Freedom of Assembly Policies in Moldova: Liberal Changes Possible

Monitoring Freedom of Assembly Policies in the Republic of Moldova, Resource Center for Human Rights, www.CReDO.md

1

15 January 2009

Monitoring Freedom of Assembly Policies in the Republic of Moldova

Resource Center for Human Rights Centrul de Resurse pentru Drepturile Omului (CReDO)

Al. Hajdeu 95 "A", CHISINAU, MD 2005, Moldova (373 22) 212 816, fax (373 22) 225 257 [email protected], www.CReDO.md


2

Table of contents 1. Executive summary..................................................................................................4 2. Introduction ..............................................................................................................5 3. Legal and institutional provisions on freedom of assembly ......................................7

3.1. Legal and institutional provisions under the old law.......................................................7 3.2. Legal and institutional provisions under new law...........................................................9 3.3. Comparison of legal and institutional changes..............................................................11

4. Monitoring assemblies: findings .............................................................................13 4.1. Assemblies: types, forms...............................................................................................13 4.2. Assembly organizers, participants and assembly coverage...........................................17 4.3 Summary of selected cases ............................................................................................19

5. Law enforcement and legal proceedings on assemblies ........................................22 5.1. Police actions and conditions ........................................................................................22 5.2. Police intervention practice ...........................................................................................24 5.3. Judicial practice .............................................................................................................27

6. Analysis of freedom of assembly policy..................................................................29 6.1 Application of the old law: concerns and problems ......................................................29 6.2 Application of the new law: improvements and remaining concerns ...........................33

7 Conclusions and recommendations .......................................................................37 7.1 Conclusions on implementation of new assembly policy .............................................37 7.2 Recommendations .........................................................................................................37

8 Annexes .................................................................................................................39 8.1 Desegregated statistical data on assemblies ..................................................................39

9 References.............................................................................................................42 10 Endnotes ............................................................................................................43


3

Table of Graphs: Graph 3.1 Comparative analyses of the key provisions of the old and new laws .........................11 Graph 4.1 Monthly evolutions of assemblies ................................................................................13 Graph 4.2 Peaceful and non-peaceful assemblies .........................................................................14 Graph 4.3 Types of assemblies......................................................................................................14 Graph 4.4 Forms of assemblies .....................................................................................................15 Graph 4.5 Duration of assemblies .................................................................................................15 Graph 4.6 Duration of assemblies under old and new law............................................................16 Graph 4.7 Assemblies and stakeholders ........................................................................................16 Graph 4.8 Geographic coverage of assemblies .............................................................................17 Graph 4.9 Places for holding assemblies in Chisinau ...................................................................18 Graph 4.10 Organizers of assemblies ............................................................................................18 Graph 4.11 Most active organizers of assemblies .........................................................................18 Graph 4.12 Participants at assemblies ...........................................................................................19 Graph 4.13 Photos case study 1.....................................................................................................20 Graph 4.14 Photos case study 2.....................................................................................................21 Graph 5.1 Conditions and restrictions ...........................................................................................22 Graph 5.2 Police presence .............................................................................................................23 Graph 5.3 Police actions................................................................................................................23 Graphs 5.4 Police intervention ......................................................................................................24 Graph 5.5 Prosecuting reasons ......................................................................................................25 Graph 5.6 Organizers prosecuted ..................................................................................................26 Graph 5.7 Law enforcements bringing charges.............................................................................26 Graph 5.8 Court jurisprudence ......................................................................................................27 Graph 6.1 Reasons for denials of assemblies in 2005-06..............................................................29 Graph 6.2 Requests and denials of assemblies in 2004-06 ...........................................................31 Graph 6.3 Cost benefit estimate ....................................................................................................33 Graph 6.4 Cost-benefit estimates of the two laws.........................................................................35 Graph 8.1 Time evolution of assemblies .......................................................................................39 Graph 8.2 Disaggregated statistics ................................................................................................40


4

1. Executive summary The report is elaborated on the basis of a nine month long monitoring of assemblies project carried out by the Resource Center for Human Rights (CReDO) with technical and financial support from the OSCE/ODIHR. The report represents one of the products of the project. Apart from the report the project has produced more than 200 observations of assemblies throughout Moldova. The project has established a comprehensive database of all assemblies carried out during the project and most importantly has built-up local capacity to monitor freedom of assembly through a network of more than fifty experienced monitors. The monitoring report finds that the new law, introduced in April 2008, has provided important improvements in the exercise of freedom of assembly. It has generally been well received by organizers and local authorities, as well as by the police. The new law has already created important benefits to local society: organizers and citizens, regulatory authorities and police and has important monetary benefits. It has facilitated practice associated with freedom of assembly, has created greater awareness within the police of the need to refrain from an incoherent use of the law on assembly and of administrative sanctions. The report provides for a number of recommendations to further improve the exercise of freedom of assembly. These include: a consolidation of the capacity of local authorities and police to deal with notifications and facilitate the notification procedure; the development of skills among members of the commission on assemblies to work with organizers; the collection of disaggregated information and statistics comparable to those presented in the report in order to understand the development of the functioning of the notification procedure, all of which would support a more coherent application of the notification procedure. We also recommend: developing police awareness on a more coherent application of administrative sanctions; building their skills in managing confrontational, aggressive and contradictory behavior, which will contribute generally to the facilitation of assembly rights. At the same time the new law needs greater political backing as it is among the most liberal within OSCE countries and it should receive support and encouragement to ensure that it is fully applied according to its ethos and principles. The monitoring of assemblies needs to continue. The project has generated some limited evidence on the application of the new law, but to generate more robust evidence one needs to carry out comprehensive monitoring for a much longer period. Furthermore, the forthcoming elections will create particular conditions for assemblies, and many of the provisions of the law and their practical implementation may well come under strain at this time and will therefore require close monitoring.


5

2. Introduction On 22 April 2008, the new law on assembly entered into force. The new law is the culmination of a long-term effort to create a more favorable legal framework to facilitate the realization of freedom of assembly rights in Moldova. The old law on assembly had been the source of constraints on the realization of freedom of assembly, and in some cases before the European Court of Human Rights , the Court found violations of the ECHR against the Republic of Moldova for violations of freedom of assembly rights. The monitoring of assemblies has been performed by a network of monitors under a project carried out by the Resource Center for Human Rights (CReDO) with the support from the OSCE/ODIHR. The project initially trained a group of thirty monitors, but further training extended the network to fifty persons throughout Moldova. The assemblies are documented through an on-line monitoring platform, http://www.credo.md/assembly/, which hosts information about all public assemblies and all monitoring reports. The project monitors follow both international and national standards when observing assemblies and are guided by a monitor’s code of ethics. Each monitor drafts an individual confidential report, which is fed into the project database. The period of monitoring documented in this report extends from December 2007 to June 2008. This monitoring report summarizes the project’s findings. Objective As well as the monitoring report, the project had an important educational effect on those actors practically involved in freedom of assembly rights: the organizers, the police, the media and the general public. The monitoring report has several specific objectives, it:

• systematizes existing freedom of assembly practice monitored by the project; • discusses how freedom of assembly practice and application of the existing legal and

institutional is respected to ensure the freedom of assembly standards; • develops evidence that justifies the introduction of the new law on assembly in Moldova; • elaborates a set of recommendations to further improve respect for freedom of assembly

in Moldova based on the new law. An important feature of the report is a comparative perspective of the old and the new laws. The overall approach is from the policy perspective, with the aim of generating information, data and consequently evidence in order to make an informed judgment regarding the standard of practice relating to freedom of assembly. Methodology The monitoring project has produced a comprehensive database of assemblies for the period of December 2007 to June 2008. This information is based on the individual reports of each assembly monitored and by one or more specially trained monitors. The project managed to monitor more than 60% of all assemblies in Moldova over this period. Some of the reports have also been developed into case studies. Additional interviews have been held with police officers and local authorities. Information has also been collected from various specialized NGOs, from the media and from contacts among organizers about the assemblies, the law and the responses by the authorities.


6

The report reviews both the old and the new laws on freedom of assembly. It assesses the laws to find out to what extent they have been adhered to in practice. The report also considers any progress or improvements that have been recorded since the introduction of the new law. The report begins from the hypothesis that the new law has created additional social value and aims to provide appropriate evidence to address this idea. Statistical information and data has been compiled from the individual reports. The data and information has been codified and quantified, and numerous graphs have been produced to illustrate comparisons and conclusions. The report discusses this information specifically in the context of the effective functioning of the new law, and from its conclusions, the report sets out a series of recommendations to improve the coherence of the application of the new law. The project and the report would not have been possible without the expert support from Neil Jarman, director of the Institute for Conflict Research, Belfast, Northern Ireland, and the encouragement and support from Natalya Seitmuratova, former ODIHR human rights adviser responsible for the project, and Lydia Grigoreva, ODIHR human rights adviser responsible for the project. The authors thank Ludmila Samoila of the OSCE Mission to Moldova for the valuable observations on an earlier draft of this report. The report was elaborated by Serghei Ostaf (research design, analysis and writing) and Florin Gisca (monitoring coordination and case studies).


7

3. Legal and institutional provisions on freedom of assembly This section provides an overview of the legal and institutional provisions that existed over the project monitoring period. During this period of time the legal and institutional provisions changed, following the entry into force on 22 April 2008 of the new law of freedom of assembly in Moldova. This section starts with a review of the provisions of the old law that was in force until 22 April 2008, and then continues with a review of the new law and institutional provisions. The Constitution of Moldova provides the general legal framework and emphasizes the peaceful and unarmed manner in which assemblies should be conducted, encouraging libertarian or free way of organizing the assemblies.

Article 40: Freedom of Assembly. All meetings, demonstrations, manifestations, processions or other assemblies are free, and shall be organised and conducted in a peaceful manner and without the use of any kind of weapon.

The following section contains a detailed overview and a comparison of the old and the new laws on assemblies.

3.1. Legal and institutional provisions under the old law At the outset of the monitoring project the legal environment consisted of: the old law on assemblies1, which had been adopted in 1995, the provisions of the Constitution2, provisions of the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO) and the provisions of the Criminal Code (CC). At the time of writing this report the CAO and CC both remained unchanged. 1. Definition of assembly (art.2, 3, 6(1))3. The old law defined assemblies through specific forms such as: meetings, demonstrations, manifestations, processions, picketing and other forms. It excluded assemblies organized by political parties, religious organizations, public authorities, commercial actors, sports events. Only peaceful and unarmed assemblies were legal and allowed. 2. Authorization of assemblies (art. 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)4. The old law provided for an authorization procedure. Organizers had to submit a request for a permit to City Hall 15 days before the event. City Hall had to issue a permit, including any conditions imposed, 5 days before the assembly. City Hall could refuse a permit and the organizers could appeal any refusal in court. Failure to issue a permit was considered acceptance of the assembly. Issuing an assembly permit was done by a commission on assembly permits. The commission prepared a draft permit and submitted this for the mayor’s signature. The commission members included: a representative of the socio-cultural department of the mayoralty, a legal advisor to the mayoralty, and representatives of the police. In some cases security agents also joined the work of the commission. Hearings and deliberations were in principle open and the organizers were invited to participate. The police always had an important input regarding the route, conditions and restrictions that might be imposed. 3. Organizers, participants of assemblies (art. 4, 6(2), 10)5. Only citizens over the age of 18 with full legal capacity or juridical persons could organize assemblies. Children and persons bearing forms of weaponry were not permitted to participate in assemblies.


8

4. Conditions for assemblies (art.8, 9, 17)6. Assemblies could only be held in public spaces. Assembled were not allowed within 25 meters of buildings of the legislative, executive and judicial powers or local authorities. Local authorities could establish special places for assemblies. The timing of an assembly was subject to local authority regulation. The police and local authorities could further regulate assemblies on the ground. 5. Ban, limitation, suspension of assembly (art. 7, 17)7. Assemblies that defamed the nation, incited to war or discrimination or subverted constitutional order were not allowed. The police and local authorities had the power to suspend an assembly. 6. Positive obligation of police and local authorities (21, 22, 23, 24)8. The local authorities, together with police, had responsibility to facilitate peaceful assemblies. 7. Responsibility, liability of organizers, participants (18, 19, 20)9. Organizers were responsible for ensuring assemblies remained peaceful and for co-operating with the police to maintain order, and were liable to pay for services provided. Organizers also had the following liabilities:

1) organizer (article 22(1) provides civil, administrative and penal responsibility): a. (civil) for the costs of damages, b. (administrative) failure to follow the notification procedure - 22(2)10, c. for the actions of the participants - 22(3) if demonstrated that they acted upon instigation

of the organizer, d. (administrative) for failure to perform duties provided in the draft law11, e. (administrative) obstruction of public transport or institutions12, f. (administrative) involvement of children in unauthorized assembly13, g. (penal) propaganda for war14, h. (penal) incitement actions and hatred15, i. (penal) calls to forcibly overthrow the Government16, j. (penal) serious disturbance of public order17.

2) Participants (article 22(1) provides civil, administrative and penal responsibility): a. (civil) for the costs of the damage, b. (administrative) active participation in the assembly without proper notification or

violating manner of assembly18, c. (administrative) obstruction of public transport or institutions19, d. (penal) propaganda for war20, e. (penal) incitement actions and hatred21, f. (penal) calls to forcibly overthrow the Government22, g. (penal) active participation in serious intervention in public order23.

