This chapter explores how Moldova can shift from a judicial-centric system to an integrated justice sector that responds to people’s legal needs. It examines legal problems faced by people in Moldova and identifies barriers to accessing justice, particularly among disadvantaged groups. It also outlines a continuum of services spanning the full justice journey and emphasises the integration of diverse providers into a coherent ecosystem. The chapter concludes with the concept of a justice services map as a practical tool to guide planning, accessibility and delivery of people-centred justice across the country. It discusses operational service delivery and the institutional practices that enable or hinder integrated, people-centred justice. It explores emerging models such as one-stop shops, highlights gaps in co‑ordination frameworks and identifies opportunities to strengthen cross-sector collaboration.
OECD Justice Review of the Republic of Moldova
Abstract
International evidence shows that legal problems are not evenly distributed (Box 6.1). People living in poverty, rural residents, women, ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities and other groups facing discrimination or disadvantage are more likely to experience multiple or serious legal issues and less likely to resolve them effectively (OECD/Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies, 2023[1]). In Moldova, emerging data reflect similar patterns. Legal needs and outcomes vary by socio-economic and geographic factors.
United Kingdom
In 2023, the Legal Services Board and the Law Society of England and Wales conducted the Individual Legal Needs Survey, a collaborative initiative aimed at assessing how unmet legal needs affect different population groups. The report analyses how individuals requiring professional assistance for legal issues often do not receive adequate support and examines the factors contributing to increased vulnerability to legal exclusion. The survey was implemented by YouGov through 17 668 online responses collected between October and December 2023. The sample was designed to be representative (e.g., women/men, age, region, education level and ethnicity). The survey explored legal problems faced in the previous four years, access to help, outcomes and perceptions of fairness. It applied a logic-tree model inspired by the OECD Legal Needs Surveys Guide to determine whether issues constituted met or unmet legal needs.
Key findings include:
32% of people with a legal need did not have it met because 20% could not access professional help.
People with severe disabilities, women, low-income households (under GBP 32 000) and those in highly deprived areas are more likely to experience unmet legal needs.
Lack of knowledge about where to get advice or understanding of rights is strongly linked to unmet legal need.
Low legal confidence and low accessibility to justice also increase the likelihood of unmet need.
Unmet legal needs are most common in family law issues (40%) and least common in injury cases (27%).
The most common reason for not receiving professional help was being unable to find someone willing or able to assist.
Australia
In Victoria, Australia, the Public Understanding of Law Survey is a large-scale, face-to-face study examining how people encounter and address everyday legal issues (“justiciable problems”).
The 2023 report explores how legal problem prevalence, progression and resolution differ across the different regions of Victoria:
Geographic variation was observed: urban areas reported higher rates for some issues, while inner regional areas led in others;
A dedicated chapter on disasters highlights that events like the 2019-2020 bushfires increased the number, severity and duration of legal problems for affected individuals;
Despite this, people rarely linked these issues to the disaster itself;
The study suggests that disaster-related legal support must be longer-term, better tailored to people’s perceptions and prepared for growing demand due to climate change.
The survey is one of the largest face-to-face legal needs and justice problems surveys in Australia, with 6 008 respondents across metropolitan, regional and rural Victoria. The survey examined how people understand and navigate everyday legal problems, referred to as justiciable issues, and employed multivariate analysis to assess legal capability and resolution pathways.
A recent survey suggests that legal disputes in Moldova are both frequent and diverse: nearly one-third of respondents reported experiencing at least one legal dispute in the past four years (Figure 6.1) (UNDP, 2025[5]). Disputes were more commonly reported by rural residents, men and individuals with higher education or income levels. While these groups are not usually considered underserved (with the partial exception of rural residents), findings point to the need for more targeted legal needs studies to better understand how legal problems are experienced across different segments of the population. Such studies should account for people’s ability to recognise the legal dimension of everyday problems, as well as the likelihood of underreporting.1 These disparities highlight the importance of disaggregated data and intersectional analysis to inform evidence-based and responsive policymaking (UNDP, 2025[5]).
Source: (UNDP, 2025[5]).
