The inhabitants of the Transnistrian region continue to face numerous challenges related to the knowledge, understanding and protection of human rights. Among the most violated rights in the Transnistrian region are the rights to free movement, education and ownership. The right to ownership is not well known and is not applied in the Transnistrian region and there are no efficient guarantees for ensuring the observance and protection of this right, experts of “Promo-LEX” Association were quoted by IPN as saying.
“Promo-LEX” noticed that the incapacity to protect the ownership right is greater and more evident in the so-called criminal cases initiated by the local police. In a case monitored by the Association’s lawyers, the “investigation body” of Transnistria in May 2017 sequestrated a Toyota car owner by a man form Chisinau within a so-called criminal case started against another person, not the owner, who drove the car based on the power of attorney. Even if the man from Chisinau, who owns the car, is not investigated as a suspect, his car continues to be kept at the parking lot of the militia in Tiraspol, while the “judges” of the Transnistrian region refuse to accept his application to have his car back.
In August 2018, after challenging the “ordinance of the investigation body” to arbitrarily sequestrate the car, the “court” upheld the sequestration, arguing that even if the car belongs to the man from Chisinau from legal viewpoint, the ownership right is de facto held by the suspect. In this case, “Promo-LEX” ascertained that the “courts of law” of the Transnistrian region do not respect the international standards on the protection of property and the local “legislation” is also not applied correctly.
“Promo-LEX” lawyer Pavel Cazacu said the sequestration decision was taken by the investigator. Under the standards of international law, only a court of law, in particular exceptional situations, can intervene in the ownership right of a person. According to the European Court of Human Rights, the “judiciary system” of the Transnistrian region does not have a juridical tradition compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Therefore, the imposition of sequestration by a local “court of law” is a flagrant violation of the ownership right as these “courts of law” do not represent a tribunal established by law. Such a power given to the “investigation body”, which does not form part of the “judiciary system”, shows how flagrant the violation of the ownership right is. It also shows the inefficiency of the mechanism for preventing the violation of the ownership right based on the local “legal framework”.
The Republic of Moldova continues to maintain that it cannot do more because it does not have efficient control, while the Russian Federation, which has control, shifts the responsibility onto the Moldovan authorities. According to “Promo-LEX”, the de facto administration of the Transnistrian region, which created a defective “legislation” and a “judicial system” that is not compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, is directly responsible for the situations when persons become victims of abuse, while those who commit the abuses benefit from impunity.