3) third parties (no civil or administrative): a. (penal) obstruction of assembly or participation in it24.

4) police (no civil or administrative): a. (penal) obstruction of assembly or participation in it25.

5) local authorities (no civil): a. (administrative) for hindering the notification procedure – 22(2), if demonstrated by the

organizer in court26, b. (penal) obstruction of assembly or participation in it27.

8. Role of police and local authorities. Police were subordinate both to the local authority and to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The municipal and regional police are organized as Commissariats, which is the police inspectorate, and the territorial police that enforce the law. Commissariats are composed of: 1) Sector police, attached to particular parts of a city, which have responsibility to oversee order at a local level and are financed from municipal or regional budgets, but methodologically and hierarchically subordinate to the Minister of Internal Affairs. 2) Criminal police, who are financed by the Minister of Internal Affairs and located in the same building as the sector police. Finally, the Ministry of the Interior has Special Police for Maintenance of Order (“Scut”) who are directly involved in the policing of large assemblies.


9

Sector police are primarily responsible for ensuring order at assemblies, while members of Scut (Special Police for Maintenance of Order) will be deployed at the larger events.

3.2. Legal and institutional provisions under new law The new law on assemblies was enacted on 22 April 2008. The favorable context for its adoption had been facilitated by:

- An individual EU-Moldova Action Plan that expressly required a comprehensive revision of the law on assemblies;

- Technical support and expert opinion of the OSCE/ODIHR and OSCE Mission to Moldova;

- An active role in lobbying and co-operating with the Ministry of Justice by CReDO, Promo-lex and Amnesty International-Moldova in adopting of the law on assembly.

1. Definition of assembly (art. 2, 3)28. The new law defines an assembly as a temporary, intentional presence of participants, and assemblies with fewer than 50 persons and spontaneous assemblies are not required to give notification and the law provides for the occurrence of more than one assembly in one location at the same time. The law does not include religious, commercial and sporting assemblies within its remit. As a result the definition of different types of assembly is more precise and it is easier to apply in practice. 2. Freedom of assembly principles (art. 4)29. The new law is based on 4 core principles: 1) a presumption in favour of holding an assembly (non-regulation, duty to protect); 2) legality (limitation); 3) proportionality (balancing public interest test, “less intrusive alternative”); and 4) non-discrimination. The provision of these “principles” constitutes clear progress compared to the previous law. The principles help to 1) interpret the grey zones and situations that may be undesirable or impossible to regulate and 2) guide the interpretation and application of the provisions of the law, and ensure they are consistent with it. The presence of the guiding principles should ensure fewer restrictive and less abusive interpretations of the law and over time should encourage a development away from conservative interpretation of the law that would be inconsistent with the fundamental aims of the law. 3. Notification (art. 10, 11, 12, 13)30. The new law incorporated a shift from an authorization to a notification procedure. Organizers notify within 5 days of an intention to hold an assembly and in the case of small and spontaneous assemblies notification is not required. If more than one notification is submitted the local authority must negotiate with the organizers, but if there is failure to reach an agreement they may deal with them on a first-come-first-served basis. Simultaneous assemblies should be facilitated and diverse interests accommodated wherever possible. The local administration can only forbid an assembly by seeking a court injunction. These elements all represent a substantial liberalization in the administrative regime. The work of the commission on assemblies will continue. The commission will review declarations and should meet with the organizers to discuss and advise on the organization of assemblies. Police and state security agents may also be present and provide input at such meetings. 4. Organizers and participants (art. 6, 7)31. Any person, including minors of 14 years and over and persons with limited juridical capacity, may organize an assembly, and no restrictions may be placed on participation in an assembly. This represents a significant development as all restrictions have been removed on organizers and participants.


10

5. Conditions for assemblies (art. 5, 9, 14, 16)32. The new law provides for holding an assembly in any public space, with no restrictions on specific sites or locations, for the use of appropriate sound or visual equipment and allows for the erection of temporary structures. The local authorities can only recommend prior changes to the form of the assembly. Restrictions imposed during an assembly must be justifiable, necessary, specific and in the interest of the assembly. This represents substantial regulatory progress. 6. Ban, limitation, suspension of assembly (art. 8, 14 (5), 21, 22)33. These three articles provide for forms of interference at different phases of the assembly:

a) banning an assembly (article 8, article 14 and article 40 of the Constitution), b) suspending an ongoing assembly (article 21 (2, 3)) or spontaneous assembly (article

12(4)), c) dispersal of an ongoing assembly (article 22).

Banning an assembly Substance: An assembly can be only banned or restricted (article 4(c)) under existing legal provision, namely:

a) article 8 (a) instigation to aggression, war, national, racial or religious hatred, b) instigation to discrimination or public violence, c) undermining national security, disturbance of public order, public morality, violation of human rights and freedoms, jeopardizing lives and health of others, or

b) article 40 of the Constitution (conduct of assemblies in a peaceful manner and without the use of any kind of weapon).

Procedure: Article 14 provides for drawing attention of concerns to the organizers and if unsuccessful instigating a judicial procedure to ban the public assembly:

a) step 1): based on facts or information contained in the notification, advise the organizers of their responsibility, and suggest actions to modify the assembly, and only after step 1)

b) step 2): based on solid evidence of the violations of article 14 or article 40 of Constitution seek a judicial injunction of the assembly.

Generally, the substantive provisions for limiting a public assembly comply with international standards and represent a substantial legislative improvement. Suspending ongoing (spontaneous34) assembly (art. 21 (1, 2)) Substance: The assembly can be suspended as an exceptional measure when:

1) there are serious violations of materials grounds of article 8 (a) instigation to aggression, war, national, racial or religious hatred, b) instigation to public discrimination or public violence, c) undermining of national security, disturbance of public order, public morality, violation of human rights and freedoms, jeopardizing lives and health of others), and

2) Measures other than suspension are insufficient to make the assembly legal.

Procedure: Article 21(1) provides for the representative of local authorities to declare the assembly suspended and asks the organizer to comply with the order. It provides an obligation to discretely address isolated incidences that violate article 8.


11

The regulation of conditions for suspending an assembly has improved qualitatively with more material and procedural guarantees put in place. Dispersal of ongoing assembly (art. 22) An assembly may be dispersed after a declaration of suspension if the organizers do not comply with requests to disperse. The police may execute dispersal only after warning participants to leave, and if they do not comply with the warning. This is an improvement in the regulation of dispersal of assemblies; however, uncertainties remain regarding the potential use of armed force and the manner in which participants may be dispersed. 7. Responsibilities of organizers, participants (art. 17, 18, 19)35 The overall responsibilities and liabilities of the organizers and participants remain the same with one exception. Under the new law the organizers may be exonerated from responsibility for the actions of the participants, when the latter have not adhered to their requests. Additionally the organizers, as well as the media and observers, have a right to record the activities at an event.

3.3. Comparison of legal and institutional changes In the following table we provide a summary of the key legislative and institutional changes, with a comparative analysis of legal changes and key provisions for the regulation of right to freedom of assembly.

Graph 3.1 Comparative analyses of the key provisions of the old and new laws

Comparative provision

Provision of the Old law Provision of the New law (as of 22.04.2008)

Conclusions, risk factors

1.Definition of assembly and assembly principles

The definition is built on forms of assembly, does not permit simultaneous and spontaneous events. It excludes religious, commercial, sporting, cultural and political meetings.

A temporary, intentional gathering provides for simultaneous and spontaneous assemblies. It includes political but excludes religious, sporting, cultural and commercial meetings. Establishes principles of legality, non-discrimination, proportionality and presumption in favor of freedom of assembly.

The new law is more inclusive and generic in covering all possible forms of assemblies. It additionally includes political assemblies within its remit. Assembly principles in the new law provide better interpretation of the provisions of the law.

2.Notification/Authorization

Assemblies are authorized if submitted 15 days in advance. Permits provide for specific conditions to be made.

Assemblies do not require authorization, only 5 days prior notification, with an exception for notification of small or spontaneous assemblies. Accommodation of plurality of assemblies.

The new law is liberal and permissive. It facilitates the exercise of assemblies and aims to accommodate multiple events including oppositional assemblies.

3.Organizers and participants

Only citizens with full legal capacity.

Everyone including minors and persons with limited legal capacities can organize events.

The new law removes all restrictions on the organization and exercise of assembly, and


12

Children cannot be involved.

empowers vulnerable groups.

4.Conditions for assemblies

Special commission decides on conditions imposed on an assembly. The commission may impose conditions under threat of refusing a permit. Conditions imposed prior on forms, time, place and manner and during the assemblies by police, special places recommended.

Special commission only screens notifications. May hold meetings with the simultaneous assemblies’ organizers. May only recommend restrictions, the organizers must make final decision

The new law removes censorship on assemblies. Allows for subsequent scrutiny of authorities involvement of conditions on assemblies. Risks remain due to insufficient capacity of local authorities and police to apply new law in practice and refrain from undue influence.

5.Ban, limitation, suspension of assembly

Authorization effectively used as ban, recourse to courts fails to ensure the exercise of the right as decisions come later. Grounds broadly formulated: defamation of nation, order, constitution. Same broad grounds applied to limitation or suspension of assembly. Suspension is decided by police, with some involvement by local authorities in forcible dispersion.

Authorities can only ban or impose a limitation to the assembly by a court decision, which is a substantial guarantee. Suspension of ongoing assembly is prescribed as matter of last resort, when other measures have been tried out. Decision to disperse is taken by local authorities and police.

The new law provides substantial increase in guarantees and make possible legally suspension only in very limited number of cases. Risks remain in insufficient capacity of local authorities and police to apply new law in practice and refrain from undue influence. Another risk results from hostility between central and local authorities in some cases.

6.Responsibilities of organizers, participants

Organizers are responsible to maintain order and to pay for services. Some liability for the actions of participants and damages caused.

Organizers responsible for their own actions, including towards the participants, must cooperate with police. Authorities have to provide necessary services. Most of penal, administrative liability remained unchanged.

New law partly limits organizers responsibility, and provides for positive obligations of police and local authorities. Risks remain in practicalities of the application of the new law in practice and ability to refrain from undue influence.

This table indicates that the new law has created a much more favorable legal environment for the realization of freedom of assembly rights. In the following sections we will discuss how this is being implemented in practice and to what extent any improvements have created additional social value for society.

4. Monitoring assemblies: findings This section contains a comprehensive overview of the statistical data collected and disaggregated as part of the monitoring project. The project monitored two phases of freedom of assembly rights. The first phase covered a period of four months from December 2007 to 22 April 2008, when the old law regulated freedom of assembly. In the second phase, assemblies were monitored in the period from 22 April until 30 June 2008, a period of just over two full months36. The project covered only assemblies that had been organized by private parties and did not monitor assemblies that had been organized by the government. The project managed to monitor more than 65% of all assemblies that took place in Moldova. In the case of assemblies that have not been monitored, some information has been gathered from the media, the relevant authorities, or directly from the organizers. The direct contacts established by members of the monitoring project with various municipalities allowed the project to have access to first-hand information on assemblies.

4.1. Assemblies: types, forms The dynamics of assemblies shows a clear pattern of growth. Under the old law, there had been an average of 30 assemblies per month, while under the new law the average has risen to around 40 assemblies per month. Graph 4.1 illustrates how following the introduction of the new law in late April 2008 there has been a rise in the number of assemblies (this trend has been sustained by data from ongoing monitoring between July and November 2008). During May the number of assemblies increased substantially, while in June and July (summer months), the level of activity has been higher than the previous four months under the old law.

Graph 4.1 Monthly evolutions of assemblies

18

18

20

10

12

16

23

7

16

7

18

1241

20

13

20

23

21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

dec 2007

jan 2008

feb 2008

march 2008

april 2008 (new 22.04)

average old law

may 2008

june 2008

average new law

Time dynamics of assemblies: December 07-June 08not monitoredmonitored

The new more liberal regime facilitated an increase in citizen’s activity through public assemblies, with an increase in the absolute number of assemblies. In the 4.75 months under the old law, there were 138 assemblies, while during the 2.25 months under the new law there were


14

100 assemblies. Under the old regime, there were around 32 assemblies per month, while under the new regime, there were approaching 50 assemblies per month. An overwhelming majority of assemblies have been peaceful, with no change evident with the introduction of the new legal regime. The following graph (Graph 4.2) shows that 97% of all assemblies have been peaceful under each regime. Indeed, during the period monitored under the old regime there were only 5 assemblies with some form of violence element and under the new regime only 2 assemblies have had some level of violent element37. There has thus been no change in the level of violent assemblies in the transformation from the old law to the new regime.

Graph 4.2 Peaceful and non-peaceful assemblies

133

5

97

3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Old law New law (22.04.08)

Peaceful and nonpeaceful assemblies

peaceful violent ellements

A moderate increase in the number of spontaneous assemblies has been registered under the new law. The following graph (4.3) shows that some spontaneous assemblies also took place under the old regime, when such events were illegal in all circumstances. Under the new law the number of spontaneous assemblies has not increased dramatically, and in relative terms their number increased only moderately. Under the old regime, there were 1-2 spontaneous assemblies per month, while under the new regime; there have been 5 spontaneous assemblies per month.

