Chișinău, 16 January 2026
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has communicated to the Governments of the Republic of Moldova and the Russian Federation a set of 19 cases concerning alleged violations of fundamental rights committed in the Transnistrian region (a territory of the Republic of Moldova de facto controlled by the self-proclaimed authorities of the so-called “Transnistrian Moldovan Republic”). The communication of the cases took place on 26 November 2025, and the details of the cases and the questions addressed to the parties were published by the ECtHR on 15 December 2025.
According to the Court, the complaints lodged by citizens and organizations from the left bank of the Nistru River primarily concern the lack of access to lawful courts in the region (violation of the right to a fair trial provided for by Article 6 §1 of the Convention). The applicants also invoke unlawful restrictions and interference with the exercise of other fundamental rights: the right to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, the right to property and freedom of movement, in accordance with Articles 8, 10 and 11 of the Convention, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4. Another issue common to all cases is the absence of effective domestic remedies (violation of Article 13 of the Convention) for these alleged violations, given the legal situation in the Transnistrian region.
Communicated cases (applicants represented by Promo-LEX lawyers)
In 8 cases, the applicants are assisted by Promo-LEX lawyers Alexandru Postică, Nicoleta Hriplivîi and Vadim Vieru. Below is a brief presentation of these cases, outlining the essence of the alleged facts and the rights invoked:
Driucenco v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 2201/19) – The applicant Anton Driucenco, a citizen of the Republic of Moldova, complained that his car was unlawfully seized by the so-called authorities of the Transnistrian region in 2017, without access to a fair judicial determination. The Transnistrian courts dismissed his actions seeking annulment of the seizure and compensation, without properly summoning him to hearings and invoking the alleged lack of evidence of his ownership rights. Complaints lodged with the constitutional authorities (the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Moldova and that of the Russian Federation) were also ineffective. Invoked rights: Article 6 §1 (absence of a lawfully established tribunal; unfair trial) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (right to property – unlawful seizure of personal property).
Carp v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 54164/21) – Olga Carp, residing on the left bank of the Nistru River, was convicted in 2020 by a Transnistrian “court” to a suspended prison sentence and a fine for alleged fraud, and was banned from leaving the region for two years. The applicant maintains that the proceedings took place within an illegitimate jurisdiction and that the ban on leaving the region constitutes a violation of her freedom of movement. Although the constitutional authorities of the Republic of Moldova opened a criminal investigation following her complaint, it stagnated, and her démarches to the Russian Embassy remained without effect. Invoked rights: Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement – restriction on leaving the region) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Timuș v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 22027/22) – Victor Timuș, a veteran of the Nistru conflict and a human rights activist, was expelled from the Transnistrian region in August 2020 and banned from returning for three years, without being informed of the reasons. According to the complaint, the entry ban order issued by the de facto administration violated his right to access his home and family in the region. His efforts to obtain information or the revocation of the ban, including complaints to the so-called local Ministry of Internal Affairs and the authorities of the Russian Federation, were rejected, while the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Moldova initiated a criminal investigation that remains ongoing. Invoked rights: Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life – refusal of access to one’s home), Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement – ban on entry into the region) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Ermurachi v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 36033/22) – Mihail Ermurachi, a retired journalist from Tiraspol, was sanctioned for criticizing the leader of the Transnistrian regime during a private conversation. In July 2021, a purported local court fined him the equivalent of 500 euros for “insulting” the leader, without providing any reasoning. His appeals were dismissed without examination, on the pretext that they contained offensive language towards the de facto administration. The complaint shows that this sanction, later aggravated by replacing the fine with 8 months of detention, violated freedom of expression, while the lack of a genuine avenue of appeal in the region violated the right to an effective remedy. Invoked rights: Article 10 (freedom of expression – punishment for critical opinions) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Victoria-Cocieri S.R.L. v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 36501/22) – The commercial company “Victoria-Cocieri” S.R.L., registered in the village of Cocieri, complains of abusive restrictions on its property rights over land it had leased in the Transnistrian region. Between 2014 and 2018, the company was denied access to agricultural land on the grounds that it was controlled by the regime’s “border guards”, and later access was conditioned on obtaining a license from the self-proclaimed authorities. The company’s complaints to the constitutional authorities led to the initiation of a criminal investigation (still pending), while démarches to the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation and the Russian Embassy yielded no solution. Invoked rights: Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (right to property -deprivation of use of possessions) and Article 13 (lack of an effective remedy).
Garmaș v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 40554/22) – Nicolai Garmaș, a resident of Bender, was arbitrarily detained by the Transnistrian militia in January 2021 and later released, but was subjected to a ban on leaving the region. The complaint alleges that the ban was abusively extended after Garmaș lodged a complaint of ill-treatment, claiming that he had been assaulted by a local investigator. Instead of investigating his allegations, the de facto administration accused him of false denunciation and maintained the restriction on his freedom of movement, thereby violating his rights. Meanwhile, the constitutional authorities opened a criminal case for violation of domicile related to the incursion of Transnistrian forces, and criminal proceedings against him on the left bank of the Nistru River are ongoing. Invoked rights: Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement – ban on leaving the region) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Moșneaga v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 50411/22) – Oleg Moșneaga, a former officer of the so-called Transnistrian “border police”, was subjected in July 2018 to a ban on entering the Transnistrian region, thereby being separated from his family and home on the left bank of the Nistru River. No justification was provided for this measure. The requests submitted by his mother (a resident of the region and seriously ill) and by the applicant himself to the de facto administration, seeking the lifting of the ban, were unsuccessful. The constitutional authorities in Chișinău initiated an investigation; however, to date the applicant has not obtained redress. Invoked rights: Article 8 (right to respect for family life – inability to see one’s family and access one’s home), Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement – ban on entering one’s place of origin) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
Samonii v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia (application no. 5696/24) – Alexandr Samonii, a former opposition city councillor in Tiraspol and journalist, left the Transnistrian region in June 2020 after the so-called local authorities initiated criminal proceedings against him for “extremism” over a critical comment published online. Having local immunity as an elected official, Samonii avoided detention by leaving the territory controlled by the regime. His complaint indicates that the criminal proceedings initiated in Transnistria seek to silence him for his expressed opinions and constitute political persecution. The Russian authorities refused to examine his complaints, while the law enforcement bodies of the Republic of Moldova opened a criminal case regarding the alleged abuses committed in this situation. Invoked rights: Article 10 (freedom of expression – repression for critical opinions classified as “extremism”) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).
The importance of human rights protection in the Transnistrian region – Promo-LEX position
The Promo-LEX Association, which provides legal assistance to the applicants in these cases, emphasizes the importance of effective human rights protection in the Transnistrian region. The communication of the cases by the ECtHR represents a positive signal for residents of the territory not controlled by the constitutional authorities, demonstrating that no one is outside the protection of the European Convention on Human Rights. “The ECtHR’s decision to communicate these cases confirms that persons living on the left bank of the Nistru River have the right to seek justice before international courts when their rights are violated and there are no effective domestic remedies. This is an important step towards holding those responsible accountable and reaffirming that the jurisdiction of the Convention also extends to the Transnistrian region,” stated Vadim Vieru, lawyer at Promo-LEX. The organization warns that maintaining a legal protection vacuum in the region allows abuses to persist. Promo-LEX reiterates its call on the constitutional authorities of the Republic of Moldova, as well as on international partners, to ensure viable mechanisms through which the population of the eastern districts of the Republic of Moldova (the Transnistrian region) can effectively exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms.
More details are available here – https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-247809
Press contact
Vadim Vieru – Lawyer, Promo-LEX Association
Tel: 068017507
E-mail: [email protected]