The police employees resort to abuses during the arrest and preventive detention, but the Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) fully ignore these violations of human rights, said lawyers Natalia Molosag and Veronica Mihailov-Moraru. Within a project implemented by Amnesty International Moldova, the lawyers identified defective practices in a number of cases they examined over the last six months and informed the Ministry of Justice and the PGO about them.
Igor Stoica, program coordinator at Amnesty International Moldova, told a news conference that in four of the examined cases, the lawyers discovered a series of flagrant violations of the human rights when detaining or arresting the person. The persons are called to the police station without citation or are arrested at home and brought to the police station without being issued with a citation beforehand, while at the police station they are not familiarized with their rights. The persons are also intimidated and forced to provide verbal or written explanations about alleged deeds. The arrested persons do not benefit from the services of lawyers or interpreters, if necessary, etc.
On January 19, Amnesty International Moldova sent letters to the Ministry of the Interior, the PGO and the Ministry of Justice, informing them about lawyers’ findings. Eight proposals were submitted for supplementing the legislation with norms that would guarantee and protect the rights of the person during arrest or preventive detention. Among the proposals formulated by the lawyers and the association are to reduce the detention period within a trial from 72 to 48 hours and to instruct the sector police officers to obey all the procedural norms.
Natalia Molosag said the answers of the Ministry of Justice and the PGO were superficial. They said the legislation in the field meets the international standards and does not need to be amended. The lawyer noted that while involved in the defense, she met with pronounced rigidity. For example, in two of the four cases, the PGO refused to efficiently, swiftly and thoroughly examine the cases.