Graph 4.3 Types of assemblies

8 3

6

4 9

1 1

0

2 0 4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

O ld la w N e w la w (2 2 .0 4 .0 8 )

N o tifie d a n d s p o n ta n e o u s a s s e m b lie s

s p o n ta n e o u s

a u th o ris e d /n o tif ie d


15

A case study of spontaneous assembly. On 22 April 2008, the day of entry into force of the new law on assembly, X, who was participating in the press-conference organized by several human rights organizations to welcome the adoption of the law, declared that the law now had to be tested in practice. At 10.40 X marched in front of the Presidential building holding a poster with the slogans “SOS! We are dying without rights!” and “Protest!”. Riot police approached him and requested that he end the activities. X refused stating that he wanted to test the law that had just entered into force since it had been published in the Official Gazette this very day. X was detained and accused of refusing to obey the police.

Most assemblies take the form of picketing or manifestations/meetings, no change has been observed following the introduction of the new legal regime38 as the graph below (4.4) illustrates. Processions are the most complex form of assemblies, but this form of event was present under the old as well as under the new legal regime. The absolute number of processions decreased, while relative number remained the same. The number of other forms of assemblies has not changed.

Graph 4.4 Forms of assemblies

12

1316

60126

1210

27

27

16

21

31

8

28

6

7321

10100102030405060708090

100

cultu

ral

socia

lco

mmercial

piketi

ng

manife

statio

n/mee

ting

proce

ssion other

Various kinds of assembliesNew law(22.04.08): not-monitored

New law(22.04.08):monitored

Old law :notmonitored

Old law :monitored

The duration of most of the monitored assemblies is about half a day and this pattern has not changed following the introduction of the new law. Graph 4.5 (below) shows that 129 of the 143 monitored assemblies lasted for less than five hours, 20 of these were rather short assemblies with a duration of less than one hour. About 13% of assemblies lasted longer than five hours, but only one event lasted longer than 12 hours.

Graph 4.5 Duration of assemblies


16

20

103

19

1 00

20

40

60

80

100

120

less 1hour

1-5 hours 5-12hours

more than12 hours

continous

Duration f assemblies

The duration of assemblies under the new law is comparable to their duration under the old law (Graph 4.6). In relative terms, one can only observe an increase in the number of assemblies with a duration of less than an hour.

Graph 4.6 Duration of assemblies under old and new law

8 12

61

42

127

1 0 0 0 0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

less 1 h

1-5 h

5-12 h

more than 12 hour

contino

Duration of assemblies: old and new law

Old l

New l(22.04.08

The following graph shows the presence of distinctive elements at assemblies. The graph shows specifically to what extent the new law has influenced the presence of: 1) children, 2) use of sound multipliers, 3) presence of officials, 4) presence of media, 4) presence of emergency service, 5) counter-demonstrations. Overall, the situation has not changed. One can see no change in the presence of children, the relative figure remained the same, relative figure for the sound amplifier remained the same, the presence of media in relative terms slightly increased, and there is a more substantial presence of the emergency service. More liberal new legislation has not seemingly changed the presence of the counter-demonstrations.

Graph 4.7 Assemblies and stakeholders


17

36

27

44

24

43

19

58

45

48 3 2 0

20 40 60 80

100 120

childrensound amplifier

oficials mdia emergencycounter-demonstrators

Distinctive Elements of Assemblies

New law (22.04.08)

Old law

4.2. Assembly organizers, participants and assembly coverage Most of the assemblies take place in Chisinau; the capital of Moldova. The new law has not changed the pattern in the geographical distribution of assemblies.

Graph 4.8 Geographic coverage of assemblies

72

34

56

31

7000 1200 1010 01011

0411 2527

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Chisinau Balti Ungheni Cahul Soroca Orhei other

Geographic coverage of assemblies New law(22.04.08):not-monitored


Old law:notmonitored

Old law:monitored

The new law has resulted in more assemblies being organized at key public locations in central Chisinau: in National Square (an important location for people to call for actions from the executive or protest against the government), in front of the Presidential building (home of an important institute of the state) and in the Public Gardens (where many people pass by) (Graph 4.9). The old law required authorization for holding the assemblies and evidence (see Annex) suggests that assemblies were only reluctantly authorized in front of the government buildings in National Square, in front of the Presidency or in the Public Gardens. The data indicates that the new law, therefore, has facilitated the organization of assemblies in each of these prominent places.


18

Graph 4.9 Places for holding assemblies in Chisinau

10

4

13

7

2061 20

436

3220 19

8

70

14

8

5

5030

6332

13

18

16

11

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

National s

quare

Presidency

Parliamen

t

Stefan Great Stat

ute

National O

pera

Public gard

en

City Hall

Processio

nother

Places for assemblies in ChisinauNew law(22.04.08): not-monitoredNew law(22.04.08):monitoredOld law:notmonitored

Old law:monitored

The new law has also facilitated a slight increase in the organization of assemblies by political parties, civic groups and NGOs (Graph 4.10). The top three organizers of assemblies remain unchanged, with NGOs, individuals and the commercial private entities, in that order, being the primary organizers of such events. One can also see that absolute and relative activism of NGOs and political groups has increased more than twofold, and there has been an increase in the levels of activism among civic groups.

Graph 4.10 Organizers of assemblies

5474

10455

30

4

27

12

20

13

12

8

17

13

84

4425

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

political civic groups ngo individuals commercial government

Organisers of assembliesNew law(22.04.08): not-monitoredNew law(22.04.08):monitoredOld law :notmonitored

Old law :monitored

The profile of the most active organizers has changed slightly, reflecting the overall changes discussed above. Apart from the ongoing activism of some individuals involved in longstanding protests, Association Falun Gong has championed the use of assemblies, followed closely by Liberal Democratic Party. Another association, Salvgardare, has also become increasingly active, while traditional organizers, such as Hyde Park and various patent holders have remained active.

Graph 4.11 Most active organizers of assemblies


19

104

9

5050

11

200

2041

0120

12

4

4

0010 11

1011

5

4

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

Falung

Gon

g

Hyde P

ark

Journ

alist

Union

Salvga

rdare

Gende

rDoc

-M

Libera

l Dem

ocrat

ic Part

y

Nation

al Lib

eral P

arty

Libera

l Part

y

Patent

holde

rs

Most active organisers of assembliesNew law(22.04.08):not-monitored


Old law:notmonitored

Old law:monitored

Finally, there have been limited changes in the number of participants at assemblies (Graph 4.12). Most notably there has been a greater number of assemblies with participation of up to 50 persons. The number of assemblies with fewer than 50 persons increased considerably in relative terms: under the old law there were about five such assemblies per month, now there are around 12 per month. There has also been an increase in the number of large assemblies of more than 1,000 persons, from 1-2 per month under the old regime to 2-3 per month under the new.

Graph 4.12 Participants at assemblies

14

9

19

25

10

6 27

14

60

6

7

0005

1015202530354045

1 per 1-50 pers 51-100pers

101-500pers

501-1000pers

1001-10000pers

10001 -100000

pers

Participants at assemblies

New law(22.04.08)

Old law

4.3 Summary of selected cases Here we provide two case studies exemplifying the application of the new law Case study 1 – 26.05.2008, S1 . S declared the protest in front of the district Court by hanging posters with words referring to a judge addressing the President of the state. The protest was carried out between 9-11.00 and involved simply talking to passers-by. At 11.00, the police

1 http://www.credo.md/assembly/mod/resource/view.php?id=211


20

arrived and requested presentation of the notification document. After a few minutes talking on the phone the police stated that there was a violation of the law on public advertisements and environmental considerations that requires consent to place any public advertisements. The police had filmed the protestor and then invited him to come to police commissariat at a later hour. S arrived at the Police commissariat at 13.00 where he was not detained but was asked to explain his actions.

Graph 4.13 Photos case study 1

Photo 1. Posters hanging between the trees Photo 2. Police request the protest be ended

Case study 2 – 10.05.2008 GenderDoc-M. On 11 May 2008 participants in the Seventh Moldovan Pride were precluded from marching peacefully in support of anti-discrimination legislation and tolerance in the centre of Chisinau. Police did not guarantee the right to freedom of assembly. Large aggressive co-ordinated groups, including extremist religious groups, members of the neo-fascist movement “New Right”, and legionnaires blocked the bus, forced the door, violently hit the windows, and attempted to remove the engine, while shouting “lets get them out and beat them up”. The police distanced themselves from the event and remained passive observers. GenderDoc-M had informed the local authorities and the Ministry of Internal Affairs as early as 21 April about the route of the march and asked for protection. The law on freedom of assembly of Moldova guarantees peaceful assembly to everyone and obliges the police to guarantee the exercise of this right and the safety of participants. The police did not facilitate the exit of Pride participants from the bus into the street, did not prevent the rival aggressive groups from intervening and through their passivity encouraged an escalation of violence and the build-up of a hostile atmosphere. Independent human rights observers witnessed hate speech, such as “Beat them to death”, “Don’t let them escape”. About 60 people were blocked in the bus for over 45 minutes. Two unidentified well-built men wearing the signs of the rival groups forced the doors from both sides of the bus and demanded all march materials (banners asking for anti-discrimination law and tolerance, European Union and Moldovan flags and rainbow balloons) as a condition for lifting the blockage of the bus. According to the estimates of independent observers, between 200 and 400 people surrounded the bus. The core of the crowd were teenagers, some dressed military-style, some wearing black masks and others skinhead-like carrying A4 posters with derogatory messages and signs. The


21

outer ring of the crowd was mostly middle-aged men wearing black clothes who encouraged the former. No police were identified by the observers at the bus, although some six traffic police cars stood approximately 100 meters away without taking any action whatsoever. GenderDoc-M made nine unsuccessful attempts to call the police. After gathering all materials, the two men ordered the unblocking of the bus and allowed it to go. The bus headed towards GenderDoc-M office, and was followed by a car with members of the crowd. The Pride participants left the bus in dispersed groups on alert of possible repeated attack by the crowd. Another crowd of approximately several hundred people surrounded the GenderDoc-M office demanding that Pride participants exit the office. Two police cars and an ambulance observed the events from a distance. The office remained blocked for several hours. In parallel to the events described above, several hundred people of all ages, men and women, gathered at the Great National Assembly Square, carrying banners saying “Family is the Union between Man and Woman”, “Homosexuality is a Sin”, “Immorality Ruins Society”, “Moldova – Christian Country”, and “Do Not Turn Sin into Virtue”. GenderDoc-M has no information whether these various groups had their manifestations authorized.

Graph 4.14 Photos case study 2

Photo 1. Bus surrounded and blocked by violent group Photo 2. Violent groups with derogatory signs

5. Law enforcement and legal proceedings on assemblies This section begins by discussing the involvement of the police in relation to freedom of assembly, and continues with a review of legal proceedings initiated against people involved in organizing or participating in public assemblies.

5.1. Police actions and conditions The new law involved a change from conditions largely being imposed prior to assemblies to a situation where most of the conditions started to be imposed in the course of the assemblies. Restrictions on holding the assemblies are no longer possible; instead, police resorted to the application of the conditions on the unfolding of assemblies such as: arrests, detentions, barriers, etc. Graph 5.1, below, shows how the number of restrictions and conditions imposed on assemblies increased following the adoption of the new law. Under the old regime 31 out of 89 assemblies (31%) had restrictions imposed on them, while under the new law restrictions have been imposed on 22 out of 60 assemblies, or 36% of all events.

Graph 5.1 Conditions and restrictions

83

6

22

6

49

115

17

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Old l

New law (22 04 08)

Conditions and restrictions imposed on assemblies authorised/notified

spontanus

prior restriction/conditio

afterwords restriction/conditio

Under the old law most restrictions or conditions were imposed prior to the event, with only 7% of conditions being imposed during an assembly. Most conditions had thus been imposed under the authorization procedure. Under the new law the proportions have reversed with 77% of restrictions being imposed on the street while the assembly is underway. Conditions or restrictions imposed in this manner are necessarily imposed by the police who have responsibility for the management of public order. Case studies of the old regime indicate that the formulation of the prior restrictions had primarily been imposed in response to input from the police, but the representative of the mayor and other members of the commission also had an input into this process. The new law has created a regime under which the police have started to use more discretionary power to restrict or impose conditions on assemblies and it appears that the police have been more willing to use these powers compared to practice under the old law. The practice of imposing restrictions on the ground has a potential to develop and could well have a negative impact on the exercise of freedom of assembly.


23

A case study of police interfering with the right to freedom of assembly. On 30 April 2008 W, X, Y and Z carried out un-notified protest in front of the National Palace during celebration to mark 50 years of National Public Television. The four carried the posters stating “Liars!”, “Traitors!”, “You have lied to the nation for 50 years!”. The police request that they end their protest was refused and police detained all four people claiming that they slandered the police and ignored their requests to disperse.

