Moldova

Law, policy and practice on the protection of stateless people and prevention and reduction of statelessness is generally positive in Moldova. The country’s record on treaty accession is good and it is one of few states with a dedicated Statelessness Determination Procedure (SDP) established in law. The SDP is accessible, with a mandatory interview, an option to initiate the procedure ex officio, and some rights are granted to applicants. People recognised as stateless in Moldova are granted rights in line with nationals. Although there is an accelerated route to naturalisation, reduced from ten years, a stateless person must still wait eight years before being eligible to apply for citizenship.

Moldovan law provides for detention to be used only as a last resort and a country of removal must be set prior to detention for removal. However, periodic review of detention was removed in 2016, reducing protection from arbitrary detention. There are partial safeguards in nationality law to prevent statelessness and the Moldovan legal framework provides for universal birth registration. However, access to birth registration is hindered in practice by the requirement that parents must be documented to register a birth, with some communities at higher risk of remaining unregistered, such as Roma.

Last updated: 
Apr 2019
Next scheduled update: 
Mar 2020
Country expert(s): 

Additional resources

ASSESSMENT KEY

++POSITIVE
+ SOMEWHAT POSITIVE
+-POSITIVE and NEGATIVE
- SOMEWHAT NEGATIVE
--NEGATIVE

ADDITIONAL INFO

-NORMS & GOOD PRACTICE

 

International and Regional Instruments

Assesses whether countries are state party to the relevant international and regional instruments, including whether reservations have an impact on statelessness, and whether instruments are incorporated into domestic law. The four core statelessness treaties (1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons; 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness; European Convention on Nationality; Council of Europe Convention on the Avoidance of Statelessness in Relation to State Succession) carry more weight than other relevant human rights instruments in the assessment.

Moldova is party to most relevant international and regional instruments, including the four core statelessness instruments. It is one of very few countries to have acceded to the Convention on the Avoidance of Statelessness in Relation to State Succession. Moldova does retain some reservations to the 1954 Convention, but these no longer have substantive effect as domestic law grants all convention rights to people recognised as stateless.

  • Moldova has signed and ratified the 1954 Convention and it has direct effect.
  • Moldova maintains reservations to several articles (23, 24, 25, 27 and 31) but these no longer have substantive effect, as domestic law grants all convention rights to recognised stateless persons.
  • Moldova has signed and acceded to the 1961 Convention with no reservations and it has direct effect.
  • Moldova is state party to all relevant regional and international treaties (except for the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers) with some reservations, including to the European Convention on Nationality and European Convention on Human Rights, but these do not have a substantive impact on statelessness.
  • Moldova is not a member state of the European Union, but its domestic law partially implements EU Directives, including the EU Returns Directive.

Statelessness Population Data

Examines the availability and sources of disaggregated population data on statelessness. Provides recent figures and assesses reliability of measures countries have in place to count stateless persons, including in the census, population registries and migration databases. Notes whether statelessness has been mapped in the country and whether there are effective measures in place to count stateless people in detention.

Disaggregated data on the stateless population in Moldova is limited. The authorities record figures on people recognised as stateless but do not publish these. Data on detention is also not published. There are some problems with the way official data is collected, including that there are overlapping categories, such as ‘people with USSR passports’ and people with ‘undetermined citizenship’. No data is available for the disputed Transnistrian region. A mapping study of statelessness commissioned by UNHCR is forthcoming.

  • The Bureau of Migration and Asylum (BMA) and the Public Services Agency record the number of people recognised as stateless in Moldova, but this data is not routinely published.
  • Figures for the year-end 2018 were provided by the Public Services Agency: 1908 recognised stateless people (721 with expired IDs). The data is disaggregated including by age, gender, ethnicity, country of origin and place of residence. Of the total, 1410 live in Transnistria, 1120 are women (882 aged 18-59 and 238 over 60), and 788 are men (620 aged 18-59 and 168 over 60). The main ethnicities recorded include 835 ethnic Russians, 543 Ukrainians, and 297 Moldovans. The main countries of origin include 1024 from Moldova, 398 from Russia, 240 from Ukraine and 87 from Kazakhstan.
  • 1822 people with ‘undetermined citizenship’ and 8818 people (including 8512 Moldovan citizens) documented with former Soviet Union passports are also recorded.           
  • There is no other data available for the disputed Transnistrian region.
  • UNHCR reports the Public Services Agency figures listed above.
  • Data on refugees and asylum seekers is not published, but the Government shares monthly reports with UNHCR, and no stateless refugees or asylum seekers have been recorded.
  • Data on stateless people entering or leaving immigration detention is not published by the BMA. If stateless people are identified in detention, they are referred to the statelessness determination procedure and released.
  • NGOs report that 39 people were released from detention between 2012-2018 due to impossibility of removal.

