Zareg Case; Decision Regarding the Appeal
|Publisher||Moldova: Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of Chisinau Tribunal|
|Author||Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of Chisinau Tribunal|
|Publication Date||6 June 2000|
|Citation / Document Symbol||Ia-500|
|Cite as||Zareg Case; Decision Regarding the Appeal , Ia-500 , Moldova: Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of Chisinau Tribunal, 6 June 2000, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b6b98.html [accessed 22 May 2013]|
|Comments||Note: all decisions were taken in absence of national law on refugee status. Names of defendants have been changed in order to safeguard their right to privacy. This is an unofficial translation.|
Decision Regarding the Appeal
In the name of the Law
6 June 2000
Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of Chisinau Tribunal as follows:
president of the court session: Buruian Mihai
judges: Gurvin Vasile and Furdui Sergiu
court clerk: Madan Natalia
With the participation of:
Prosecutor: Balan Valentin
Defender counselor: Barbaneagra Alexei
Trying in a public court session in appeal the criminal case of charge against Zareg, born on 28.03.1967 in the Republic of Sudan, citizenship of Sudan, high education, single, without any permanent domicile, not convicted before on article 210.1 of the Criminal Code
On the appeal of the prosecutor of Centru sector from 24.04.2000 against the verdict of the court of Chisinau sector from 14 April 2000 by which Zareg has been acquitted on article 201.1 of the Criminal Code on the reason that there was not stated the fact of the crime,
The appealing party requires the cassation of the verdict and passing of a new verdict of conviction on the basis of article 201.1 of the Criminal Code, motivating that case evidences prove the defendant guilty in breaking on purpose of the rules of stay in the Republic of Moldova.
The prosecutor sustains the appeal but the defendant and his defender reject it, motivating that it is unfounded and the legal sentence is founded.
The Judicial Board for Criminal Cases rejects the appeal as being unfounded, keeping the appealed decision.
Verifying the legality and the solidity of passed decision regarding the formulated critics and ex officio too, it is stated that the fact situation retained and appreciated by law is in concordance with the administered and examined during the judicial investigation evidences, so the first instance's decision is right.
It results from the case materials that the defendant has a protection letter from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (case page no 21 and 84), which represents an official paper with an obligatory character for state authorities and which is issued for the duration of examination of the juridical status of the petitioner.
This mandate confirms the juridical status of the defendant and it is issued on the basis of the Agreement of cooperation between the UNHCR and the Government of the Republic of Moldova from 2 December 1998. This right of the defendant as a foreign citizen results from part 2 of article 19 of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, which provides: "The right for refuge is granted and rejected in conditions of law, with the observance of the international treaties to which the Republic of Moldova is a party."
Though the Republic of Moldova is not a party to the Convention on the status of the refugees, adopted on 28 July 1951 and entered into force on 22 April 1954, our state pledged in other international treaties to respect persons right to refuge and the principle of non-return of the persons which ask for refuge or have the status of a refugee. These being said next juridical acts to which the Republic of Moldova is a party are mentioned and which, in accordance with article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, have supreme juridical force:
- article 14 of the Universal declaration on human rights which provides "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution";
- article 3 of the UN Convention against torture and other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, which provides "No state Party shall expel, return or extradite a person to another state where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture";
- article 3 of the European Convention on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and article 7 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights, which provide "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".
It is, also underlined that through its whole behaviour the defendant did not break on purpose, as a foreign citizen, the rules of stay in the Republic of Moldova, as it is incriminated in the indictment.
Zareg, because of the civil war in his origin country - Sudan, has entered the territory of the Republic of Moldova having an entry visa for 90 days, he has registered immediately at the interior affairs organs, his visa was prolonged for 3 months, he has addressed to the competent authorities to solve his problem and as a result he received the Protection letter from UNHCR in the Republic of Moldova, which was mentioned above.
Relating the mentioned legal frame to the described situation of the defendant, it comes out that for sure in his actions there is no fact of the crime provided by article 210.1 of the Criminal Code and in accordance with law, it is suitable to acquit him.
So, the, verdict is legal and juridical founded. The found circumstances in this case, the evidences and conclusions fit between them and are exposed logically and consecutively strictly corresponding with the law requirements.
As a consequence the appeal is rejected as being unfounded and in conformance with law the verdict is maintained.
Taking as guide articles 321, paragraph 1, point 1. letter (c) - 324 of the Code on Criminal Procedure, the Board,-
to reject the appeal of the prosecutor of Centru sector as being unfounded, maintaining the verdict of the court of sector Centru from 14 April 2000 regarding Zareg.
The decision may be appealed in a term of 10 days in the Appeal Court.
President of the session, signature
The copy correspond to the original
President of the session, Buruiana Mihai