Legal problems in Moldova are confirmed to arise from ordinary life situations. Among the most reported issues were neighbour-related disputes (17.3%) and problems with social and public services (12.6%), followed by disputes involving the police, employment and land (Figure 6.2) (UNDP, 2025[5]). Further challenges, though less prominent, include consumer problems, money, crime and misdemeanours. These trends are consistent with international findings on the everyday nature of justice problems (OECD, 2019[6]; OECD/Open Society Foundations, 2019[7]).
In percentage
Source: (UNDP, 2025[5]).
A particular concern is the clustering and cascading nature of legal problems: a single issue may trigger multiple legal and non-legal consequences, re‑emerge over time and become entangled with other challenges, compounding vulnerability (OECD, 2019[6]). In this context, it is important to note that the poorest segments of the population in Moldova reported the broadest range of justice-related problems. They were disproportionately affected by social welfare, domestic violence, housing insecurity and police problems (UNDP, 2025[5]). Poverty appears to both heighten exposure to these types of justice problems and limit the resources needed to address them. Importantly, disputes often carried serious consequences, with low-income people especially likely to report very severe ones. These impacts can be serious, notably affecting well-being through health problems (35.8%), financial costs (34.2%) and damaged relationships (31.5%), which were the most cited by all respondents, in addition to loss of time. Such findings underscore the justice gap faced by the most marginalised, as well as the multifaceted nature of justice problems that cannot be addressed in isolation but require holistic, evidence-based justice strategies and joined-up services.
Moldovan stakeholders acknowledge the sound legal framework in the country yet point to limited legal awareness and culture among the population at both the individual and community levels.2 Levels of legal literacy remain limited when it comes to seeking redress, particularly in areas such as social welfare, housing, family issues and domestic violence (UNDP, 2025[5]). Additional barriers affect ethnic minorities and non-native Romanian speakers, where cultural differences can lead to misunderstandings or justice needs being overlooked.3 Language barriers and limited availability of resources in additional languages impede people’s abilities to navigate the justice system effectively (UNDP, 2025[5]).
Yet, similar to many OECD countries, people in Moldova face a wide range of barriers when seeking justice. Low levels of trust4 in justice institutions, often linked to perceived inefficiency, limited transparency, corruption, delays and failures in law enforcement (UNDP, 2025[8]), continue to inhibit access. People may be deterred from seeking help and pursuing legal remedies; discouraged from complying and co‑operating with justice institutions; and avoid formal justice systems. Instead, they turn to informal or extra‑legal mechanisms, thereby impeding fair and effective resolution of their legal and justice needs.
Financial hardship is another major constraint as lawyers’ and other legal fees often exceed what people can reasonably afford. While lawyers’ recommended fees range between EUR 70 and 170 per hour,5 the average gross monthly salary in 2024 was MDL 13 9906 (approx. EUR 715), with a minimum wage of MDL 5 500 (approx. EUR 280) (Government Decision No. 846/2024). This gap justifies Moldova’s efforts to improve legal aid coverage. Yet, stakeholders have also noted that recently introduced court fees may further restrict access to procedural justice.7 Some underserved groups specifically highlight financial burden as one of the key factors preventing them from seeking justice (UNDP, 2025[8]).
In rural regions of Moldova, geographic remoteness combined with poor transportation infrastructure can result in additional cost and time burdens, especially for people with limited mobility or financial means. For example, a single trip to the court by a person living in a village in Gagauzia is described as very difficult (Mironova, 2022[9]). According to local accounts, some residents are currently unable to reach court hearings by public transport before 9:00, forcing them to pay for private transport. As for people with disabilities, they may be additionally forced to hire assistants and other forms of support to attend hearings, posing an additional barrier for low-mobility population. These challenges are not unique to the region but point to broader structural issues related to the organisation of justice delivery along the capital-region divide.
Moldova also faces a concentration of legal expertise in Chișinău, limiting access to specialised professionals in other parts of the country. Stakeholders noted the shortage of forensic experts to assess bodily harm, and qualified psychologists and interviewers to engage with children outside the capital. In many cases, their input is required under the law, causing significant delays in case management and processes. Moldova has acknowledged these shortages and is preparing measures to expand capacity, including the recruitment of around 300 child protection specialists at the local level and the reinforcement of training for existing professionals (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2025[10]).