The number of police officers at assemblies has increased since the change in the legislation (Graph 5.2). Most events are attended by 5 to 20 police officers. There is a notable increase in the number of events attended by police officers between 20 and 100. Overall, as the number of assemblies has increased, therefore the police presence has increased correspondingly. From the data available, one cannot draw a conclusion as to whether overall police presence has increased. Almost 30% of events are attended by between 20 and 100 police officers, whereas under the old law fewer than 11% of assemblies were policed to this extent. It remains to be investigated to what extent this change of pattern is justified on the ground and there is a real need for a larger deployment of policemen at assemblies due to the presence of more participants.

Graph 5.2 Police presence

19

12

28

19

6

12

0005

101520253035404550

1-5 policemen 5-20policemen

20 - 100policemen

more 100policemen

Police presence (monitored assemblies)New law(22.04.08)

Old law

The use of force, detentions or arrests and the dispersal of assemblies have increased in both relative and absolute terms since the adoption of the new law (Graph 5.3). Since the adoption of the new law force was used in 7 cases, compared to 4 cases under the old regime; detention or arrests were used in 6 cases, compared with 4 cases under the old regime; and dispersal was used in 8 cases, compared to 15 cases under the old regime. Furthermore, as the qualitative research shows (below) use of force, dispersal or detention and arrests have been used against a limited group of organizers.

Graph 5.3 Police actions


24

00

6

2 15

8

4

6

4

7

000

5

10

15

20

25

special e

quipm

ent

barriers

disp

ersio

n

detention/arrest

use of fo

rce

won

ded po

licem

en

Police actions (monitored assemblies)

Newlaw(22.04.08)Old law

In order to assess whether the increase in the absolute number of police interventions has also resulted in a de facto increase in police intervention, the graphs below present the data on the number of interventions per assembly. Given that all assemblies in which there was a police intervention have been observed by the monitoring project we can conclude that police intervention through use of force and recourse to detentions or arrests have doubled in frequency since the adoption of the new law, while actions to disperse assemblies and the use of barriers have declined in frequency.

Graphs 5.4 Police intervention

4,3%

2,0%

10,7%

7,9%

2,9%

5,9%

2,9%

6,9%

0,0%

2,0%

4,0%

6,0%

8,0%

10,0%

12,0%

barriers dispersion detention/arrest use of force

Relative wieght of police intervention (all assemblies)

old law

new law

7,2%

4,1%

18,1%

16,3%

4,8%

12,2%

4,8%

14,3%

0,0%

2,0%

4,0%

6,0%

8,0%

10,0%

12,0%

14,0%

16,0%

18,0%

20,0%

barriers dispersion detention/arrest use of force

Relative Weight of police intervention (monitored assemblies)

old lawnew law

In a later section on judicial and legal proceedings we will offer a quantitative analysis of the kinds of assemblies that have involved use of force, detention or arrest and the dispersal of participants.

5.2. Police intervention practice The police have invoked the provisions of the administrative offences legislation contained in the Code of Administrative Contraventions39 when intervening against assemblies. Organizers have been prosecuted and individuals charged in court under the following provisions:


25

1) breach of legislation regarding assemblies40, 2) insulting a policeman41, 3) resistance to policemen42, 4) involvement of children in public actions43, 5) breach of residency rules by a foreign citizen 44, 6) insult45, and 7) petty hooliganism46.

Following the adoption of the new law the number of accusations of failing to comply with the notification procedure, staging illegal assemblies, insult of and resistance to policemen have all increased. Additionally, new types of charges have been brought against the organizers. Failure to properly notify an assembly has been the most frequent accusation of the breach of the law by the police, with five such cases being brought under new law compared to only two under the old law. Two further assemblies have been considered illegal by the police even though the organizers invoked the clauses in the new law on small and spontaneous assemblies. Under the new law there have also been more cases involving charges of insulting a policeman and showing resistance to policemen. Among the new types of accusations have been: 1) causing material damage, 2) participation in an illegal assembly, 3) petty hooliganism, 4) the involvement of children in political activities and 5) causing insult to others.

Graph 5.5 Prosecuting reasons

2

5

2

2

0 1

0

1

0

1

3

3

1

2

0

1

0 1

0 1

0

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Declaration failure (174/1(1)) unauthrized

assembly (174/1(2))

Participation unauthorised

assembly (174/1(4))

Causing materialdamage

(174/1(5))

Police resistence(174/5(6))

Insult ofpolicemen174/6(1)

Resistence topolicement(174/5(1))

Petty hooliganism(164(1))

Residence permit breach 191/1(1) Insult (47/3 (1)) Children

politics170/5

Reasons for prosecution by police

New law (22.04.2008) Old law

Many of the charges have been brought against Hyde Park and its members, particularly under the new law (Graph 5.6). Other organizers who have been charged include Mr Matasaru (an individual protestor), Salvgardare and Mr. Boicenco (also an individual protestor). A qualitative analysis of the cases would shed light on the nature, discourse content and actions that led to a prosecution by the police. Hyde Park is a civic group that practices imaginative activities clearly directed against the government and employs a medium designed to appeal to the media through use of figurative


26

and hyperbolic content. The group also aims to test the various provisions of the law, one example being the protest organized in front of the Presidency building on the day the new law entered into force (cited above). The event was not notified as it was a small assembly which did not require notification under the new law. However, the police intervened and removed the organizers from the scene. Salvgardare is a pensioners’ rights-oriented group that has attempted to force entry into Government buildings on a number of occasions, and at times have been dispersed by the police from the National Square. Matasaru and Boicenco have both protested in front of the court buildings, including hanging posters accusing officials of corruption. They have both been removed from the scene and been charged with damaging the environment or insulting behaviour.

Graph 5.6 Organizers prosecuted

0

5

1

0 2

2

0

1

0

1 1

0

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

HydePark/Brega

EuropeanMovement

AnatolMatasaru

Salvgardare Boicenco other

Organisers prosecuted

New law (22.04.2008)

Old law

Most of the accusations for breaches of the law have occurred in the Buiucani police district in Chisinau. Buiucani is the police district with the territorial responsibility for the central part of Chisinau city where the most of the assemblies take place.

Graph 5.7 Law enforcements bringing charges

2

7

10

01

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Chisinau Buiucani district police Chisinau central district police General prosecutor

Law enforcement body bringing charges

New law (22.04.2008)

Old law


27

In cases when the police intervene one can see a clear pattern of the undue use of the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO) legislation. The law on assembly requires close scrutiny and solid justification for suspension of an assembly, but if the CAO is used, this can lead to the detention of the organizers of the assembly and consequently to the suspension of the assembly. The threat presented by the sanctions contained in the CAO are clearly not reconcilable with the higher threshold contained in the law on assembly, and therefore one could conclude that this will result in a violation of the provisions of the law on assembly. However, the hierarchy of laws provided in the Constitution ensures that the CAO supersedes organic laws and therefore the provisions of the CAO are considered superior to the provisions of the law on assembly. From a different perspective the law on assembly is a specialized law, which demands a specific explanation on how the specific provisions of the CAO should relate to the exercise of freedom of assembly. This ambiguity creates something of a legal limbo in the application of the legal framework.

5.3. Judicial practice Most of the accusations brought by the police have not been upheld by the courts (Graph 5.8). Of the twenty cases brought by the police under the new law, thirteen have been rejected by the courts in the first instance courts and six have been rejected in the course of the appeal procedure. This means that two thirds of the accusations brought by the police have been settled in favor of the organizers in the first instance procedure, with all but one of the remaining third being rejected by the appeal court.

Graph 5.8 Court jurisprudence

4 1

3

20

13

6

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Old law New law (22 04 2008)

Charges brought and acquittals by the court

individual charges 1st instance acquited 2nd instance acquited

This is a remarkable result as the courts, by finding against the police, have begun to ensure there is greater respect for freedom of assembly. Nevertheless some problems remain as some decisions, related to administrative arrests, issued by courts in the first instance are not suspended if the accused seeks to appeal, and thus individuals may remain subject to administrative detention while the appeal process takes place.

Two cases studies of court enforcement of the right to organize spontaneous assembly. Case study 3. On 22 April 2008, the day of entry into force of the new law on assembly, X, who was participating in the press-conference organized by several human rights organizations to welcome


28

the adoption of the law, declared that the law now had to be tested in practice. At 10.40 X marched in front of the Presidential building holding a poster with the slogans “SOS! We are dying without rights!” and “Protest!”. Riot police approached him and requested that he end the activities. X refused stating that he wanted to test the law that had just entered into force since it had been published in the Official Gazette this very day. X was detained and accused of refusing to obey the police. In May 2008 the court of first instance declared the actions of the police unjustified citing the provisions of the law on assembly relating to small assemblies. Case study 4. On 30 April 2008 W, X, Y and Z carried out a non-notified protest in front of the National Palace during celebration to mark 50 years of National Public Television. The four carried the posters stating “Liars!”, “Traitors!”, “You have lied to the nation for 50 years!”. The police request that they end their protest was refused and police detained all four people claiming that they slandered the police and ignored their requests to disperse. On 8 May 2008 the court convicted X and Y of resisting police requests and slander, but freed W and Z. X was condemned to serve four days of administrative detention and Y received a fine. On 27 May 2008 the court of appeal reversed the lower court decision against X with full acquittal; however X had already served the administrative detention.

Based on the above mentioned discussions, one can see that the assembly rights enforcement is facilitated by the court decisions. Justice is formally done by the courts through the acquittals, yet this justice comes at quite a late stage when the assemblies are effectively suspended from being held.


29

6. Analysis of freedom of assembly policy This section contains an analysis of freedom of assembly policies. The analysis is based primarily on the information and data produced within the monitoring of assemblies project including:

a) individual assembly monitoring reports which have specific information on each event (see the Annex). The reports are written by trained and experienced monitors, with complex assemblies monitored by several monitors. Their reports cover events prior to and during the assemblies and activities following the assembly, and focus on the role and actions of various actors including organizers, participants, police, local authorities and the judiciary; b) individual reports, data and information (including observed facts, numbers, photos and assessments) are analyzed to form the core quantitative information on assemblies, while all individual reports are placed under the internal platform: http://www.credo.md/assembly c) some individual reports have been complemented by case study research, including interviews with relevant actors, and collection of other relevant information; d) information provided by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ombudsman Institute, including statistical and other materials; and e) legal analysis and interpretation of the use of the law.

The aim of this section is to build up evidence that is relevant to the policy-making process related to freedom of assembly. This will be used to identify both ongoing concerns and areas where improvements are required and will help to identify possible future legal solutions.

6.1 Application of the old law: concerns and problems This subsection will analyze the information and data to identify the problems and concerns that existed under the old law. This will show that the legal provisions did not support or facilitate the implementation of freedom of assembly. 6.1.1 Requests and denial of assemblies The denial, or refusal of permission, of an assembly has been a frequent practice that has been extensively documented by various reports by non-governmental organizations and statistical information from governmental bodies. The denial of assemblies has been imposed by the local authorities with either the support or the direct influence of the police, and has been invoked on the basis of a variety of grounds and reasons. The graph below documents the existing statistics for 2005 and 2006.

Graph 6.1 Reasons for denials of assemblies in 2005-06


30

17

11

5 44 3

31

51

32

43 4

2333

22

1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. disturbs public transportation

2. possible disturbans of public order

3. involvement of school children

4. place has another destination

5. no justification for holding an assembly

6. concurring assemblies declared (no one authorised)

7. possible counterdemonstrations

8. assembly reason has been exausted

9. already occupied by another organizer

10. case reasons is examined by the courts

11.place booked by state authorities manifestations

12.threats from rival groups

13.no reasons for holding the assemnbly

14.terms for authorization not respected

15.conditions for peaceful assembly not secured

16.authorization declaration not filled in properly

17.organizers has not been vested with full legitimacy

18.mayor considers assembly undesirable

19.special commissions created to solve the problem

20.25 meters distance cannot be respected

21.scope of assembly is defamation of s tate

Reasons for denial of assemblies, 2005-06

20052006

Based on Graph 6.1, one can see that a number of reasons were invoked to deny requests for an assembly. One line of refusals invoked procedural irregularities: organizers have not been vested with authority from the participants, the declaration is not filled in properly, or terms are not specified; this account for at least 13 cases. Another line of denial (involving 20 cases) cites parallel or counter-demonstrations, including concurring assemblies, possible counter-demonstrations, a place being occupied by others and a place being booked by state authorities. In at least 20 cases assemblies have been denied on the grounds that they are considered unjustifiable, specific reasons cited were: “the problem is being examined”, “the mayor considers an assembly undesirable”, “and assembly justification or reasons to carry it out do not stand any longer”. Other reasons for denial involve threat to public order; threats from other groups (including a possible disturbance to public order or public transport, threats from rival groups), the involvement of schoolchildren, and defamation of the State. A comparison of these reasons with Article 7 of the old law shows that the grounds for denial rarely complied with the legal interpretation of the grounds for refusal set out in the law. The generous interpretation of the grounds for denial by the local authorities raises questions as to whether the text of the old law was clear enough and whether the regulatory authorities followed the spirit of the old law. Case studies show that few refusals of assemblies under the old law have been brought to justice by the organizers and when cases have been brought to court the final decisions have been delivered months after the intended date of the assembly. In most of the cases denials have ultimately been overturned and declared illegal by the court. Some of the cases from 2005-2006 have gone to the European Court in Strasbourg, with decisions expected by the end of 2008 or early 2009.


