National Bank and the Leu Rate. Have all the questions been answered?

[Financial Brains commentary for Info-Prim Neo] It is commendable that the the leadership of the National Bank of Moldova (NBM) issued a statement yesterday to recognize that it had intervened directly on the domestic currency market through purchases of US dollars, absolving the importers and the seasonal peculiarities of the responsibility for a weaker leu. The depreciation of the national currencies does have positive effects for the domestic producers engaged in export activities. However, the NBM's behavior over the past week has arisen a number of questions. The interventions of central banks in Europe, Asia or the United States are usually carried out following certain ethic rules. At first, the actors on the currency market are publicly notified that the rate of the given national currency doesn't satisfy the government, and only when the actors ignore these warnings and continue to sell or buy in an excessive manner, will the central bank resort to direct sell/purchase interventions. To the detriment of its reputation, the NBM told a television channel in an interview on December 4 that this weakening of the Moldovan leu was due to imports and seasonality alone, trying in this way to calm down the public, {knowing at the same time that it was the bank that was causing the depreciation.} The NBM's stated goal to stem deflation can be achieved with other instruments, as well, means that could concurrently benefit the country's economic growth, like cuts in the base rate, which would cheapen the loans offered by the commercial banks to producers and would stimulate consumption. The Financial Brains plead for a free and transparent currency market where the exchange rate is determined by offer and demand and the country's macroeconomic indicators. After all, the exchange rate is a true barometer of the economic state of one country.