| Alexandru Tănase, the former President of the Constitutional Court of Moldova |
Alexandru Tănase, former President of the Constitutional Court of Moldova, emphasised that the necessity and proportionality of the continued detention of ManHee Lee, Chairman of Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony, who is currently standing trial while detained, should be assessed by taking into account all relevant circumstances, including his age, health, and the risk of flight.
Tănase explained that, under the European legal framework, advanced age does not in itself exempt an individual from criminal proceedings. However, a person’s age may be an important consideration when courts assess whether pretrial detention is necessary and proportionate.
Tănase previously served as Minister of Justice of the Republic of Moldova, President of the Constitutional Court, and a member of the European Commission for Democracy through Law. As a specialist in constitutional law and human rights, he has extensive experience in judicial reform, the rule of law, and the protection of fundamental rights.
While stressing that he would not comment on the merits of an ongoing case in Korea or any other country, Tănase expressed confidence in Korea’s judicial system.
“I believe it is appropriate not to express an opinion on specific ongoing cases, whether in Korea or another country,” he said. “The Republic of Korea is a democratic nation with a well-established legal system, and I have full confidence that the Korean judiciary will judge this case in accordance with the law, the evidence submitted to the court, and the principles of a fair trial.”
At the same time, he noted that the principles established under the European Convention on Human Rights require any deprivation of personal liberty to be lawful and to constitute a necessary and proportionate measure aimed at achieving a legitimate purpose.
He explained that courts should generally consider the circumstances of each individual case as a whole, including the person’s age and health, the risk of flight, the possible effect on the proceedings, and whether the same legitimate objective could be achieved through less restrictive measures.
Tănase also stressed that respect for human dignity must remain a fundamental principle throughout the judicial process.
“Respect for human dignity is a fundamental principle that must be upheld throughout the entire judicial process,” he stated. “The proper administration of justice and the protection of individual rights are not conflicting values, but mutually complementary elements of the rule of law.”
Judicial Decisions Must Be Free from Public and Political Pressure
Tănase further emphasised that judicial proceedings should not be influenced by public opinion, political pressure, or social prejudice.
“The most important duty of the court is to ensure that justice is conducted according to the law, not by public opinion or political expediency,” he said. “In every democratic society, courts function in an environment where social debate, media attention, and political views exist, but judges must make decisions solely on the basis of the law, the evidence submitted to the court, and the applicable legal standards.”
He explained that judicial independence should not be viewed as a privilege granted to judges, but rather as a safeguard designed to ensure that every citizen has access to an impartial and fair judicial process.
“The independence of the judiciary is not a privilege granted to judges,” Tănase said. Rather, it is “intended to ensure that the disputes of all citizens can be adjudicated by an impartial court.”
Presumption of Innocence and Due Process
Tănase also highlighted the fundamental importance of the presumption of innocence.
“Everyone should be treated as innocent until proven guilty through a fair judicial process,” he stated.
According to Tănase, several principles are essential to ensuring judicial fairness and neutrality, including the independence of judicial institutions, security of judicial tenure, transparent procedures, well-reasoned judgments, equality of arms between the parties, and full respect for due process.
“These principles not only protect the rights of the parties involved in a case but also play a role in safeguarding public trust in the judiciary,” he said. “Ultimately, the legitimacy of the judiciary depends not on public popularity, but on how faithfully it adheres to fairness, neutrality, and the rule of law.”
Fidelity to Law and the Constitution
Tănase identified fidelity to the law and the Constitution as a central principle throughout his legal career.
“Judges do not exist to satisfy public expectations or political interests,” he said. “It is a judge’s duty to apply the law fairly and independently while respecting the dignity and rights of every individual.”
He further emphasised that judicial independence, equality before the law, procedural fairness, and reasoned judgments are indispensable foundations of a democratic legal system.
Source: vo.la/bzwaUwm