Stakeholders pointed towards a need to address the specific circumstances of groups at risk of marginalisation, including children, victims of domestic violence, persons with disabilities, refugees and asylum seekers, and others.8 Underserved groups are less likely to pursue justice services to address their problems as they face significant and multi‑faceted barriers, including limited knowledge, dismissive and even hostile treatment from legal institutions and professionals, systemic inefficiencies and prolonged delays in sensitive cases, as well as physical access barriers (UNDP, 2025[8]; UNDP Moldova, 2025[11]). 0 provides analysis of legal and justice needs of specific groups who face intersectional disadvantage in Moldova.
The Nunavut Court of Justice functions simultaneously as the superior and territorial court for the sparsely populated Nunavut region. The region’s vast territory and low population density require the Court to travel to approximately 95% of its communities, including remote settlements, while omitting very small communities where almost no crimes are reported. Court travel is needs based, and the frequency of visits varies from every six weeks to every two years, depending on the number of cases in a given community.
The Court’s travelling team typically includes a judge, clerk of the court, court reporter, prosecutor, at least one defence attorney, and interpreters, who may be local or part of the Court’s institutional staff depending on availability. Court sessions are held in suitable public facilities such as community halls or school gyms.
Source: (Nunavut Courts, 2025[12]).
6.2.1. Towards a continuum of justice services
Recent justice reforms, particularly those linked to Moldova’s European Union (EU) accession process, have largely focused on institutional strengthening, including reinforcing judicial independence and improving system efficiency (European Commission, 2024[13]). Institutional reforms, while essential, must be complemented by a people-centred approach that prioritises how justice is experienced in practice and how institutional principles and values translate into meaningful outcomes for people – an important factor in building public trust (see Chapter 5). So far, reform efforts have focused primarily on aligning legal frameworks and improving institutional performance but have paid less attention to the experiences of justice users, particularly those facing socio-economic hardship, geographic isolation or limited legal capability. These gaps correspond to the access barriers presented in the above section.
Addressing these barriers calls for moving beyond a court-centred conception of access to justice. Moldova’s Constitution firmly embeds access to justice through its guarantee of access to courts. This legal guarantee, while significant, reflects a narrower conception of access to justice than OECD and international definitions, which emphasise user outcomes, legal empowerment and systemic responsiveness (OECD, 2023[14]; Praia City Group, 2019[15]).9 Constitutional rights must be translated into meaningful access to justice through policies and services that reflect people’s needs and capabilities. A well-functioning justice system offers multiple, effective pathways for addressing legal needs – formal, informal, administrative and quasi-judicial – tailored to the diverse realities of its users (OECD, 2023[14]).
Indeed, building on this constitutional base, policy frameworks in Moldova have moved towards a broader understanding of access to justice, reflecting the wide range of avenues and services available to address legal needs. The Justice Sector Strategy 2022-2025 included a dedicated strategic direction on access to justice and quality of justice. Several laws and measures have been adopted to expand access to justice, including strengthened protections for disadvantaged and underserved groups, expanded eligibility and coverage of state-guaranteed legal aid and mediation, increased availability of paralegal services, enhanced use of digital and remote court procedures, and public awareness campaigns to improve uptake of non-judicial services.
International human rights frameworks offer additional guidance, especially for disadvantaged and underserved groups, by identifying priority needs and considerations. Moldova has ratified most core human rights instruments; however, both the Council of Europe (CoE) and the European Commission have called for the completion of these ratifications as part of broader efforts to promote equality and democratic consolidation (European Commission, 2024[13]).10
Moldova’s path forward lies in connecting its constitutional guarantees with international standards, policy frameworks and service delivery models that make justice real and effective for all. Strengthening legal capability, expanding meaningful redress mechanisms and embedding user perspectives into justice governance are critical to closing the gap between legal rights and people’s everyday experiences.
Indeed, for most people, the process they use to resolve a legal problem matters less than achieving a fair and timely outcome. What they need are clear entry points and effective pathways to resolution, regardless of whether these lie in informal mechanisms, administrative procedures or formal adjudication. By offering diverse and accessible pathways to resolution, a people‑centred continuum reduces common access barriers. This perspective highlights the limits of a fragmented system and the importance of building an integrated continuum of justice services that reflects how people actually experience and resolve problems in daily life.