31

The frequency of a decision to deny authorization to an assembly is substantial in relation to the number of assemblies requested. And as the number of the requests for the assemblies grew so too did the instances of denial, while the proportion of denials grew faster in Chisinau, which hosts most of the assemblies. Graph 6.2 below illustrates the pattern from 2004 to 2006 and a simple calculation proves that in 2006 more than a quarter of requests have been denied.

Graph 6.2 Requests and denials of assemblies in 2004-06

78

10

190

27

148

40

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2004 2005 2006

Requests and Denials in Chisinau

Requests Denial

There have been two cases already adjudicated by the Court in Strasbourg against Moldova, with five more cases in the pipeline, all relating to the flawed authorization procedure. As a result Moldova risks the imposition of 10-20,000 Euros in damages per case, with total potential damages at around 100,000 Euro in the next two years. Under the old authorization system the likelihood of further cases before the European Court for Human Rights would have remained high and as the authorization procedure would also have generated a number of cases at national level the costs would be even higher. The frequent denial of assemblies under the old law represented a substantial, serious and systematic violation of freedom of assembly. The incompatibility of the old law with international human rights standards has been one of the sources of a systematic violation of freedom of assembly. This situation was created by a restrictive interpretation of the right, including an intentionally restrictive use of vague legal provisions by the regulatory authorities and a decision-making process that allowed decisions to be made with limited facts. This situation created a necessity to modify and clarify the definition of an assembly, the authorization procedure and the grounds for the refusal of an assembly. Each of these aspects has been addressed in the new law and this has led to an important additional social value that will be discussed in the next subsection. 6.1.2 Holding assemblies The procedures under the old law influenced the choice of locations for an assembly for the organizers. Graph 4.9 illustrates that the most popular location for assemblies, subject to authorization, have been the National Opera, Parliament, and the National Square. The same graph shows that after the introduction of the notification procedure, the most popular places for assemblies became the National Square and the Presidency. This suggests that procedures and institutions of the old law influenced the location of an assembly. Several case studies and


32

information from organizers indicate that there was undue influence by the authorities and police to change the location of an assembly from the preferred choice of the organizers. Under the old regime there was no readily available legal solution for organizers to protect their rights to assembly, as this would have required a combination of legal quarantines for the choice of place and also work with the regulatory authorities to understand their concerns that underpinned their refusals. Under the old regime, most restrictions were imposed prior to the event through the authorization procedure. Graph 5.1 clearly depicts the trend of the regulatory authorities and police in imposing restrictions prior to the event: 22 cases involve prior restrictions and only six were subjected to restriction as the assembly unfolded. Case studies and legal analysis of the old law show that restrictions were imposed on the basis of restrictive interpretations of the rather vague provisions of the law. Even though sometimes restrictions could be justified, case studies demonstrate that restrictions would be made to: a) facilitate the police interests or b) reduce the public visibility of the event. These aspects raise further concerns in relation to police intervention. The excessive legal restrictions and vagueness needed to be modified in favor of limiting the discretionary power of the regulatory authorities to restrict the assemblies. One of the direct conclusions could be the requirement for capacity-building activities with the local authorities to raise their skills and self-confidence in dealing with the complexities of regulating and policing assemblies. 6.1.3 Policing and use of police force The policing of assemblies has been done in most cases with a police presence of fewer than twenty officers and Graph 5.2 shows that only a few assemblies required a police deployment of more than 20 officers. This suggests that the policing of assemblies does not require a substantial police force, with a smaller number of well-trained and skilled police being the preferred option. This issue relates to capacity-building rather than to the need for legal prescription. 6.1.4 Prosecution, police intervention, suspension and dispersal Police intervention at assemblies remained frequent, ranging from the use of barriers, dispersal of participants, arrests, detentions and use of force. The old law offered a rather general and permissive framework for interventions, suspension and dispersal of assemblies. Graph 5.4 shows that about 4% of assemblies were constrained from moving by barriers, more than 10% were dispersed partially or totally, while detentions and use of force were used in 2% of assemblies. These figures suggest a rather interventionist approach by the police. A more qualitative analysis explores the nature of police intervention with a small number of organizers. Graph 5.7 suggests uneasy relationships with Hyde Park and Mr Matasaru, actors who use more expressive and symbolic forms of manifestation with a limited number of participants. Qualitative analysis of police intervention shows that in a number of cases their intervention lacks legal justification, as the activities could not amount to a disturbance of public order or constitute a serious threat to public health. Police intervention often involves dispersal or detention and charging of the organizers, which in essence results in the suspension of the assembly. Comparing these interventions with the levels of court acquittals suggests that in most cases police intervention lacks justification (Graph 5.7).


33

Information from case studies indicates that some of the cases have been taken to the European Court in Strasbourg. This situation raises some concerns. The old law and the police behavior encroached on the core of freedom of assembly. To effectively address this situation, one would require changes in the law, in a number of provisions of the Code of Administrative Sanctions and most importantly changes of the police attitude in the application of the law.

6.2 Application of the new law: improvements and remaining concerns This subsection will interpret the information and data to understand to what extent the new law addresses the problems and concerns identified under the old regime, and whether problems and concerns remain that will have to be addressed through legal, institutional or capacity-building measures. 6.2.1 Organizing assemblies Establishing a notification procedure for holding assemblies has had a positive impact. Spontaneous assemblies are now legal and small assemblies are not required to be notified; citizens, NGOs and other actors have begun to use these forms of assembly. Denials of the authorization have disappeared so had the associated legal conflicts. The statistics presented in the previous section shows a moderate change in the type of the assemblies, the number of participants and even the police involved in securing public order. The direct public benefit of these changes can be estimated in the saving of legal costs and potential imposition of the obligation to pay damages by the European Court in Strasbourg and in the benefit for citizens’ rights to exercise freedom of assembly. The costs of administrative procedures associated with assemblies have been reduced and have moved to tasks related to facilitating an event. There is no direct evidence of any increased complexity or additional demands required to manage the new notification procedure. Graph 6.3 compares the potential costs and benefits between the old and new legal provisions.

Graph 6.3 Cost benefit estimate Old law New law Explanations

A. Benefits A1. Saved legal costs for of denial assemblies A2. Saved damages at the European Court in Strasbourg A3. Citizens benefit for liberty A4. Reduced costs for organizers to comply with proceedings

0

0

0

0

50,000 Euro

50-100,000 Euro

Could not be monetized

15 000 Euro

1,000 Euro per denial, average at least 50 annually denied.2 10,000 Euro case, 5-8 cases annually3 World Bank study shows 5% GDP increase in free societies 50 Euro per case, 350-400 assemblies annually

2 Based on average cost of lawyers, judges and proceedings per this type case at national level 3 Based on the estimation of art. 11 ECHR sanctions against Moldova


34

B. Costs B1. Commission on assemblies meetings B2. other

Same

Same

No evidence for increase in costs (time, complexity)

(A-B). Net social value/benefit for society

Around 150,000 Euro annually plus benefit for freedom

of assembly

The shift to a notification procedure could produce a net social value of up to 150,000 Euro annually plus benefits of greater opportunities to exercise freedom of assembly by citizens4. Other benefits relating to the openness of the local authorities to the citizens could also be cited. 6.2.2 Conditions for holding assemblies Place. It has become easier for organizers to hold assemblies, but at the same time apparently the policing of assemblies have become moderately more difficult since the introduction of the new law. Evidence from the graphs 4.6 and 4.9 show that the types of assemblies, their duration and the number of participants have only changed moderately. The main change has been in the number of events being held. The evidence shows that since the organizers have had greater choice in location for assemblies, they have chosen to focus on the executive (National Square) and the presidency (President’s building). The new law has therefore managed to more effectively secure and protect the right to organize assemblies in the place of the organiser’s choice. Manner. Restrictions that are imposed on assemblies are now mainly imposed during the event rather than prior to the event. The evidence from the monitoring (Graph 5.1) shows a direct reversal in imposition of restrictions. The new law provides that restrictions may only be imposed by a court or if recommendations from the regulatory authorities are accepted voluntarily by the organizers. The substantial decrease in the use of restrictions can be explained as a result of the new law and represents a positive development. Restrictions imposed by the police during assemblies under the new law mostly relate to the need to respect the agreed terms of the assembly. In this respect the new legal provisions seem to have started working. An issue still remains with the capacity of the police and the regulatory authorities to effectively manage an assembly and in many cases the preferred choice of the police is to restrict the assembly. A counter-option would be to negotiate and co-operate with the organizers with the aim of facilitating their preferred options for an assembly. This issue requires further development of relevant policing skills. Most assemblies are held in fewer than a dozen locations in Chisinau, with most events taking in place in one of four or five sites. Appropriate policing skills and specific tactics could be devised for each of these places. The police presence at assemblies has increased under the new law: graph 5.2 shows the increased deployment of police officers. A professional assessment is required to determine whether the additional police presence is justified or whether it is a simple case of over-compensating for insufficient skills and limited capacity to deal with the uncertainties of public assemblies.

4 Under the condition that the intensity of civic and political activism will remain the same


35

6.2.3 Police intervention, suspension, dispersal and prosecution The new law has substantially addressed the issue of suspension and dispersal of events, yet in practice these provisions have been poorly interpreted and this suggests that other laws require modifications to bring the overall practice into line with the new standards. Graph 5.1 shows that under the new law police intervention in ongoing assemblies has slightly increased. This possibly depicts a police desire to exercise control over the assembly, comparable to the control they exercised using the prior restrictions under the old law. As the organization of assemblies has become simpler for the organizers and prior censorship imposed by the regulatory authorities is subject to better procedural and material scrutiny, the police appear to be trying to compensate for losing control by applying restrictions or intervening during an assembly. Overall, the new law has yet to address the problems related to the unjustified police intervention and restrictions during assemblies. Indeed, dispersal, use of force, and detention has continued, although largely directed at a limited number of organizers who use symbolic and expressive means of appealing to society. Police interventions in the course of holding of assemblies could be seen as either 1) incorrect interpretation of the assembly rights provided in the new law, or 2) as a very formal approach in the enforcement of the interests that are protected under the law on administrative sanctions, not related to the law on assembly. The latter police interventions amounts to the de facto dispersal and suspension of an assembly, neglecting the legal protection established in new law. This raises questions over whether this is due either to a lack of police goodwill in interpreting the new law, in conjunction with the administrative sanctions legislation, or an insufficient precision and clarity in the new law. There is a need for additional guarantees in the new law and changes in the attitude of the police if the situation is to be improved. Looking at Graph 5.4, which sets out the reasons for police intervention, one can see that supposed minor offences to public order or against the police (hooliganism, police insult, resisting the police, causing damages to environment, etc) have been the major reasons for police interference in an assembly. These supposed offences should not be used to create a new threshold to suspend assemblies. In future police intervention should be more clearly justified and fully in compliance with the spirit of the new law on assemblies. Police interventions at, and restrictions on, assemblies have mostly been invalidated by the courts. As Graph 5.7 shows, a systematic review of the charges brought by the police and the final decisions by the courts has indicated that most police interventions have been groundless. More than half of the accusations have been turned down by the court and the rest, with limited exception, have been rejected on appeal. The rights of the organizers have been upheld by the courts but often some months after the date of the assembly. This suggests that there is a serious lesson for the police to learn, and as Graph 5.6 shows, particularly for police in the Buiucani district Chisinau who have brought most of the charges. Yet again capacity building work with the police seems to be crucial to ensure the correct application of the provisions of the new law and particularly to encourage greater compliance with the spirit of the law. Below we provide a concise cost-benefit assessment of the current application of the new law compared to the more appropriate application of the new law:

Graph 6.4 Cost-benefit estimates of the two laws

New law current application by police

(status quo)

New law principled application by police

Explanations

A. Benefits


36

A1. Saved legal costs defense charges (organizer) A2. Saved damages Strasbourg court A3. Citizens benefit of liberty A4. Public image

0

0

0

0

20,000 Euro

10,000 Euro

Could not be monetized

Could not be estimated

1,000 Euro per denial, average at least 20 annually prosecuted.5 10,000 Euro case, 1-2 cases annually6 World Bank study shows 5% GDP increase in free societies

B. Costs B1. Prosecution costs (police) B2. other

2,500 Euro

no

50 Euro per case, 50 prosecution files annually

(A-B). Net social value/benefit for society

- 2,500 Euro

+ 30,000 Euro annually plus benefit for freedom

of assembly

A more principles application of the new law would deliver an additional value of at least 30,000 Euro annually, while the current application of the law delivers a strong negative social value. The society will better of if the police apply the new law regarding the intervention in assemblies correctly and in good will.