Statelessness Determination and Status

Identifies whether countries have a definition of a stateless person in national law that aligns with the 1954 Convention, and whether they have a dedicated statelessness determination (SDP) procedure; or, if not, whether there are other procedures or mechanisms by which statelessness can be identified and legal status determined. Countries are subdivided in four groups to enable comparison between those with an SDP in place, those with other administrative procedures, those with a status but no clear mechanism, and those without any status or mechanism. Where a procedure and status exist, these are assessed against norms and good practice, and the rights granted to recognised stateless persons are examined.

Moldova established a dedicated SDP in law in 2011, which in many ways is an example of good practice, so it falls within Group 1. The procedure is accessible, with no fee or residence requirement, and can be initiated ex officio, in person, orally or in writing. The dedicated Statelessness Unit must examine claims within six months, free legal aid is provided by NGOs, an interview is mandatory, an interpreter can be arranged, and training is provided by UNHCR. The burden of proof is shared, and although not established in law, the standard of proof is the same as in the asylum procedure, and cross-referral between procedures is established. Applicants are protected from expulsion and have access to some basic rights, including the right to work; and there is an automatic right to appeal. People recognised as stateless are granted permanent residence and rights in line with nationals. Eligibility for naturalisation is reduced from the standard 10 years but stateless people must still wait eight years before naturalising.

  • The definition of a stateless person in national law is consistent with the 1954 Convention.
  • There is a dedicated statelessness determination procedure established in law.
  • The authority appointed to determine statelessness is the Statelessness Unit of the Bureau of Migration and Asylum (Ministry of Interior).
  • Statelessness determination is the specific objective of the procedure.
  • The procedure can be initiated ex officio or in person, orally or in writing. There is no application fee, residence requirement, nor time limit on when applications can be submitted.
  • By law, the application must be examined by the competent authority and an interview must take place within 15 working days of submitting the application.
  • There is no specific form for the initial application, but it must contain a clear and detailed description of facts and evidence to support the application. There is a mandatory interview, and the examiner completes all the paperwork during the interview.
  • If needed, an interpreter will be arranged.
  • UNHCR conducts training, roundtables and information sessions several times a year and there is good cooperation between the Government and legal aid providers and NGOs.
  • There are no targeted information campaigns for applicants on how to make an application.
  • The burden of proof is shared between the applicant and the state.
  • The standard of proof for the SDP is not established in law, but in practice, it is the same as in the asylum procedure.
  • There are protective measures in place for people with mental health care needs and unaccompanied minors; but not for women.
  • There is an internal instruction for the competent authority on how to determine statelessness, sources of evidence and procedures for gathering evidence, but this is not publicly available.
  • The law establishes that free legal aid should be provided for the administrative procedure. In practice, this is provided by NGOs.
  • Interviews are mandatory, and translation and interpretation are offered for free if needed.
  • Access to UNHCR is provided, and UNHCR monitors the SDP and provides regular training.
  • Decisions are communicated in writing and negative decisions are reasoned.
  • Cross-referral mechanisms are in place to asylum procedures. The SDP is suspended if an asylum application is made and resumed if refugee (or subsidiary protection) status is refused.
  • An applicant for stateless status will be informed of their rights in writing in a language that they understand, and is entitled to: right to stay in Moldova during the assessment (except if national security or public order affected); a temporary identity document; to use their own language; to have an interpreter; to work; and to housing (but in practice, social housing is not available). Applicants also have access to social security entitlements, but only if they work.
  • The application must be examined within six months. This may be extended in complex cases, but not by more than six months (so the total does not exceed 12 months).
  • The applicant has automatic legal admission during the assessment and cannot be expelled.
  • If a person applies whilst in detention, the authorities will seek clarification from the supposed country of citizenship. If their citizenship is formally not recognised or the time limit for detention expires, they will be released. People who apply in the community will not be detained.
  • The applicant has an automatic right to appeal and there are no fees for the appeal.
  • The provision of free legal aid is established by law and provided by the state and NGOs for the judicial procedure.
  • There is no evidence of significant errors in decision making.
  • The state grants legal status and an indefinite right to stay to those recognised as stateless.
  • The rights attached to stateless status include: travel documents, family reunion, work, primary, secondary and higher education in line with nationals, access to social security and healthcare.
  • Rights granted are on the same basis as nationals.
  • There are accelerated naturalisation procedures for recognised stateless people and refugees, who can be naturalised after eight years compared to the standard 10 years, but there is no fee exemption or waiver of language, citizenship test or minimum income level requirements. Although accelerated, eight years is comparatively long to wait for naturalisation.
  • Naturalisation in Moldova costs 180 LEI (9 EUR) plus 140 LEI (7 EUR) processing fee. After naturalisation, to get an identity card costs 130 LEI (6.50 EUR) and a passport 850 LEI (42.50 EUR).
  • Criminal offences do not unreasonably prevent naturalisation (crimes listed as exemptions are international and military crimes, crimes against humanity, terrorism, prosecution or conviction for activities that endanger public order or national security).
  • Exclusion clauses for naturalisation also include if the person is ‘involved in activities that endanger the… health and morality of the population’.

