Unpublished ECHR decisions bring prejudices to Moldova’s population and justice. Investigation by Info-Prim Neo

Moldovan authorities don’t ensure the publication of the decisions and judgments of the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR), pronounced in the cases Moldova is charged, thus infringing provisions of the national and international legislation, as well as the fundamental human rights and freedoms. There is a conclusion made by more experts in the process of investigation into the reasons and effects of not publishing the judgments in the “Official Monitor of Moldova” newspaper (OM), Info-Prim Neo reports. The non-publication of ECHR documents has an impact on the future victims of the Moldovan justice, the head of the non-governmental organization “Jurists for Human Rights”, Vitalie Nagacevschi stated. According to Nagacevschi, once a judgment of ECHR is pronounced, Moldova has two obligations: one of individual character, which implies the victim’s reinstatement and moral damage remedy, and another one of general character. This one stipulates the non-admission of such cases in the future, inclusively by modifying the legislation, by implementing it and by publishing the ECHR decision obligatorily with a view to familiarizing the judges, prosecutors, advocates of international law regarding human rights. If Moldova does not publish these decisions in the OM, it does not meet its obligations of general character, Nagacevschi says. Head of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, Stefan Uratu, asserts that the non-publication of the judgments and decisions of ECHR in the OM means that they are not applicable, because the legislation of Moldova stipulates that any document becomes legal only after its publication in the OM. Chief-editor of the OM, Simion Ropot, told Info-Prim Neo that “The Monitor” does not publish the ECHR decisions because it does not have the Russian version of the text, and the Romanian version is not sealed up on each page. The non-publication of a judgment, decision, and normative document in both variants of OM runs counter to the legislation in force, mixes the compulsory count of the published documents and can arouse revolts of the OM Russian edition’s subscribers. “The Law regarding the way of publishing and coming into force of the official documents”, amended on 6 January currently, stipulates in article no. 1 that the decisions and judgments of ECHR pronounced in cases in which Moldova is the defendant, are official documents, which “are published in the state language with the translation into Russian and into other languages, according to the legislation”. Moreover, the Law on Governmental Agent to ECHR, which came into force on 14 April currently, stipulates that “the governmental agent, with the agreement of the Ministry of Justice (MJ), can employ translators, on occasion”, says Ropot. Yet, the ECHR decisions were issued for publication in the OM only in the Romanian language and in one of international circulation, Russian not being among them. For a while, the ECHR decisions were published in the special number of the OM that appears only in the Romanian version, but, once the new law came into force, this modality is not acceptable anymore, says Ropot Info-Prim Neo reports that in March the Division of the State Agency “Moldpres”, responsible for OM, addressed to the representative at that time of the Government to ECHR, the present minister of Justice Vitalie Parlog, and also to the Ministry apart, a letter through which it requested to respect the law regarding the rules for publishing the ECHR decisions in the OM. In his response, dated April 3, after about two months from the coming into force of the modified law regarding the way of publishing and coming into force of the official documents, Parlog answers that the ECHR decisions are not “official documents and are not under the named law and, as a result, it does not need an additional translation into Russian or into other languages than into the state one”. At the same time, Parlog affirms that he can not oblige the ECHR, “to seal up each page so that its decisions and judgments can be published”. According to Ropot, in a letter dated May 22, the minister of Justice at that time, Victoria Iftodi, made reference to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration, as being authorized to certify the translations, and put forward “the lack of necessary staff in the personal establishment” as a reason for not presenting the texts of the decisions in the Russian language. Moreover, Iftodi asserts that “the ECHR decisions and judgments are not catalogued as official documents”. Requested by Info-Prim Neo, Vitalie Parlog, as Minister of Justice already, stated that accordant to the Law nr. 353 of October 28, 2006 regarding the governmental agent, “the ECHR decisions and judgments pronounced in cases in which Moldova is the defendant are transmitted for publication in Moldova after they become definitive and are published in OM free of charge”. At the same time, Parlog reminds that the ECHR decisions and judgments are placed on the official site of the Ministry of Justice and are integrally published in the Bulletin of the Supreme Court of Justice. Besides, the governmental agent “ensures the information of judges, prosecutors and public functionaries regarding the ECHR Law, including the ECHR decisions and judgments versus Moldova”, Parlog asserts. So, the minister of Justice thinks that the ECHR decisions and judgments versus Moldova are accessible for the civil society and state authorities. The Republic of Moldova was sentenced by ECHR in 36 cases.