Under the draft, victims will be able to claim compensation for both material and non-pecuniary damage. When determining the amount of compensation for non-pecuniary damage, the court will take into account the severity of the violation, physical and psychological suffering, the duration of the proceedings, and the length of unlawful detention. Payments will be made from the state budget, regardless of the culpability of the specific individual who committed the unlawful acts.
Ministry of Justice: it is better to pay compensation in Moldova than to take cases to the ECHR
Lilian Apostol, Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice, believes that the new mechanism should serve as an effective national remedy and reduce the number of applications to the ECHR.
“The law establishes a compensation mechanism at national level so that, before turning to the European Court, a person can go through all the necessary stages within the country and receive compensation here. This is better than taking a case to the European Court, where the risk of the Republic of Moldova being found in breach and the financial consequences may be greater. Instead of litigating at the European Court, we will resolve these issues here,” said Apostol.
Courts award only a small proportion of the compensation claimed
Ilie Kirtoacă, Chair of the Centre for Legal Resources in Moldova (CRJM), drew attention to the current practice of awarding compensation by Moldovan courts. According to him, the findings are based on an analysis of cases from 2020 to 2024.
“For every 100 lei claimed as material damages, the courts awarded an average of one lei. For non-material damages, they awarded 9 lei out of 100, and for legal costs and expenses, 49 lei out of 100. In other words, 1 per cent of the claimed amount was awarded for material damages, 9 per cent for non-material damages, and around 50 per cent for costs and expenses. This does not, of course, mean that all the amounts claimed were justified: some claims may have been inflated or insufficiently substantiated. However, more than 200 cases show that the level of compensation awarded by the state, at least based on case law from 2020 to 2024, is insufficient and is likely below the standards set by the European Court,’ stated Kirtoacă.
He also pointed to significant differences in the amounts of compensation, citing two virtually identical cases as examples.
“There are two cases in which unlawful detention lasted 129 days. In one case, the individual received 100,000 lei in compensation for non-pecuniary damage. In another, similar case, compensation for 100 days’ detention amounted to just 5,000 lei. The amounts of compensation are not uniform,” noted Ilie Kirtoacă.
The authors of the bill argue that the new law should establish clearer criteria for determining the amount of compensation. These include the severity of the violation, the nature of the right infringed, physical and psychological suffering, the duration of the proceedings and, separately, the length of unlawful detention. At the same time, the amount awarded must not be manifestly disproportionate to the compensation awarded by the European Court of Human Rights in similar cases.
Potential for abuse
The draft bill has been criticised by the National Anti-Corruption Centre (NACC). The agency believes that the new mechanism could be overused by certain parties involved in criminal proceedings.
In the NACC’s view, the introduction of an additional procedural option could lead to delays in the examination and referral of cases to court. The agency does not rule out the possibility that certain parties to the proceedings will use the new mechanism to their own advantage, which could affect the time taken to examine cases.
The Ministry of Justice explains the need for the new law by pointing to shortcomings in the current legal framework, which was adopted in 1998. According to the draft’s authors, the current legislation contains loopholes and does not fully comply with international standards.
The new mechanism should enable victims of violations in criminal and administrative proceedings to seek compensation in Moldova without having to apply directly to the ECHR for redress.
Previously, the chair of the CRJM stated that, since 1997, Moldova had paid applicants more than 23.4 million euros in compensation in cases heard by the European Court of Human Rights.
Follow our updates
Have information for the newsroom? Share it with Logos-Press