Detention

Analyses law, policy and practice relating to immigration detention generally, focusing in on protections in place to prevent the arbitrary detention of stateless people during removal and deportation procedures. Subthemes examine areas such as detention decision-making, whether alternatives to detention are legislated for and implemented, procedural safeguards such as time limits, judicial oversight and effective remedies, as well as protections on release and whether statelessness is considered juridically relevant in bilateral return and readmission agreements.

There are several gaps in detention law, policy and practice in Moldova. Although there are some protections against the arbitrary detention of stateless people, in that powers to detain are provided for in law, detention should be a last resort and a country of removal must be set prior to detaining; in practice, it is unclear how these principles are implemented. The maximum time limit differs for different types of detention, but there is no time limit for detention pending deportation following a criminal conviction. The provision of information to detainees on their rights is not set in law and is provided by UNHCR’s NGO partners at the discretion of the government. There are some remedies for detainees, but periodic judicial reviews were removed in 2016, although a 2018 advisory opinion of the Supreme Court requires this to be reinstated. People released from detention will either be transferred to the Statelessness Unit for documentation if recognised as stateless or granted ‘tolerated stay’ if not.

  • Powers for immigration detention are provided for in law.
  • A proposed country of removal must be identified during the administrative decision to remove, prior to the judicial decision to detain.
  • Statelessness is relevant in the decision to detain in that a recognised stateless person will not be detained. Referral to the SDP is possible from detention, though someone who applies from detention may remain detained until the proposed country of removal confirms they are not a citizen. Between 2012-2018, 39 people were released from detention into the SDP following confirmation they were not a citizen by the proposed country of removal.
  • By law detention should be the last resort, but in practice no alternatives exist, so it is unclear to what extent this is implemented.
  • Vulnerability assessments are carried out prior to the decision to detain, but statelessness is not considered during the assessment.
  • There are no alternatives to immigration detention established in law and alternatives are not considered in practice during decisions to detain.
  • Maximum periods of detention differ for different categories of detainee: 12 months for 'undesirable persons' (person whose resident permit has been cancelled with no right of return for five to 15 years); six months for people subject to removal procedures; no time limit for people subject to a deportation order following a criminal conviction.
  • The law provides that all administrative and judicial decisions must be given in writing.
  • People in detention are informed about their rights, including how to access the SDP and support, by an NGO implementing partner of UNHCR through an agreement with the authorities, but this service is discretionary and not funded by the government.
  • Up until December 2016 monthly judicial reviews of the necessity of detention were carried out, but following changes to legislation, the provision for regular periodic review of detention no longer exists in law. However, a 2018 Advisory Opinion of the Supreme Court of Justice requires this to be reinstated.
  • Free legal aid is provided to people in detention.
  • People in detention have the possibility to appeal against each court decision to detain. There are no provisions regarding the language of the appeals, but if the appeal is written in another language it must be translated into an official state language.
  • Released, undocumented stateless people are transferred to the Statelessness Unit to be provided with documentation.
  • Re-detention does not occur in practice so there is no accumulation of detention time.
  • If the detention purpose cannot be fulfilled, the person is released and obtains the status of 'tolerated person', but few rights are conferred to someone with this status. However, there are no reported cases of stateless people ending up in this category.
  • The readmission of stateless people is provided for in several of the agreements that Moldova has entered into, including for example, with the European Union, Norway, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Ukraine. Others, including the agreements with Albania and Switzerland, do not mention stateless people.
  • Very little information is available as to whether stateless people are readmitted under these agreements in practice and no monitoring information nor statistics are publicly available.