The OECD Recommendation on Access to Justice and People-Centred Justice Systems adopts this whole-of-sector vision, defining justice systems to include “agencies and institutions across all branches and levels of government as well as non-governmental stakeholders (…) involved in policymaking, legal reform, administering or enforcing the law, or providing legal and justice services, as well as other human and social services that contribute to legal empowerment” (OECD, 2021[16]; OECD, 2024[17]).
A people-centred continuum recognises that justice is not a one-size-fits-all process centred exclusively on the courts. Instead, it encompasses a range of entry points, pathways and supports that people may need at different stages of their justice journey (Figure 6.3) (OECD, 2019[6]). These could include:
Legal awareness and early support (e.g. education, legal literacy campaigns, community outreach);
Information and assistance (e.g. legal advice, paralegals, NGO support, hotlines);
Informal and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) (e.g. community mediation, state-guaranteed ADR, traditional mechanisms);
Formal processes and enforcement (e.g. courts, prosecution services, legal aid, ombuds institutions, administrative review);
Post-resolution support (e.g. legal follow-up, re‑integration, psychosocial support);
Administrative justice and review mechanisms (e.g. specialised tribunals, administrative complaints procedures, ombuds institutions).
Each element of the continuum addresses different access barriers at specific stages of the justice journey. Prevention and early support address low legal awareness by helping people recognise legal problems and seek assistance before issues escalate. Community‑based and low‑cost services, such as paralegals or state-guaranteed legal aid, mitigate financial barriers, geographic constraints and distrust in formal institutions by providing accessible and locally embedded support. Alternative and administrative mechanisms provide faster, more flexible and less adversarial avenues for resolving legal problems. The continuum goes beyond a catalogue of services but operates as a practical framework that addresses access barriers by expanding entry points, simplifying pathways and tailoring services to people’s capabilities and circumstances.
Source: Adapted from (Attorney-General's Department of Australia, 2009[18]).
These services may be delivered in-person, online or through hybrid formats. The range of delivery models is particularly important in addressing geographic isolation, mobility or digital divides, barriers to which certain groups - e.g. rural populations, elderly, people with disabilities, are especially exposed. To deliver on the promise of people-centred justice, each part of the continuum must be accessible and responsive, especially for groups facing structural disadvantage. This requires linguistic and cultural adaptation, geographic and digital accessibility, affordability and procedural simplicity, clear referral pathways and strong co‑ordination across legal and non-legal services (see below).
In Moldova, elements of this continuum already exist, but remain fragmented, underutilised and not yet co‑ordinated as a coherent system. This fragmentation constitutes a barrier in itself, increasing the burden on people to navigate services and leading to delayed, incomplete or abandoned attempts to resolve legal problems. Services are delivered by a diverse set of actors, including courts, prosecutors, paralegals, legal clinics, NGOs, social workers and mediators, but often operate in parallel rather than as interconnected components of a coherent service delivery model. As a result, people may struggle to navigate the justice system, fall through service gaps or rely on informal or unofficial pathways.
6.2.2. Prevention and early intervention
Proactive and empowering legal and justice services are essential to help individuals recognise and address legal issues before they escalate, recur or cause serious harm. A people-centred justice system begins not at the courtroom door, but upstream, by equipping people with the knowledge, skills and confidence to understand their rights, take early action and seek appropriate support when problems arise (OECD, 2021[16]). This approach is closely linked to the concept of legal literacy, which encompasses people’s ability to identify legal issues, make informed decisions and navigate processes. Strengthening legal awareness, literacy, capability and trust in the justice system are critical pillars of prevention and early intervention (OECD, 2019[6]; Canadian Bar Association, 2013[19]). Preventive and early support strategies not only improve outcomes for individuals by reducing the severity, duration and cost of legal problems, but also enhance system-wide efficiency. They reduce the burden on courts, administrative bodies and social services by addressing problems at an earlier and less resource-intensive stage (OECD/World Justice Project, 2019[20]).