5 Based on average cost of lawyers, judges and proceedings per this type case at national level 6 Based on estimation of art. 11 ECHR sanctions against Moldova


37

7 Conclusions and recommendations

7.1 Conclusions on implementation of new assembly policy This subsection will discuss options on how to ensure there are improvements in the quality of freedom of assembly in Moldova. While looking at policy options, we will generate options along key problematic issues: 1) legal improvements within the current legal framework, 2) capacity building with the authorities, 3) political will and attitudinal improvements. The introduction of a notification procedure has produced significant benefits for society; in practical terms, it has ensured greater respect for the freedom and rights and an improvement in the public image of the authorities. The available quantitative information combined with the case studies and observations from monitoring assemblies proves that the modification has been well received by the regulatory authority, the police and the organizers and overall functions satisfactorily. The notification procedure has been strengthened with a more inclusive definition of the concept of assembly and the creation of basic principles. This allows sustainable guarantees for the functioning of the notification procedure. The notification procedure is justified from the perspective of social and economic benefits; the approach saves hundred of thousands of euros in possible losses to the society. The introduction of the notification procedure has meant that restrictions on assemblies are imposed by the police during the event. The new law introduced further guarantees for assemblies and their organizers. The evidence shows that in practice there is some progress regarding the use of restrictions by the police, while monitoring has shown that at times the police still intervene unjustifiably with assemblies. The courts’ rejection of police interventions proves this hypothesis, while the imposed restrictions rely on legislation on administrative sanctions rather than on the new law on assemblies. This means that the new law has managed to outlaw unjustifiable police intervention under the assembly law and has imposed more scrutiny, yet the police have unjustly used the administrative sanctions law to impose restrictions. This situation will require awareness-raising and a shifting in police attitude to ensure they work to the spirit of the new law. Excessive intervention by the police in assemblies creates additional social costs, which will amount to a social burden if there is a clear abuse of freedom of assembly rights. The social costs are associated with the cost of the judicial proceedings on behalf of the police, the courts and the organizers, in particular when cases are quashed by the courts. This practice also has chilling effect on potential organizers, and creates an alienation of sections of society from the authorities. The unjustified intervention by the police remains a continuous challenge for the new law and its application.

7.2 Recommendations This section presents recommendations based on the discussions and conclusions of the report. The recommendations are structured to include recommendations for the notification procedure, organization of the assembly and political support and reinforcement for the assemblies. Regarding strengthening of the notification procedure, there is a need for:


38

1) Consolidation of local authority and police capacities to deal with notifications, facilitation of the notification procedure, developing skills of the members of the commission on assemblies to work and deal with the organizers,

2) Collection of disaggregated information and statistics, comparable to those presented in this report, in order to understand the development of the functioning of the notification procedure,

3) Introduction of an on-line platform to announce lodging of notification and to publicize notified assemblies helping local authorities and the potential organizers to plan assemblies; the on-line platform could be modeled to the one that is used by the monitoring project,

4) Publication of the annual and bi-annual reports with detailed information on assemblies comparable to the information included in statistical information section.

Regarding holding assemblies and interventions in assemblies there is a need for:

1) Development of police awareness of the incompatibility of the use of administrative sanctions legislation with freedom of assembly legislation,

2) Capacity-building and confidence-building among the police to deal with conflict situations,

3) Developing skills and tactics in managing confrontational, aggressive and contradictory behavior,

4) The creation of specialized assembly-management policing groups, with a maximum of 50 persons who could be deployed to manage assemblies,

5) Learning from the court decisions on invalidating police interventions during assemblies, including dispersal, detention, etc.

6) Organizing capacity-building activities for the local authorities, police, organizers and media.

Regarding creation of generally policy-learning process there is a need for:

1) Greater political enforcement of the existing law on assemblies, the law is among the best in OSCE countries in terms of legal regulation of the freedom of assembly,

2) Greater co-operation between the police and local authorities in policing and facilitating freedom of assembly,

3) Production by the police and local authorities of annual reports including statistics and information on assemblies to inform the public,

4) Annual reports, which can be used for a review of practice and lessons relating to developments around freedom of assembly.


39

8 Annexes

8.1 Desegregated statistical data on assemblies

Graph 8.1 Time evolution of assemblies

monitored not monitored dec 2007 18 18 36 jan 2008 20 10 30 feb 2008 12 16 28 march 2008 23 7 30 april 2008 (new 22.04) 16 7 23 average old law 17,8 11,6 29,4 may 2008 41 20 61 june 2008 13 20 33 july 2008 14 22 36


40

Graph 8.2 Disaggregated statistics

Organizator

authorised/notified

spontaneous

prior restrictions/conditions

afterwords restrictions/conditions

peaceful

violent ellements

TIPUL

cultural social

commercial

piketing

manifestation/meeting

procession other

Old law: monitored 82 79 6 22 6 78 5 0 12 6 1 27 31 7 1

Old law: notmonitored 58 4 0 0 0 55 0 0 13 0 2 27 8 3 0

New law (22.04.08): m 61 49 11 5 17 56,5 3 0 1 12 1 16 28 2 1

New law (22.04.08): n 40 0 0 0 40 0 0 6 6 0 21 6 1 0

TOTAL 241 132 17 27 23 229,5 8 0 32 24 4 91 73 13 2

LOCALITATEA

Chisinau Balti

Ungheni Cahul

Soroca

Orhei

other

Locaţia solicitată

Locaţia acordată

Staţionară / deplasare

National square

Presidency

Parliament

Stefan Great Statute

National Opera

Public garden

City Hall

Procession other

Old law: monitored 0 72 7 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 66 10 2 20 3 19 1 5 6 13

Old law: notmonitored 0 34 0 2 0 10 4 5 0 0 7 4 0 4 2 8 4 0 3 18

New law (22.04.08): m 0 56 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 55 13 6 3 2 7 8 3 3 16

New law (22.04.08): n 0 31 0 0 0 1 1 7 0 0 0 7 1 6 0 0 5 0 2 11

TOTAL 0 193 7 3 2 12 6 16 0 0 128 34 9 33 7 34 18 8 14 58

Durata

less 1 hour

1-5 hours

5-12 hours

more than 12 hours

continous

Agenţi de securizare

1 per

1-50 pers

51-100 pers

101-500 pers

501-1000 pers

1001-10000 pers

10001 - 100000 pers

Old law: monitored #### 8 61 12 1 0 7 14 19 10 27 6 6 0

Old law: notmonitored 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

New law (22.04.08): m#### 12 42 7 0 0 5 9 25 6 14 0 7 0

New law (22.04.08): n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL #### 20 103 19 1 0 12 23 44 16 41 6 13 0


41

Numărul participanţilor

children

sound amplifier oficials mdia

emergency

counter-demonstrators

police presence

Numărul de poliţişti

1-5 policemen

5-20 policemen

20 - 100 policemen

more 100 policemen Civil

Uniformă

Old law: monitored #### 36 43 42 57 4 3 73 867 19 28 6 0 36 623

Old law: notmonitored 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 8

New law (22.04.08): m#### 27 24 19 45 8 2 50 676 12 19 12 0 33 377

New law (22.04.08): n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL #### 63 68 62 103 12 5 124 1543 31 47 18 0 70 1008

special equipment

barriers

dispersion

detention/arrest

use of force

wonded policemen

Judecată

Rezultat

instanţe număr

interzise

Old law: monitored 0 6 15 4 4 0 0 8 4 0 17 4

Old law: notmonitored 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

New law (22.04.08): m 0 2 8 6 7 0 0 5 3 0 10 0

New law (22.04.08): n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 0 8 23 10 11 0 0 13 7 0 27 4

ORGANIZATORI

political

civic groups ngo

individuals

commercial

government

NOMINAL

Falung Gong

Hyde Park

Journalist Union

Salvgardare

GenderDoc-M

Liberal Democratic Party

National Liberal Party

Liberal Party

Patent holders

Old law: monitored 0 5 10 30 20 17 4 0 1 5 11 2 0 1 0 1 11 0

Old law: notmonitored 0 4 4 4 13 13 4 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 5 0

New law (22.04.08): m 0 7 5 27 12 8 2 0 4 5 0 4 2 4 1 1 4 0

New law (22.04.08): n 0 4 5 12 8 4 5 0 9 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 3 0

TOTAL 0 20 24 73 53 42 15 0 14 10 13 7 3 11 1 3 23 0


42

9 References

• Individual reports produced by the project, www.credo.md/assembly, CReDO, 2007/08, • Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice, David Weimer, Aidan Vining, Prentice Hall; 4

edition, 2004, • Promolex, Report on Respect of Human Rights in the Republic of Moldova, 2004, 2005,

2006, • Center for Human Rights, Annual Report on the Respect of Human Rights, 2004, 2005,

2006, 2007, • Center for Human Rights, Specialized Report on the respect of freedom of assembly in

Moldova, 2007.


43

10 Endnotes 1 Old law on the organization and conduct of assemblies as adopted on 21.07.95 and abrogated on 22 April 2008 (referred to as old law) http://www.legislationline.org/legislation.php?tid=200&lid=6184&less=false 2Constitution of Moldova, 29 July 1994 http://www.legislationline.org/legislation.php?tid=200&lid=6182&less=false 3 Old law Article 2. Definition of assembly. For the purposes of this Law “assemblies” mean meetings, demonstrations, manifestations, rallies, processions, pickets and strikes held in public places, outside of enterprises, institutions, organisations or places of work, as well as any other assemblies of citizens that are not listed in the Article 3 and not regulated by any other law. Old law Article 3. Assemblies not regulated by this Law. (1) This Law does not regulate the procedure for organisation and conduct of meetings held by: а) State and municipal authorities; b) churches and other religious organisations registered in accordance with the legal procedure, including religious ceremonies inside the churches, at cemeteries, in the places of worship and at other designated locations; с) parties, other public and political organisations, professional unions acting in accordance with their charter and rules with the aim of convoking their members inside the premises owned or rented by these entities; d) managers or employees of enterprises, institutions, and organisations holding meetings at the territory owned, rented or entrusted to these entities; е) commercial enterprises, institutions and organisations holding business or entertainment events at the designated locations and with due respect for public order and rights and freedoms of others; f) institutions and organisations holding events in the form of sport competitions, concerts, and other cultural events at the designated locations and premises. (2) To ensure that these events are held with due respect for the public order the organisers may contract the services of police or other bodies and agencies for public safety. Old law Article 6. (1) Assemblies must be conducted peacefully, without any sort of weapon, while guaranteeing the protection of participants and the environment, without impeding the normal use of public highways, road traffic and the operation of economic undertakings and without degenerating into acts of violence capable of endangering public order and the physical integrity and life of persons or their property…. 4 Old law Article 11 “(1) Not later than 15 days prior to the date of the assembly, the organiser shall send the municipal council a notice in accordance with the model set out in the annex which forms an integral part of this Law. (2) The notice shall indicate: a) the name of the organiser of the assembly and the aim of the assembly; b) the date, starting time and finishing time of the assembly; c) the place of the assembly and the access and return routes; d) the manner in which the assembly is to take place; e) the approximate number of participants; f) the persons who are to ensure and answer for the sound conduct of the assembly; g) the services which the organiser of the assembly asks the Municipal Council to provide. (3) If the situation so requires, the Municipal Council may alter certain aspects of the notification upon agreement of the organiser of the assembly.” Old law Article 12. Terms and procedure of consideration of the notice (1) Local executive authorities of the city (municipal area) or village (community) shall consider the notice no later than 5 days before the scheduled date of the assembly. (2) When considering the notice at an ordinary or extraordinary meeting the municipal council shall discuss the form, timetable, place and other conditions for the conduct of the assembly and shall take the appropriate decision. (3) The organiser of the assembly has a right to take part in the discussion of the notice. The municipal council shall inform the organiser of the date and time of the meeting to discuss the notice. (4) If in course of discussion the council identifies circumstances preventing the conduct of the assembly at the specified time, place or in specified manner, any suggestion regarding alternative manner, time or place of assembly shall be made only in presence of assembly organisers and police officials. (5) If the municipal council failed to consider the notification or considered it outside of the time limit stipulated for in the paragraph 1, then the assembly shall be held on terms and conditions set forth in the notification. (6) The municipal council can take decision on prohibition of the assembly only after consulting the police and only when there is compelling evidence leading to believe that the conduct of assembly will violate provisions of the Articles 6 and 7 leading to the serious consequences for the society. Old law Article 13. Decision on the manner, time and place of the assembly (1) Pursuant to consideration of the notice, the municipal council shall decide and inform the organiser of one of the following decisions: а) authorisation of the assembly; b) refusal to authorise the assembly based on the provisions of the Article 12 (6). (2) The municipal council shall issue to organiser a document of authorisation to conduct an assembly agreeing the manner, time and place of assembly (hereinafter – authorization) or a copy of decision refusing such an authorisation on the day when the decision was taken. Authorisation shall be issued in the standard format approved by the municipal council and shall list the


