Institution of criminal proceedings and abuse of fair trial rights for embezzlement in Moldova

Facts

The author, a Romanian national, was appointed as the General Director of Vitaproduct, a company established by Orhei-Vit, located in the Republic of Moldova. Vitaproduct had all its business operations in the Russian Federation. Due to oversupply of goods and non-payment of instalments by buyers, Vitaproduct’s debts remained unpaid and started accumulating. OrheiVit lodged a criminal complaint against the author with the Russian Investigation authorities for large scale fraud and embezzlement. The Russian authorities decided not to initiate criminal proceedings hence, Orhei-Vit lodged a criminal complaint against the author in the Republic of Moldova, and criminal proceedings were initiated. While travelling to the Republic of Moldova, the author was detained and remained in detention during the criminal proceedings. A District Court held that the author’s actions only amounted to abuse of trust and ordered his immediate release on payment of a fine.

The author and his family emigrated to the United Kingdom, and in 2012, Orhei-Vit appealed against the order of the District Court and the Appeal Court convicted the author of fraud and sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment and payment of damages in full. The author claims that he was not informed of the appeal proceedings and the judgment was not delivered to him. In 2013, the author filed an application before the Supreme Court requesting for reinstatement of the time limit for lodging a cassation appeal which was rejected. The author was arrested in London in 2020 following an extradition request by Moldovan authorities. This request was rejected by the Magistrate’s Court which held that it would be in violation of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights as there was no assurance that the author would not be subject to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment on his return to Moldova. This decision was not appealed, and the author was released from detention. The author claims that the authorities in Moldova lacked competence to institute criminal proceedings against him and that the entirety of the criminal proceedings were in violation of his right to not be imprisoned merely on the inability to perform a contractual obligation, and fair trial rights under articles 11, 14 (1), (2), (5) and (7), and 15 (1) of the Covenant.

Admissibility

The Committee noted that according to rule 99 (c) of the Committee’s rules of procedure a communication may constitute an abuse of the right of submission when submitted five years after the exhaustion of domestic remedies by the author of the communication, or three years after the conclusion of another procedure of international investigation or settlement. Contrary to the author’s argument that it was only in the course of the extradition proceedings initiated in 2020 that he became aware of significant violations of his rights in the criminal proceedings against him and that the relevant date to be considered would be that of the proceedings initiated in 2020, the Committee noted that the final domestic decision in the author’s case was in 2013, when the Supreme Court rejected the author’s application for reinstatement of time limit for the cassation appeal. The present communication was submitted in 2021, with a delay of 8 years. The Committee held that the author had not sufficiently explained his reason for not submitting the communication to the Committee till 2021. The Committee considered the delay to be unreasonable and as amounting to an abuse of the right of submission and accordingly rendered the communication as inadmissible under article 3 of the Optional Protocol.