In Moldova, the importance of prevention and early intervention is increasingly recognised, with promising practices emerging across sectors, including civil society organisations, legal aid providers and local authorities. Legal education, community outreach and primary legal counselling efforts contribute to increasing public awareness of rights and responsibilities, especially among disadvantaged and underserved populations.
Localised preventive approaches, such as community‑based youth engagement and early risk identification, demonstrate the potential impact of co-ordinated prevention strategies when grounded in local knowledge (Box 6.3). Prevention efforts are also embedded in broader sectoral strategies, including education and prevention frameworks to tackle violence against women and girls, that demonstrate growing policy attention to early intervention.
However, at the strategic policy level, most remain under-recognised and insufficiently integrated into broader justice system planning. Many activities are project-based or donor-driven, and need institutional support and co‑ordination to ensure their continuity, scalability and alignment with user needs. There is an opportunity to reframe prevention and early intervention not as ancillary, but foundational to a well-functioning justice system. Demonstrating the value of early action in terms of better outcomes for people, reduced recurrence of legal issues and long-term cost savings can help build broader support among policymakers and justice stakeholders.
In Gagauzia, the number of children in contact with the law remains notably low compared to other parts of the country. According to local records, as of September 2024, only three children had committed criminal offences, marking a significant decline from 2023, when nine cases were recorded. Stakeholder interviews suggest that local police are strongly committed to youth crime prevention. They reported having good intelligence on the times and places of potential youth crime. On-going reductions in juvenile offending were mainly attributed to a combination of general awareness-raising efforts, including anti-bullying campaigns, trafficking prevention activities, as well as targeted support for children at risk. Preventive engagement involves collaboration with schools, parents and teachers, and is informed by a detailed understanding of local risk factors, such as the locations and times associated with youth crime. Most young offenders in the region tend to be 17‑18 years old, unemployed and have limited educational attainment, with some also facing family circumstances marked by neglect or parental absence due to migration. Local authorities emphasise the importance of keeping at-risk youth in vulnerable situations “close” and actively engaged to reduce the risk of offending. Despite low numbers of child offenders, stakeholders report that the number of child victims of crime remains higher, emphasising the need for balanced attention to both prevention and protection. Nevertheless, the apparent success of these practices makes them a good practice to learn from.
Source: OECD fact-finding mission to Gagauzia, 12 September 2024.
Legal education
Legal education is a critical foundation for building a people-centred justice system. By introducing legal literacy and capability from an early age, education systems can empower individuals to understand their rights and responsibilities, prevent legal problems and navigate justice processes more confidently throughout life (OECD, 2021[16]). When embedded within general literacy and civic education, legal education contributes to stronger democratic engagement, social and legal empowerment (OECD, 2021[16]).
In Moldova, progress is being made through structured school-based education initiatives, including the Legal Socialisation Education Programme offering a curriculum on the rule of law, civic responsibility and risk prevention11 (Ministry of Education and Research, Moldova, 2021[21]). This initiative reflects a promising example of cross-sector collaboration and long-term investment in legal capability. It has the potential to generate lasting impacts on legal awareness, trust in public institutions and responsible citizenship. However, the programme remains in its early stages and has not yet been expanded to a structured legal education programme across Moldova’s entire school network.
A comprehensive legal education strategy could include:
Mainstreaming legal literacy within national education standards and civic curricula;
Equipping teachers and school staff with relevant training and resources;
Involving justice professionals and civil society in delivery and mentoring roles;
Developing age-appropriate, responsive and culturally adapted content.
While school-based programmes play a key role, legal education efforts must also reach youth outside the formal education system, since they are most at risk of coming into contact with the justice system. This group may face greater legal vulnerability due to limited education, economic insecurity or social exclusion. Tailored interventions, delivered through youth centres, community programmes and online platforms, can complement formal education to ensure broader and more equitable impact.
In parallel, one-off or project-based legal literacy initiatives, often led by civil society, legal professionals or government actors, play an important role in building awareness among specific communities or on specific issues (e.g. domestic violence, discrimination or administrative rights). However, their long-term impact is limited without being embedded in a structured and co‑ordinated national framework for legal education.
