The document states that the procedure of expropriation of property on the land plot intended for the construction of a new building of the US Embassy in Chisinau is carried out in strict compliance with the legal framework and the principles of administrative transparency.
The construction works were recognized as socially useful and of national interest, based on an intergovernmental agreement between Moldova and the USA and approved by a relevant law adopted by the Moldovan parliament. In its declaration, the Government ordered the expropriation of the property and appointed APS as the expropriator in charge of the procedure.
What fell under expropriation
Expropriation concerns exclusively property and property rights legally acquired and registered in accordance with the law. Structures erected on public land without permits or cadastral registration do not confer property rights and cannot give rise to an obligation on the state to pay compensation. Compensation applies only to legally existing assets registered in the Real Estate Register, according to their functional condition at the time of valuation.
The assets were appraised by a certified appraiser selected through a transparent public procurement procedure.
Interested parties were informed of their rights under the law to challenge the amounts earmarked for expropriation.
Given that the expropriated persons did not exercise their right to submit alternative valuation opinions, the Complaints Commission maintained the amount of compensation established by the valuer, which currently amounts to 96,469,722 lei (4.7 million euros at the current exchange rate, while the US Embassy should allocate 7.5 million euros for this purpose – Logos Press note ). This amount refers to the assets of private expropriated persons.
The State Property Agency issued documents establishing the compensation and registered the entire amount in a special account at the Ministry of Finance in favor of the expropriated owners. Of this amount, 13,151,371 lei (663 thousand euros) have been paid so far. After the registration, legal procedures will be initiated to remove [the objects] from the cadastral database.
The application of the mechanism of immediate expropriation with transfer of ownership is expressly provided for by law for objects of national public interest and does not override the right of owners to challenge the amount of compensation in court.
The state acts solely on the basis of the law and cannot substitute subjective assessments or emotional criteria for the legal basis. Any discrepancies are subject to judicial review.
The procedure continues in a predictable and verifiable manner and all actions are documented. The State Property Management Agency will ensure that the progress of this matter of public interest to the country is kept informed.
Object owners do not agree with the assessment
This clarification appeared after the appearance of a journalistic investigation on one of the TV channels about the situation around the compensation to the owners of real estate at the Republican Stadium. Logos Press also wrote about this problem.
The TV piece claimed that the head of PPA Roman Cojuhari and the director of the appraisal firm Alexandru Paladi were hiding from journalists, confused in their answers and tried to evade them.
The affected owners of the objects on the territory of the former Republican Stadium were skeptical about the Agency’s reaction to the TV piece.
“The Public Property Agency, as usual, is evading answers,” Irina Durlestean, the owner of Kangaroo Squash & Padel Club, commented on the Agency’s publication. – According to what law, under what article the owners have to submit an alternative assessment? And who in the commission has the necessary knowledge and experience to determine which appraisal is better?
And what is to be done with an appraisal that is found to have been conducted with serious violations? And how many letters have been sent to the PPA waiting for the decision of the Agency for Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre, which, according to the law, is obliged to check the assessment reports?
The Agency’s response, like all the previous ones, is a new attempt to hide incompetence and abuse of power.”
Irina Durlestean explained for Logos Press: “Our point of view remains unchanged – it was an illegal appraisal conducted by an illegal appraiser. And we do not agree with its results”.
Sergei Durlestean, co-owner of the squash club, supported her: “Expropriation is not only a legal mechanism, but also an indicator of the political maturity of the state. The way the government implements it shows where the rhetoric of human rights ends and the exercise of power begins.
In established democracies, expropriation respects legality, proportionality and fair compensation. In unstable or authoritarian regimes, it can become an instrument of control and redistribution under the guise of “public good.
Tracking these practices provides valuable information on the balance between the public interest and the protection of individual rights”.
