Even if multiple legislative regulations provide for the political independence of the magistrates, it is often doubted in courts, political analyst Igor Botan believes. According to Botan, the interference of the authorities in trials decreased and is less evident, without petitions in writing. Still it was not stopped definitively. At the same time, few were achieved as regards „transparence” matters in courts, many of them being artificially delayed in order to avoid sentences on behalf of the European Court for Human Rights (ECHR). This way the authorities diminish artificially the number of complaints addressed to ECHR. Concomitantly, the independence and authority of justice is dissatisfying, even in the context of the recommendations of the Action Plan „European Union – Republic of Moldova”, international and communitary institutions, considered as priority by the political parties. In the II quarter of 2006, Igor Botan noted, the transparence of the contests for judge positions is reduced to publishing announcements, without publicizing information on organizing the contests, the contestants who participated in and those selected. At the same time, the lawyers are complaining that their independence is not ensured as the law requires; that the influence of the Ministry of Justice over the lawyers is too high and often abusive. Among the most essential obstacles in applying the right of access to court is the lack of means to pay the state tax, lack of resources for hiring a qualified lawyer. The way defendants are informed about the verdict is dissatisfying as well, and the execution term of certain sentences is still delayed. In this context, the CoE’s Committee of Ministers, convened in a meeting dedicated to execution of ECHR decisions by the CoE member states and adopted a document pursuant to which Moldova „should undertake legislative measures and reforms in justice matters to prevent non-execution of court decisions”. The Republic of Moldova, along with the Russian Federation and Ukraine, are considered as “relevant states” due to numerous complaints addressed to ECHR.