Extraordinary evaluation of judges in Southeastern Europe: exceptional reform or disciplinary substitute?

The article explores the extraordinary evaluation (vetting) of judges as a judicial reform tool in Southeast Europe, with a focus on the Republic of Moldova. Through a comparative analysis of the experiences in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo, and Moldova, the paper examines whether such evaluation processes act as a genuine reform mechanism or a substitute for traditional disciplinary accountability. The study assesses the implications of these practices from the perspective of international legal standards, including the Venice Commission and the jurisprudence of the ECtHR.