44

rights and duties of the organiser, their liability for violating the law and shall spell out measures taken by the council and police to implement the provisions of the notice. Old law Article 14. Decision on refusal of authorisation (1) Decision to refuse authorisation shall be justified and put in writing. It shall contain the reasons for refusal pertaining to the time, place and manner of conduct of assembly or be based on other grounds as prescribed by this Law. (2) Organiser shall be informed about the decision on refusal of authorisation no later that 48 hours after the decision has been taken. Old law Article 15. Appeal against the refusal of authorisation (1) Organiser of the assembly has a right to appeal against the refusal of authorization to a competent administrative court. (2) The competent administrative court shall review the appeal against the refusal of authorisation within 5 days and shall take one of the following decisions: а) reject the appeal; b) invalidate the decision of the municipal council and oblige the council to issue an authorisation. 5 Old law Article 4. Organisers of the assembly The following persons are entitled to a right to organise an assembly: а) legally capable citizens of the Republic of Moldova over 18 years of age; b) parties, community-based and political organisations, enterprises, institutions, organisations, professional unions, churches and other religious organisations, non-governmental associations registered in accordance with the legal procedure. Old law Article 6. … (2) The involvement of students in unauthorised assemblies by their educators or by other persons from their schools shall be forbidden. Old law Article 10. Restriction of right to participate in the assembly Participation in the assembly is prohibited for persons that: а) are in possession of arms (openly carry or have with them firearms, cold steel or items intended for inflicting bodily injuries or material damage as well as items that are not intended but can be used for these purpose); carry explosive, flammable, radioactive, poisonous, and paralyzing substances or tear gas and other items or substances that can be used for violent action and to disrupt the regular process of the assembly; have with them alcoholic beverages ; wear masks or are masked in any other way; b) violate public order and deliberately obstruct movement of the public transport and pose threat to road safety; с) cynically violate moral norms by their appearance or in any other way. 6 Old law Article 8 Place of assemblies (1) Assemblies can be conducted in squares, streets, parks and in other public places from cities, towns and villages, as well as in public buildings. (2) It is forbidden to conduct an assembly in the buildings of the public authorities, of the local administration, of the prosecutor’s office, of the courts or of companies with armed security. (3) It is forbidden to conduct assemblies: a) at a distance closer than fifty metres from the building of the Parliament, the residence of the President of Moldova, the seat of the Government, the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Justice; b) at a distance closer than 25 metres from the buildings of the central administration authority, of the local public administration, courts, prosecutor’s offices, police, prisons and social rehabilitation institutions, military objects, railway stations, airports, hospitals, companies which use dangerous equipment and machines or diplomatic institutions. (4) Free access to the premises of the institutions enumerated at paragraph (3) must be guaranteed. (5) The local public administration authorities may, if the organisers agree, establish places or buildings for permanent assemblies. Old law Article 9. The time of the assembly is to be established by the organiser and the local council of the city, town or village.Article 17. Presence of officials at the assembly Official representatives of the municipal council, police and other legal bodies responsible for ensuring compliance of assembly with legal requirements have a right to be present at the assembly. In case of violation of provisions of the Article 6 or Article 7 the organiser of the assembly shall terminate the event upon the request of these official representatives or on the organiser’s own initiative. 7 Old law Article 7. Assemblies shall be prohibited when they enclose the following facts or actions: a) denial and defamation of the State and of the people; b) incitement to war, aggression, and to ethnic, racial or religious hatred; c) incitement to discrimination, territorial separatism, public violence; d) infringement of the constitutional order. 8 Old law Article 21. Duties and liability of the municipal council officials (1) Municipal council officials shall create conditions for organisation and conduct of lawful assemblies, providing for safety of organisers and participants and for protection of rights and freedoms of others, ensuring national and public security, and public order, physical and moral integrity of people. (2) Officials interfering with organisation of lawful assemblies are held liable in accordance with the existing legislation. Old law Article 22. Duties of the municipal councils Municipal councils of cities (municipal territories) and villages (communities) shall: а) take a decision on the venue of the assembly in accordance with the Article 8 and inform the public thereon; b) provide for paid services and equipment upon the request from the organiser ; с) prohibit sale of alcohol in places of assembly or in close proximity of such places and in case of necessary prohibit sale of alcohol in all of the municipal territory until the assembly is over; d) take any other measures needed to ensure that the assembly is held in a peaceful and civilised manner;


45

е) to return any advance payment made under the Article 18 e), if the assembly was prohibited on the grounds not covered by the Article 7 or when the organisers bear no responsibility for the prohibition. Old law Article 23. Duties of police officers (1) For the purposes of safeguarding the legal order and ensuring peaceful conduct of the assembly, police officers on duty shall be guided by the Law on police and by other legislation. (2) In case if the assembly acquires non-peaceful and uncivilized character police shall take measures to counter or stop actions interfering with public order or posing threat to life and physical integrity of citizens and law-enforcement officers or threatening to destroy or damage public or private property. (3) Police officers shall fill out a protocol specifying the breach of law during the assembly. Old law Article 24. Preventive measures When police officers are in possession of information leading to believe that participants of the assembly carry weapons, items or substances posing a threat to health or life of others, they shall inform the organiser and take decision on necessity of searching the participants of the assembly and their bags at the scene of the event in accordance with the procedure established by law. 9 Old law Article 18. Duties of the assembly organiser The organiser of the assembly shall: а) observe the provisions of this Law and other relevant legislative provisions; b) appoint persons who will lead the assembly and bear responsibility for its conduct; с) upon agreement with the police, appoint a group of clearly identifiable persons that will take measures to safeguard public order; d) delineate the place of assembly by displaying visual signs and in case of a rally to take measures to delineate the occupied areas of the road; е) based on calculation of the expenses, make an advance payment for the services and equipment provided by the municipal council for the purposes of the assembly upon request of the organiser; f) determine the route to and from the place of assembly and ensure that participants follow this route, take measures to ensure that participants arrive to the place of assembly before it starts and leave it immediately after the agreed time when the event is scheduled to end; g) ensure that the law-enforcement officers on duty have free access to the assembly; h) prohibit that persons, listed in the Article 10 a), take part in the assembly. Old law Article 19. Duties of the participants of the assembly Assembly participants shall: а) observe the provisions of this Law and other relevant legislation; b) follow the advice of the assembly organiser, municipal council officials and police; с) refrain from obstructing the assembly and from soliciting others to take such action through calls, distribution of manifestos or by other means; d) not display or carry items and substances listed in the Article 10 a); е) leave the assembly upon request of the assembly organiser, municipal council officials and police. Old law Article 20. Liability of the assembly organiser and participants (1) Organiser and participants of the assembly acting in violation of this Law are held liable in accordance with the procedure set by the administrative or criminal law. (2) Deliberate resistance of assembly participants to lawful requests of police officers on duty as well as threatening police officers with violence or taking violent action against them is punishable by law. (3) When the organiser or participants of the event fail to respond in a timely manner to the order of the municipal council or police officials seeking to terminate the assembly conducted in breach of this Law, the municipal council shall take the case to local court and the Government shall address the Supreme Judicial Chamber, which within 5 days shall take one of the following decisions: а) grant the appeal and order for termination of the assembly ; b) dismiss the appeal. 10 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1. (1) Violation of legislation regulating organization and conduct of assembly. Violation of the terms and procedure of consideration of notice on holding an assembly - is punishable by a fine of not less than twenty and no more than thirty minimal wages. (2) The organization and holding of an assembly without a prior notice to the municipal council or not authorized by it, and in breach of the conditions (manner, place, time) concerning the conduct of a meeting as indicated in the authorization – results in a fine to be imposed on the organizers (leaders) of the assembly in an amount equal to between twenty five and fifty times the minimal wage. 11 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1 (3) Failure of the organizer (leader) of the assembly to perform his or her duties prescribed by the law, -is punishable by a fine of not less than twenty and not more than thirty minimal wages. 12 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1 (6) any form of obstruction of operation of public transport or enterprises, institutions and organizations by participants of an assembly - is punishable by a fine of not less than twenty and not more than fifty minimal wages or by administrative arrest for up to fifteen days. 13 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1 (7) Involvement of children in unauthorized assemblies results in a fine of between 10 and 20 minimal wages. 14 Penal Code Article 140. Propaganda of war (1) Propaganda of war, dissemination of biased or feigned information, contributing to instigation of war, or any other activity aimed at unleashing war through public calls, in writing, via radio, television, cinema or using any other means,- is punishable by a fine of up to 500 conventional units or by imprisonment for not less than 3 and no more than 8 years and by a ban on holding office or engaging in certain activity for up to 5 years. 15 Penal Code Article 346. Deliberate action aimed at inciting national, racial or religious hatred or discord Deliberate action and public calls, including those made through printed or electronic mass-media, with the aim of inciting national, racial or religious hatred or discord or degrading national honour and dignity, as well as direct or indirect restriction of


46

rights or direct and indirect provision of advantages for citizens based on their nation, race or religious affiliation,- is punishable by a fine of up to 250 conventional units or with imprisonment for up to three years. 16 Penal Code Article 341. Public calls to overthrow or forcibly change the constitutional order of the Republic of Moldova (1) Public calls to overthrow or forcibly change the constitutional order or to undermine territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, as well as disseminating for this purpose any materials containing such calls,-is punishable by a fine of not less than 200 and no more than 600 conventional units or by imprisonment for any term not exceeding 2 years. (2) The same offence in the event of: a) being repeatedly; b) committed by two or more persons, is punishable by a fine of not less than 300 and no more than 1000 conventional units or by imprisonment for the term not exceeding 5 but not less than 7 years. (2) Involvement of minors in group actions leading to serious interference with public order, concomitant with resisting lawful orders of officials or obstructing regular operations of transport, or inflicting serious damage to legally guarded rights and interests of individuals and legal entities, -is punishable by a fine of up to 500 conventional units or by imprisonment for up to five years. 17 Penal Code Article 358. Organization or active participation in group actions leading to serious interference with public order, and involvement of minors in this offence: (1) Organization or active participation in group actions leading to serious interference with public order, concomitant with resisting lawful orders of officials or with obstructing regular operations of transport, enterprises, institutions, and organizations, -is punishable by a fine of up to 500 conventional units or by imprisonment for up to 3 years. 18 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1 (4) Active participation in an assembly referred to in paragraph (2) of this Article - results in a fine in an amount between 180 and 450 minimal wage. 19 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1 (6) any form of obstruction of operation of public transport or enterprises, institutions and organizations by participants of an assembly - is punishable by a fine of not less than twenty and not more than fifty minimal wages or by administrative arrest for up to fifteen days. 20 Penal Code Article 140. Propaganda of war (1) Propaganda of war, dissemination of biased or feigned information, contributing to instigation of war, or any other activity aimed at unleashing war through public calls, in writing, via radio, television, cinema or using any other means,- is punishable by a fine of up to 500 conventional units or by imprisonment for not less than 3 and no more than 8 years and by a ban on holding office or engaging in certain activity for up to 5 years. 21 Penal Code Article 346. Deliberate action aimed at inciting national, racial or religious hatred or discord Deliberate action and public calls, including those made through printed or electronic mass-media, with the aim of inciting national, racial or religious hatred or discord or degrading national honour and dignity, as well as direct or indirect restriction of rights or direct and indirect provision of advantages for citizens based on their nation, race or religious affiliation,- is punishable by a fine of up to 250 conventional units or with imprisonment for up to three years. 22 Penal Code Article 341. Public calls to overthrow or forcibly change the constitutional order of the Republic of Moldova (1) Public calls to overthrow or forcibly change the constitutional order or to undermine territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, as well as disseminating for this purpose any materials containing such calls,-is punishable by a fine of not less than 200 and no more than 600 conventional units or by imprisonment for any term not exceeding 2 years. (2) The same offence in the event of: a) being repeatedly; b) committed by two or more persons, is punishable by a fine of not less than 300 and no more than 1000 conventional units or by imprisonment for the term not exceeding 5 but not less than 7 years. 23 Penal Code Article 358. Organization or active participation in group actions leading to serious interference with public order, and involvement of minors in this offence: (1) Organization or active participation in group actions leading to serious interference with public order, concomitant with resisting lawful orders of officials or with obstructing regular operations of transport, enterprises, institutions, and organisations, -is punishable by a fine of up to 500 conventional units or by imprisonment for up to 3 years. 24 Penal Code Article 184. Violation of the right to freedom of assembly. 1) Violation of the right to freedom of assembly by means of unlawful obstruction to holding or participating in a meeting, demonstration, manifestation, procession or any other type of assembly as well as compelling citizens to take part in the assembly against their free will: a) committed by an official; b) committed by two or more persons; c) accompanied by violence with no threat to life or health, is punishable by a fine of not less than 200 and not more than 400 conventional units or by up to 2 years’ imprisonment. 25 Penal Code Article 184. Violation of the right to freedom of assembly. 1) Violation of the right to freedom of assembly by means of unlawful obstruction to holding or participating in a meeting, demonstration, manifestation, procession or any other type of assembly as well as compelling citizens to take part in the assembly against their free will: a) committed by an official; b) committed by two or more persons; c) accompanied by violence with no threat to life or health, is punishable by a fine of not less than 200 and not more than 400 conventional units or by up to 2 years’ imprisonment. 26 Administrative Sanctions Code: Article 174/1. (1) Violation of legislation regulating organisation and conduct of assembly. Violation of the terms and procedure of consideration of notice on holding an assembly - is punishable by a fine of not less than


