CAT/C/MDA/CO/2

United Nations

Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment

Distr.: General
29 March 2010
Original: English

Committee against Torture
Forty-third session
Geneva, 2–20 November 2009

Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under
article 19 of the Convention
Concluding observations of the Committee against Torture

Republic of Moldova
1.
The Committee against Torture considered the second periodic report of the
Republic of Moldova (CAT/C/MDA/2) at its 910th and 912th meetings (CAT/C/SR.910
and 912), held on 11 and 12 November 2009, and adopted, at its 922nd meeting
(CAT/C/SR.922) held on 19 November 2009, the conclusions and recommendations as set
out below.

A.

Introduction
2.
The Committee welcomes the submission of the second periodic report of the
Republic of Moldova, which, while generally following the Committee’s guidelines for
reporting, is submitted with a delay of almost three years, and lacks statistical and practical
information on the implementation of the provisions of the Convention. The Committee
also welcomes the submissions of the replies to the list of issues
(CAT/C/MDA/Q/2/Add.1), in which the State party provided additional information on the
measures it has taken to implement the Convention. The Committee regrets, however, that
the State party has not responded in the framework of follow-up to the questions that it
raised in the course of consideration of the initial report of the Republic of Moldova
(CAT/C/32/Add.4), despite the reminder sent on 7 March 2006 by the Committee
Rapporteur on follow-up with regard to the concluding observations to the Republic of
Moldova (CAT/C/CR/30/7).
3.
The Committee notes with satisfaction the constructive dialogue held with the highlevel delegation of the State party.
4.
The Committee also notes the State party’s assertion that it cannot be held
responsible for violations of human rights committed on the territory over which it “does
not exercise a real jurisdiction”, as is the case with the left bank of the Dniester river
(HRI/CORE/1/Add.114, paras. 33–34). The Committee nonetheless reiterates that the State

GE.10-41468 (E)

070410

Select target paragraph3