Prevention and Reduction

Assesses the adequacy of safeguards in nationality laws to prevent and reduce statelessness, including protections for otherwise stateless children born on the territory or to nationals abroad, foundlings and adopted children. Examines law, policy and practice on birth registration, including access to late birth registration, reduction measures taken by states to prevent statelessness among groups at high risk, and provisions regarding withdrawal of nationality.

Moldovan nationality law previously contained full safeguards to prevent childhood statelessness, but amendments that came into force in April 2018 increase the risk that children may be born stateless on the territory. Children born on the territory who would otherwise be stateless may now only acquire nationality automatically at birth if at least one of their parents has legal residence, international protection or stateless status. Foundlings automatically acquire nationality and children born to Moldovan parents anywhere acquire Moldovan citizenship automatically. However, efforts to prevent statelessness in Moldova are hindered by barriers to universal free birth registration. Parents must be documented to register a birth, which means that some parents face barriers to registering births, including Roma and other minorities.

  • Children born on the territory who would otherwise be stateless automatically acquire Moldovan citizenship by law, but only if at least one of their parents has legal residence, international protection or stateless status in Moldova.
  • The provision is automatic from birth, so children are not required to prove that they cannot access another nationality, nor meet any other requirements.
  • Foundlings are granted citizenship automatically by law and there is no age limit.
  • Citizenship cannot be withdrawn from a foundling if it would result in statelessness.
  • A child adopted by foreign parents cannot lose Moldovan citizenship if this would lead to statelessness.
  • There is provision in law for a child adopted by Moldovan parents to acquire citizenship, but they must opt for and apply for nationality, it is not automatic. There is no time limit.
  • In all cases the law provides for a child born to Moldovan parents anywhere to acquire citizenship automatically.
  • Birth registration should take place no later than three months after birth.
  • The law provides for universal birth registration, irrespective of the parents' legal status, but it is not possible to complete the registration if parents are undocumented. If children are born in a medical institution, registration is automatic.
  • There are credible reports from NGOs of barriers to birth registration for undocumented parents and children remaining unregistered as a result. Roma communities are disproportionately impacted and many face challenges due to parents' lack of documentation.
  • There is no requirement to report undocumented individuals to immigration authorities.
  • Late birth registration is possible in practice, but it is subject to a fine.
  • There are no current proactive government campaigns or programmes to promote birth registration. The Government passed a decision in 2009 ‘on simplifying the procedure for registering new-borns’, which introduced automatic registration for children born in a medical institution. An amendment to the law, which came into force in January 2018, recognises Transnistrian civil status acts, making it easier for parents of Transnistrian origin to register the births of their children in Moldova and for children born to Transnistrian parents to acquire Moldovan nationality.
  • There are no other reduction measures in place, and a recent amendment to the law increased the risk of children being born stateless in Moldova.
  • Grounds for the withdrawal of Moldovan nationality are established in law and include where a person acquired citizenship by fraud, enlisted in a foreign army, or committed particularly serious deeds damaging the state.
  • There is a safeguard against statelessness in all cases except for the fraudulent acquisition of citizenship.
  • The competent authority is the President, an appeal is possible and legal aid is available to challenge the presidential decree.

Latest news on Moldova

Moldova publishes instructions to implement the law recognising Transnistrian civil status acts

In January 2018, new legal provisions were introduced in Moldova recognising Transnistrian civil status acts. The government has now published...
source: Guttorm Flatabø_https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

Moldova shows good practice on statelessness determination with improvement needed in other areas

Moldova demonstrates examples of good practice regarding international and regional instruments and statelessness determination, but still requires...
Parliament of Moldova

Moldova introduces changes to nationality laws which leave children at risk of statelessness

In December 2017, Moldova adopted two changes (one positive and one negative) to laws concerning the prevention and reduction of statelessness.

Project funded by: