The Parliament decided that the volume of the compensations for moral prejudices in case of defamation must be reasonable and must estimated taking into consideration several factors. MPs voted on Thursday, July 20 in first reading a draft law on amending the 16th article that contains these provisions. According to the amendments the quantum of moral compensations will be determined taking into consideration the character and the spreading area of the information; the social impact over a person; the gravity and the duration of the psychological or physical damages. At the same time the extent to which the reputation was endangered; author’s degree of guilt; the extent to which the compensation can satisfy the damaged person. Separately, circumstances as publishing rectifications, offering retort or publishing a denial until the decision of the court is passed. According to the authors of the project, representatives of communist, democrat and Christian-democrat factions, the exact evaluation of the moral prejudice in case of libel is very difficult. The court is the body that can set the form and the relatively equitable volumes of the compensation, grounding on the specific particularities of each action, the character of the moral prejudice, material situation of the claimant and the defendant etc. The authors gave the example of the European Court for Human Rights, where deciding the volume of the moral compensation is the competence of the judges. The draft law was not supported by the MPs of “Moldova Noastra’ Alliance. MP Anatol Onceanu declared that the amendments are general and will not change the present situation. MNA pleaded in favor of settling a compensation ceiling in case of defamation. As well, Onceanu declared that the draft law was elaborated without taking into consideration the proposals of the civil society, which solicited this ceiling. The participants to the public debate entitled “Again about the 16th article of the Civil Code and press’s freedom of speech: jurists and journalists face to face” that took place last week, expressed different opinions on the necessity of introducing a compensation ceiling for the moral damages caused by libel.