Developing such a framework in Moldova would support more consistent delivery, allow for monitoring and evaluation, and ensure that legal education contributes meaningfully to a continuum of people-centred justice services. As Moldova works to strengthen access to justice and civic engagement, legal education could be recognised as a core pillar of prevention, empowerment and resilience.
6.2.3. Entry points and first contact services
Effective access to justice begins at the first point of contact. Entry points, such as legal information, community-based support and targeted outreach, serve as bridges between people and the broader justice system. A people-centred justice approach recognises that availability alone is not enough: for services to be used, they must be known, trusted and accessible where people live, work and seek help.
Legal information, awareness, community-based access
In Moldova, outreach and legal awareness campaigns are implemented by both state and non-state actors, demonstrating the diversity of outreach approaches currently applied in Moldova. These efforts aim to raise awareness of rights and services, particularly among communities that are traditionally less likely to engage with formal justice institutions.
The Office of the People’s Advocate has been engaged in this area through nationwide and community-based outreach, including training, information campaigns, mobile outreach and targeted initiatives for specific groups (Ombudsoffice, 2024[22]).12 These efforts reflect institutional recognition of the importance of first-contact services and a strategic commitment to communication and outreach, as outlined in the Ombudsoffice’s Strategic Development Programme 2023-2030 (Ombudsoffice, 2023[23]). Current activities highlight opportunities to further build the capacity and influence of the ombudsoffice and to consolidate outreach in order to achieve a greater reach, impact and contribution to a broader people-centred justice system.
The National Council for State Guaranteed Legal Aid (NCSGLA) similarly conducts outreach, targeting communities that mistrust formal institutions. With support from its network of geographically based and specialised paralegals, NCSGLA organises legal education and awareness events aimed at disadvantaged and underserved groups.13 Media coverage has been expanded to raise visibility and promote access, particularly for non-criminal matters.
Civil society organisations also play a key role, especially for Roma communities, persons with disabilities and survivors of violence. However, many outreach initiatives remain donor-dependent and constrained by limited financial resources, threatening their long-term sustainability.
There is untapped potential to strengthen outreach using low-cost, high-impact measures. These include:
Posting legal aid and hotline information in public spaces (e.g. health centres, schools);
Distributing legal rights materials with utility bills or social benefits payments;
Engaging trusted intermediaries, such as librarians, teachers, or community health workers.
These approaches promote access by bringing information to places where people naturally gather, making justice services visible in daily life.
Paralegals, primary legal aid and civil society organisations
Moldova’s network of community-based paralegals provides primary legal aid to all individuals, regardless of income (Law No. 198/2007). Paralegals are often trusted community members with some legal or higher education training, though they are not licensed to practice law.14 They offer legal information, assistance and referrals, serving as a frontline service and bridge between the community and formal institutions.
Since its inception in 2015, Moldova’s paralegal scheme has expanded significantly.15 The NCSGLA co‑ordinates a national network of community paralegals and maintains an experimental cohort of specialised paralegals.16 While the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) determines the overall budget for the state-guaranteed legal aid system, including paralegal services, this allocation has steadily increased in recent years. For individuals with Internet access, the dedicated online platform provides remote access to legal information. It includes a media library of frequently asked questions, legal news and direct access to paralegal assistance. The platform supports the continual training of paralegals, strengthening both outreach and quality assurance.
Operating within their own communities, paralegals provide legal information, raise awareness and offer referrals to formal justice mechanisms. They often serve as the first point of contact for individuals navigating legal issues, particularly in rural and underserved areas, and act as a crucial bridge to formal services. Paralegals support users with everyday issues, such as pensions, social benefits, health access and family matters (CNAJGS, 2025[24]).
However, public awareness and trust in paralegals remains limited. A 2025 survey found that only 2.7% of respondents turned to paralegals for help and only 1.7% found their assistance to be the most helpful (UNDP, 2025[8]). Trust, perceived expertise and community reputation were the most cited reasons for choosing alternative sources of help. About one-third of respondents expressed doubts about the impartiality of NCSGLA paralegals. Yet, individuals who had actually used paralegal services reported more positive views, suggesting that direct experience helps build trust. These findings point to the need to improve public awareness, clarify the paralegal role and ensure service quality and independence.
