CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 5 mars 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 5 March 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 1513/15 Vasile SELEVESTRU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 2 January 2015 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the dismissal of a judge as a result of disciplinary proceedings. The applicant alleges inter alia that the proceedings were not fair because the sanction was imposed on him after the expiry of the statutory time-limit of one year and because the courts failed to give weight to that issue. He also contends that the Superior Council of Magistrates, which examined his appeal against the disciplinary sanction, failed to qualify as an “independent and impartial tribunal” since it had the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Justice among its members. The applicant alleges that as a result of the above circumstances, he was a victim of a breach of his rights guaranteed by Articles 6 § 1 and 8 of the Convention. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations and/or the criminal charges against him, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention ( Oleksandr Volkov v.   Ukraine (no.   21722/11, ECHR 2013)?