   
•	Carrying out the contest for admission to the first initial training course for the position of judge and prosecutor
The first contest for admission to the first initial training course for the position of judge and prosecutor was carried out on 13-30 August 2007. First contest for admission revealed a number of problems encountered by the Commission for admission in the process of examination of candidates. These problems were related to deficiencies of the Regulation on the admission contest to the NIJ, as well as to practical aspects of the process of examination, quality of tests and questions on the basis of which the competition was carried out. The Commission for admission to the NIJ has formulated a number of recommendations for eliminating the reviled problems in the future contests.   
•	Setting up proper donor cooperation in the assistance provided to the NIJ
UNDP proposed a new project “Strengthening Institutional Capacity of the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) of Moldova. The envisaged Workplan of the UNDP project comes across most of the activities planed under Joint Programme ToR (especially with regard to curricula and training programme). The project’s implementation period is 2008-2009 (very similar to JP, taking into consideration a possible extension). NIJ leadership supported UNDP initiative, without proper delimitation of areas in which JP or the UNDP project shall have the lead. In order to avoid overlapping and duplications, further coordination of the initiative is needed. 

III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1) Summary of the factual state of affairs
•	The Law on the National Institute of Justice is adopted and national authorities are demonstrating willingness to set up a proper functioning, solid institution for initial and in-service training of judges and prosecutors, as well as of other persons contributing to the well-functioning of justice;
•	The NIJ was officially registered as legal entity and an appropriate building allocated by the Government. The mentioned building is still not liberated by the previous possessor and needs repairs and refurbishment; 
•	Official inauguration of the NIJ took place on 9 November 2007 (although the teaching process started in October); 
•	Following the adoption of the Law on NIJ, the main legislation on organisation and functioning of the judiciary as well as on Public Prosecutors’ Service was amended with the purpose to mainly bring it into consistency with the Law on NIJ;
•	First graduates of the NIJ (10 candidates for the position of judge and 20 for the position of prosecutor) will be ready for nomination as judges and prosecutors not earlier than April-May 2009. Already now the number of candidates trained by the NIJ can be estimated as very small and not responding to the real needs of both systems. Current legislation allows limited admission to both professions (judges and prosecutors) of other persons than graduates of the NIJ (specific categories of legal professionals with at least 5 years working experience). The wording of the law in this respect is cumbersome and the problem of equal treatment and equal chances of NIJ graduates and other candidates is not solved yet and shall be addressed by the moment of first contest for filling in the vacant positions of judges and prosecutors with participation of NIJ graduates;
•	The NIJ draft Statute, and other five internal regulations have been drafted by the NIJ Council / Executive Director and discussed with CoE experts. The NIJ leadership finalised these documents in order to bring them in accordance with experts’ comments and suggestions, and adopted in final reading on 6 June 2007;
•	With the assistance of the Joint Programme (JP), the NIJ draw up training programmes and curricula for initial and continuous training of judges and prosecutors. A training programme for bailiffs shall be implemented as from 2008;
•	The first contest for admission to the first initial training course for the position of judge and prosecutor was carried out on 13-30 August 2007. 

2) Most recent Council of Europe activities
The Law on NIJ was drawn up at the initiative and with the assistance of the Council of Europe. Its experts participated during only last year in six meetings devoted to the set up of the NIJ and delivered detailed recommendations on the NIJ set up and its proper functioning:
-	9 November 2007: Official ceremony of the inauguration of the National Institute of Justice. The ceremony was attended by H.E. Terry Davis, CoE Secretary General, H.E. Vladimir Voronin, President of the Republic of Moldova, representative of the EC Delegation, representatives of all national stakeholders, international organizations and NGOs. According Terry Davis: “the National Institute of Justice is a step forward to build an independent, efficient, and impartial judicial system. The members of the Institute may count on CoE’s full support in preparing the courses on judicial ethics, prosecuting corruption, and judicial decision-making.” Vladimir Voronin stated that: “the reforms carried out in the recent years have proven the strong will as well as the authorities’ capacity to improve human rights defence mechanisms. The Institute shall assume responsibility for fostering a new generation of judges and prosecutors that will build the foundation of an efficient judiciary”;
-	Report on the Curricula of the Moldovan National Institute of Justice, by Lavinia Lefterache / Mihai Selegean, National Institute for Magistracy, Romania, July 2007;
-	Report on the Study plan of the Moldovan National Institute of Justice, by Lavinia Lefterache / Mihai Selegean, National Institute for Magistracy, Romania, June 2007; 
-	Assessment Visit and Working Group on the development of the National Institute of Justice of Moldova, Chisinau, 31 May 2007 (please see the Memo on the activity);
-	Assessment Visit to advise the NIJ on equipping its premises / Assessment Visit held in Chisinau, with participation of one CoE expert, on 27-28 February, 2007 (please see the Report of Mr. Mihai SELEGEAN, CoE Expert, on the equipment needed for the proper functioning of the National Institute of Justice);
-	Third Workshop on the development of the National Institute of Justice, Strasbourg, 1-2 February 2007;
-	Study visit to Lisbon: National Institute of Justice of Moldova current situation and perspectives, Lisbon, 14-15 December 2006;
-	Training course for staff and trainers from judicial schools of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, Barcelona, 23 - 27 October 2006;
-	Expert meeting “National Institute of Justice of Moldova. Current situation and perspectives”, Chisinau, 16-17 November 2006; 
-	Anniversary Conference on 10 years of reforms of the judiciary system of the Republic of Moldova, Chisinau, 6 - 7 September 2006 (with a particular focus on the role of the National Institute of Justice with regard to the training of employees for the justice system);
-	Expert meeting on the compatibility of the Moldovan Legislation on Judiciary with Council of Europe standards, Chisinau, 16-17 March 2006;
-	Written expertises worked out by the Council of Europe experts Mr. Giacomo Oberto (Italy), Mr. Daimar Liiv (Estonia), Ms. Marie Luce Cavrois (France) and Mr Jorge Dias Duarte (Portugal), on the draft Law on the National Institute of Justice (Revised version), Law on  the Superior Council of Magistrates, Law on  the Supreme Court of Justice, Law on the Judicial Organisation and Law on the Status of Judges, Strasbourg, 2 March 2006.
-	A two days multilateral workshop on the ''Creation and sustainability of the judicial school according to the Council of Europe standards'', 12/12/2005 - 14/12/2005, European Youth Centre - Budapest, Hungary
-	2nd expert meeting for the transformation of the Judicial Training Centre into the National Institute of Justice: a new legal framework, 27/10/2005 - 28/10/2005 , Chisinau, Moldova
-	Follow-up expert meeting for the transformation of the Judicial Training Centre into the National Institute of Justice: a new legal framework 11/07/2005 - 12/07/2005, Strasbourg, Council of Europe

3) Proposals for further activities under the Joint Programme
	See the Implementation Workplan and NIJ Action Plans.