47

twenty and no more than thirty minimal wages. (2) The organisation and holding of an assembly without a prior notice to the municipal council or not authorised by it, and in breach of the conditions (manner, place, time) concerning the conduct of a meeting as indicated in the authorisation – results in a fine to be imposed on the organisers (leaders) of the assembly in an amount equal to between twenty five and fifty times the minimal wage. 27 Penal Code Article 184. Violation of the right to freedom of assembly. 1) Violation of the right to freedom of assembly by means of unlawful obstruction to holding or participating in a meeting, demonstration, manifestation, procession or any other type of assembly as well as compelling citizens to take part in the assembly against their free will: a) committed by an official; b) committed by two or more persons; c) accompanied by violence with no threat to life or health, is punishable by a fine of not less than 200 and not more than 400 conventional units or by up to 2 years’ imprisonment. 28 New law Article 2. Scope of application This Law stipulates the procedure for arrangement of processions, meetings, assemblies, pickets or other forms of assemblies organized in public, hereinafter referred to as meetings. 2) The provisions of this Law do not refer to organizing and holding of: a) religious meetings, in form of public worship or other traditional manifestations; b) sport, cultural-artistic manifestations and other relaxation activities, c) commercial cultural events, sports competitions, concerts and entertainment activities. New law Article 3. Definitions For the purposes of this Law: - Assembly shall mean a temporary and intentional gathering of a group of persons together to express some attitudes and ideas, - Less numerous assembly shall mean assembly with less than 50 persons, - A spontaneous assembly shall mean an assembly, that has been arranged or organized as a direct and immediate response to social events, which, in the opinion of participants, cannot be postponed, and as a result the usual notification procedure is not practical or possible; - Simultaneous assemblies shall mean assemblies organized in the same place and time, which may or may not have the same motives and purposes, and whose organizers may have similar, different or controversial opinions. 29 New law Article 4. Principles This Law applies with respect of the following principles: 1) proportionality, that envisages application of any restriction in freedom of assembly, authorities should respect the balance between the necessity of the restriction in a democratic society and the exercise of the right to assembly. 2) non-discrimination, according to which the right to assembly is guaranteed to all citizens, irrespective of their race, nationality, ethnic origin, language, religion, gender, opinion, political affiliation, wealth or social origin; 3) legality, according to which as justifying reasons for any form of prohibition or limitation of the freedom of assembly shall serve only the legal provisions, without the possibility for authorities to question the opportunity of an assembly. 4) the presumption in favour of organization of an assembly, according to which at the examination of a request by the authorities, as well as during the insurance of the public order at the meetings, such actions shall be taken as to remove only illicit elements of the meeting, otherwise granting to the possible extent the right of assembly. 30 New law Article 10. Notification procedure (1) Any person intending to hold an assembly, shall notify the public authorities from the respective region or territorial-administrative unit, in writing, by a prior declaration, with at least five days prior to the meeting. (2) Prior declaration shall contain the name or, in case of a legal entity, the title of the organizer, purpose of the meeting, date and place of the meeting, form of assembly, and, when necessary, the route of the assembly, the hour it starts, an estimative number of participants, envisioned duration of the meeting, services requested from the authorities. (3) The local authority body responsible for the registration of the requests shall register the prior declaration and shall issue the organizer a stamped copy of it, containing the number, date and hour of registration of the prior declaration. (4) The local public authorities shall take necessary actions to ensure required by the organizers services, that are provided regularly through the organs and institutions that are subordinated. New law Article 11. Declaration of simultaneous assemblies (1) If there are more applicants that have registered prior declarations regarding the organization of meetings in the same place and time, the competent local public authority shall organize a sitting with the participation of all applicants in order to find the adequate solution for organization of each simultaneous meeting. (2) If, depending on the declared place for holding more meetings in the same time, and on the estimated number of participants, the conclusion will be reached that all simultaneous meetings are possible, the organizers shall be given recommendations as to the portion of the territory where the assembly will be held, as well as indications to police for maintaining public order. (3) If after discussions among the public authorities, police and all the organizers of the assemblies, the decision is reached regarding the impossibility to organize all meetings simultaneously, the competent public authority shall propose the organizers to change the hour or place of the assembly. (4) If after the discussions as stipulated in par. (3), none of the applicants wishes to change the hour or place of the meeting, priority shall be given to the organizer that has first submitted the prior declaration. New law Article 12. Exceptions to notification procedure (1) In case of spontaneous assemblies notification is admissible even without respecting the conditions regarding the written format or the time limit provided in art. 10 (1). In this case it is sufficient to provide information on the date, hour and place of the meeting, its organizers, as well as services requested from authorities.


48

(2) Organizers shall exercise the right to assembly as stipulated in conditions of par. (1) with good faith and shall inform the competent authorities about the intention to organize a meeting once it has become known in order to facilitate the guarantee of the freedom of assembly by the competent public authorities. (3) Authorities shall take all necessary measures to ensure the security of all spontaneous assemblies. (4) Competent public authorities may file lawsuits in order to challenge the conditions and terms in which spontaneous meetings have taken place. The judicial procedure does not have a suspensive effect on the meetings and the burden of proof is on the initiator of the lawsuit. (5) It is not mandatory to notify the local public authorities through a prior declaration for the assemblies that have less than ten participants and which do not cause restriction of the traffic on the public roads. If organizers of a meeting with limited number of participants require certain services from the authorities or wish to set a temporary construction, they shall submit a prior declaration in this regard at least one working day prior to the date of the assembly. New law Article 13. Notification of the public Any person has the right, even prior to place the declaration, to disseminate information regarding the organisation of the assembly, place, time and its purposes or any other relevant information, to encourage the public to take part at the meetings through speeches, flyers, announcements, information campaigns, other legal methods. 31 New law Article 6. Assembly organizers 1) Persons with full legal capacity, groups of persons, as well as legal entities, have the right to organize meetings. 2) Minors of age 14 as well as persons with no full legal capacity together with a person vested with full legal capacity can organize assemblies. New law Article 7. Participants to assemblies 1) Any person is free to actively participate or assist at an assembly. 2) Nobody can be forced to participate or assist in an assembly. 32 New law Article 5. Place of assembly 1) Assemblies may be organized in any open to the public place, outside buildings and outside spaces closed for free access. 2) Assemblies could be organized in one place or in procession. 3) In case of carrying out of some official actions or of some repair works, local administration, upon the request of the interested authority, can declare temporary limited access to places where ordinarily access is free. New law Article 9. Necessary equipment for holding an assembly (1) During the assemblies, any graphic or sound device for expression of attitudes or opinions, any special sound amplifiers and other objects specific to organization of an assembly may be used. (2) It should also be allowed to set any temporary constructions. In this case, the organiser shall take necessary measures in order to prevent causing of disproportionate inconveniences to participants or by-passers and not to cause damages to the environment, in the end removes the construction from the place. New law Article 14. Modification of conditions for holding the assemblies and prohibition of the assemblies (1) If, based on the prior declaration or based on a request to ensure public order in the time of carrying out of the assembly, authorities will only act to isolate or remove discretionary the illegal elements, facilitating the organization and continuation of the assembly. (2) If information from prior declaration or from any other information, follows that the scope and the form of organizing the assembly contravene to the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova or can follow the violation of legislation, local public authorities immediately inform the organizer on the circumstances and the legal consequences. (3) If considers necessary for the insurance of peaceful assembly, local administration can recommend the organizers to modify the conditions of carrying out of assembly regarding time, place or its form. The final decision belongs to the organizers. (4) Local authorities can seek judicial recourse if are in possession of the information that the assembly will be carried out with the violation of art. 8. Local authorities can seek to ban the assembly, modify the time, place, form of organization. The start of the judiciary proceedings does not suspend the assembly. (5) Courts hear the request to ban or modify the terms of the assembly and adopt within 3 days a decision. (6) Courts can adopt one of the following: a) ban the assembly, b) maintain the assembly. New law Article 16. The manner of holding the assemblies 1) The assemblies shall be held only in a peaceful manner. 2) The organizer has to ensure access to houses in the immediate proximity of the place of assembly. 3) No explosives, weapons or objects that can harm lives are allowed. 4) Assemblies held between 23.00-7.00 are not allowed the use of the sound amplifier equipment. 33 New law Article 8. Prohibited assemblies (1) The following assemblies shall be prohibited that have as purpose: a) Instigation to aggression war, national, racial, ethnic or religious hatred; b) Instigation to discrimination or violence; c) Undermining of national security, disturbance of public order, public morality, organization of mass disturbances, violation of human rights and freedoms, presenting danger to other lives, breach of public morals. New law Article 21. Ensuring the public order. Suspending assemblies (1) If during the holding of the assemblies some participants public order or the provisions of article 8 have been violated, the organizer, or in case of necessity together with police, shall remove participants that take such actions.


49

(2) If during the meetings there are actions that seriously violate the provisions of article 8, the representative of the local public authority shall request the organizer to cease the meeting. This being the extreme measure that can be used only if other measures are not sufficient to ensure holding of an assembly in a legal manner. (3) The lack of the prior declaration is not a reason for suspending a meeting. New law Article 22. Dispersing assemblies 1) If the organizer does not comply with the request of local administration or does not manage the suspension of the assembly, representative of local authorities will ask for the dispersion of the participants. 2) In case when after the request of the local authority, participants to the assembly do not leave the place for the assembly, the police can warn the participants about the possible use of the special means and a forcible dispersal of the meeting, offering a reasonable period of time to comply with the request, afterwards the dispersal request will be reiterated. 3) In case when after the reiterated request for the dispersal, the participants to the assembly do not leave the place, upon the request of the representative of the local authority, the police will disperse the participants. 4) In case of the forced dispersal of the assembly, police writes up a motivated conclusion that provides with the motives and reasons of the dispersal. 34 The suspension of the spontaneous assembly is done through a judicial procedure based on the nonconformity with the formal procedures for notification. The burden of proof lies with the local authorities. 35 New law Article 17. Registration of meetings (1) Any person may register the meetings on audio or video devices. (2) Access of the press to the meetings shall be ensured by the organizers and authorities. 3) Seizure of the technical means, audio and video registrations of assemblies is allowed only under the provisions of equality. New law Article 18. Duties of the organizer (1) The organizer Of the assembly has the following obligations: a) to carry out assemblies only in forms, places and terms indicated in prior declarations and do not allow substantial deviations. b) to designate a coordinator of the assembly and to communicate, within reasonable terms, to local public authorities, his/her name. (3) Organizer can designate marshals to maintain the order during the assembly, who will bear distinctive signs and will be easy identifiable. New law Article 19. Duties of participants Participants have the following duties: a) to respect the legislation, public order and legitimate requests of the organizer, b) to abstain from the actions that can impede the carry out of the assembly and from the incitement to this kind of actions, c) to leave the assembly upon the request of the organizer and/or of the representative of local administration or of the police as stipulated in art.21 and 22. 36 Including 1 week from April from 22nd of April to 1st of May 2008 37 The case of LGBT parade taken place during the new regime is an extraordinary stand alone case 38 In this report: 1) picketing is small or medium size gathering in protest in front of the particular institution, 2) manifestation/meeting is a medium or large size gathering uniting people for a particular cause or policy agenda, 3) proceedings are movable processions, passing a number of places ending with a meeting or picketing. 39 http://lex.justice.md/index.php?action=view&view=doc&lang=1&id=327751 40 Article 1741 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Breach of legislation regarding assemblies. 1) Breach of terms and ways of examination of declarations for carrying out assemblies – fined with 20-30 conventional units. 2) Organization and carrying out of unauthorized assemblies or breach of conditions (place, form and time) indicated in the authorization – fined with 20-50 conventional units. 3) Failure of organizer to comply with provisions of law – fined with 20-30 conventional units. 4) Active participation in unauthorized assembles or those that breach authorized conditions - fined with 10-15 conventional units. 5) Participation in assemblies of persons with ammunition that can cause physical burden or material damage – fined with 5-50 conventional units or administrative arrest up to 15 days. 6) Preclusion under any form by the participants of the circulation of public transport or of functioning of institutions, organizations – fined with 20-59 conventional units or administrative arrest up to 15 days. 7) Involving children in the unauthorized assemblies or breach of conditions (place, form and time) indicated in the authorization – fined with 10-20 conventional units. 41 Article 1746 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Insult of policeman … 1) Insult of policeman, intentional insult of the honor and dignity, insult of other deeds of police or of a person that is in charge to maintain public order, combats criminality, expressed verbally or in written – fined with up to 10 conventional units or with up to 15 days of administrative arrest. 2) … 42 Article 1745 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Resistance to policeman… 1) Putting resistance to a policeman or of a person that is in charge to maintain public order, combats criminality, expressed verbally or in written – fined with up to 15 conventional units or with up to 30 days of administrative arrest. 2) … 43 Article 1705 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Involvement of children in political actions. Involvement of children in political actions – is fined with 20-50 conventional units. 44 Article 1911 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Breach by foreign citizens or stateless persons of residence rules 1) Residence with no valid or expired identity card, entrance with the expired, terminated visa or stay beyond the 3 month term limit when visa is not necessary - fined with 30-50 conventional units. 2) … 45 Article 473 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Insult 1) Insult, intentional depreciation of person’s honor and dignity by verbal or written actions – fined with 7-15 conventional units or administrative arrest up to 15 days. 2) …


50

46 Article 164 of the Administrative Contraventions Code. Petty Hooliganism 1) Petty hooliganism, words and insulting expressions in public places, depreciative anchoring of citizens or other similar actions that disturb public order and citizens peace – fined with 5 conventional units or if considered ineffective or given specific circumstances of the person fined with administrative arrest up to 15 days. 2) …

Freedom of Assembly Policies in Moldova: Liberal Changes Possible

Documents

Transcript of Freedom of Assembly Policies in Moldova: Liberal Changes Possible