Moldova1 IHF FOCUS: elections; freedom of expression and access to information; independence of the judiciary; torture, ill-treatment and police misconduct; prisons; national and ethnic minorities; social and economic rights; women’s rights; homosexuals’ rights; the Transnistrian conflict. In 2003, concerns over the respect of human rights and democratic institutions intensified in Moldova to the extent that the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Moldova (MHC) warned that current developments put the very functioning of democratic institutions at stake. Political dialogue in the parliament virtually ceased with the Communist Party using its constitutional majority and blocking any substantial discussions. The president and the executive branch exercised increasing and unprecedented unofficial influence on parliamentary processes, reducing the legislative branch’s functions to a rubber stamp that merely confirmed the decisions of the president who also remained the leader of the ruling Communist Party. The non-transparent process of preparation of laws did not allow civil society to contribute or offer its expertise in any way. With the increasing concentration of power, the autonomy of local public administration remained a dead letter. The Law on Local Public Administration entered into force in March 2003.2 Rapporteurs of the Council of Europe’s Congress of Local and Regional Authorities in Europe (CLRAE) noted that the drafting procedure violated a number of provisions laid down in the European Charter of Local Self-Government,3 ratified by Moldova in October 1997.4 The new law on local administration reorganized the country into 37 small units, a structure that greatly resembled the administrative organization of Moldova during the Soviet era. The reform abolished the administrative structure, which was set up in 1999-2001 with substantial support from international organizations, including the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the European Union. The law also created a framework of total control by the central government over local administration, including the right to overturn decisions of local authorities. The local elections in May and June were of particular importance after the 2001 general elections in which the Communist Party won the majority of votes. Regrettably, the elections were riddled with irregularities, opposition candidates were intimidated and arrested, media outlets were biased in their reporting during the election campaign, and central and local authorities flagrantly abused their office to promote candidates who were loyal to them. Concerns also increased regarding the role of public media outlets as virtual organs of the Communist Party and the excessive intervention by authorities in the operation of private media in Moldova. The judicial system was greatly influenced by the executive, and they remained inefficient, working under difficult conditions. Torture and ill-treatment of detainees was widespread practice, yet only a small number of these cases were investigated, and even fewer led to disciplinary measures or conviction. Physical conditions and the treatment of prisoners amounted to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Transnistrian conflict remained unsolved, with the self-proclaimed “Moldovan Transnistrian Republic” continuing wide-scale violations of basic human rights and refusing to carry out democratic reforms. 1 Based on the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights of the Republic of Moldova (MHC), Report on Respect of Human Rights in the Republic of Moldova (including Transdnistria), January 2003-January 2004. 2 Monitorul Oficial (Official Gazette), No. 49 (1142), 19 March 2003. 3 See http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/122.htm. 4 See http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/ListeTraites.asp?PO=MOL&MA=999&SI=2&CM=3&CL=ENG. 1 Elections Local Elections The local elections in May and June were of particular importance following the 2001 general elections in which the Communist Party won the majority of votes. For the first time since Moldova’s independence, the manner in which local elections were conducted seriously questioned the commitment of the authorities to carry out democratic, free and fair elections. The MHC monitored the local elections and the campaign leading up to it and recorded a number of problems, including intimidation and arrests of opposition candidates, bias by media outlets, abuse of office by central and local authorities and irregularities during the poll. In addition, the electoral law was not in line with international standards.5 The last minute amendments to the election law made its application difficult. In the wake of the elections, several authorities who supported the opposition were dismissed. The pre-election campaign was extremely tense and aggressive. Opposition candidates were hindered from carrying out election rallies, their access to public media outlets was blocked and a number were intimidated or arrsted. State media coverage was biased in favor of the ruling party, and the director of the state news agency was dismissed after she complained of political pressure by the ruling party. Independent or opposition media outlets, journalists and reporters were subjected to various forms of intimidation. High-ranking authorities (including the president of the state) openly “advised” on how people should vote, and some candidates exploited administrative resources available to them in their campaign. For example, the minister for transport and telecommunications used the postal services for his campaign. The communist-led government also appeared to use the distribution of humanitarian aid as a way of gaining more sympathy for its own candidates: bags containing humanitarian aid, which were handed out to people, also contained Communist Party campaign leaflets. The use of religiously or ethnically defamatory remarks and propaganda was yet another serious cause for concern. During the vote rounds many irregularities were recorded, including: erroneous voter lists; failure to respect voter confidentiality; observers being hindered from carrying out their work; undue presence of police officers at polling stations, unsatisfactory supervision of ballots; and non-respect of vote counting procedures. Following the elections, numerous people, who were not supporters of the Communist Party which won the majority of seats within the local councils, were dismissed from their posts, including police officers, judges and managers of public services. Freedom of Expression and Access to Information State radio and television company Teleradio Moldova was redefined de jure as the national public broadcasting institution by Law No. 1320 – XV of 26 July 2002 on Public Service Broadcasting. The law was adopted after the resolution on Moldova of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in 2002 and was supported by numerous protesting employees of Teleradio Moldova and various civil society organizations. The original law allowed for political interference in the activities of Teleradio Moldova in that half of the members of its highest body, the Observer’s Council, were chosen by the parliament, the president, the government, and the Superior Council of Magistrate, and the remaining members by various professional associations. In the course of 2003 the law was amended to provide for the 5 The entire report of the MHC on the local elections 2003 is posted at www.humanrights.md 2 company’s administrative board to be appointed by the company president who was also the head of the board, with the consent of the Council of Observers. These changes did not significantly reduce the government’s political influence on Teleradio Moldova’s operation. Moreover, its full functioning was blocked by the fact that the basic documents regulating its activities—the statute of the company, the regulations of the administrative board and of the Observer’s Council—had not been adopted by its leading bodies by the end of 2003. In November, seven members of the ruling Communist Party proposed the liquidation of Teleradio Moldova instead of its reorganization. Despite protests from the opposition and the Council of Europe, the parliament on 13 November adopted an amendment to Law No. 1320 of 26 July 2002, introducing new, nontransparent regulations for the liquidation of the company and for the dismissal of its employees as well as criteria for hiring new staff. The amendment raised fears that state authorities would attempt to place Teleradio Moldova under tighter political control by replacing journalists who are perceived as non-loyal to the government. · The continued pressure on Teleradio Moldova personnel was clearly manifested on 28 November when the company administration decided not to broadcast the TV show “Buna Seara” moderated by Mircea Surdu because one of the guests of the show—a leader of the Communist Party—could not attend the broadcasting. The show aimed at discussing the federalization of Moldova. Other participants included leaders from the main political parties as well as representatives of the Council of Europe and the OSCE Mission to Moldova. MHC stated that the decision not to broadcast the TV show was an act of intervention by the ruling party in the freedom of mass media, and set a dangerous precedent for violations of the right of the people to be informed about public interest issues such as the Transnistrian conflict. The MHC also registered a significant number of cases related to