In terms of geographic distribution, the National Association of Paralegals of the Republic of Moldova provides an interactive map displaying the location and contact details of paralegals. While this tool enhances transparency, a visual review alone suggests possible gaps in coverage, without providing a robust basis for assessing geographic disparities and service adequacy. Although local have proposed placing one paralegal per village, such an approach may be neither feasible nor efficient. An assessment to identify areas of highest need or align paralegal deployment with population-level legal demand and service delivery models needs to be made first.
In areas without access to paralegals, particularly in remote or rural regions, Moldova could consider expanding complementary outreach models. One example is the establishment of "Legal Aid Contact Points", operated by trusted community individuals, such as teachers, librarians, community workers or clergy. Following a basic training, they could offer basic orientation, share legal information and connect people with available legal services either through mobile teams or online tools. Such community-based intermediaries could play an important outreach function, especially in the contexts of low digital literacy and limited trust in formal institutions.
In parallel, Roma community mediators offer culturally relevant access points for Roma populations (Government Decision No. 557/2013). Although not legal professionals, they facilitate communication between Roma individuals and public authorities across sectors such as education, health, documentation and social assistance (CoE, 2025[25]). As of April 2024, Moldova employed 57 Roma community mediators across the country.17 Their work in preventing escalation, resolving disputes informally and building trust at the community level makes them an integral part of the broader justice ecosystem. Strengthening their legal training and linking them more explicitly to the formal justice system could expand mediators’ impact in supporting legal empowerment and early resolution.
Finally, civil society organisations (CSOs) complement public services by providing primary legal aid and broader support, either within the framework of the Law on State-Guaranteed Legal Aid or through independently funded initiatives, often supported by international donors. A significant number of NGOs provide legal assistance across areas such as child protection, prevention of violence against women and girls and anti-trafficking.18 While many are concentrated in Chișinău, others operate in specific geographic regions, offering targeted, community-responsive support.
Beyond direct service provision, CSOs often serve as key access points to justice for those who may not approach formal institutions. Many of them also offer integrated services, such as psychosocial counselling, shelter and legal representation, especially for underserved populations. Field visits to Comrat and Ungheni revealed the critical dual role played by CSOs: they often act as first responders, while also serving as key referral partners for police and justice professionals, particularly in regions with limited state-run services.
Community Legal Advice, United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, non-lawyer legal advisers play a vital role in improving access to justice through established services, such as Citizens Advice and the Law Centres Network. These organisations provide free legal advice on issues including welfare benefits, housing, debt, employment and immigration. Staffed by trained caseworkers and paralegals, qgal information and help with administrative processes and assistance in preparing for tribunal hearings, though not full court representation. Many advisers are accredited through systems such as the Advice Quality Standard or Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) (for immigration). Citizens Advice alone served over 2.4 million people in 2022‑2023, illustrating the scale of unmet legal need addressed by these services. While not formally regulated as a profession, advisers operate within clear quality assurance frameworks and are increasingly included in government-supported legal support strategies.
Licensed Paralegals for Affordable Legal Services, Canada
Ontario offers a leading example of formally integrating paralegals into the justice system. Since 2007, the Law Society of Ontario (LSO) has licensed paralegals to provide specified legal services independently of lawyers. Licensed paralegals can advise and represent clients in certain lower-value or less complex matters, for example, small claims court cases, minor criminal offenses, traffic and by‑law infractions, and appearances before provincial or federal tribunals.
Paralegals must complete an approved college diploma, pass a licensing exam, carry liability insurance and adhere to a professional code of conduct. The availability of competent licensed paralegals has made legal services more accessible and cost-effective for the public. In recent years, Ontario has even moved to expand paralegals’ scope into family law: in 2022, the LSO approved a specialised license for paralegals to handle certain family legal services, aiming to address unmet needs in divorce, custody and support cases. This ongoing evolution of Ontario’s paralegal system is frequently cited as a best practice model by legal regulators abroad. It shows how a structured paralegal profession can relieve overburdened courts and lawyers, lower costs and extend legal assistance to underserved populations.
Mediation
Mediation as a form of ADR is gradually gaining a foothold in Moldova’s justice system. As a user-friendly and less adversarial option for resolving disputes, mediation needs to be reflected in the development of a comprehensive justice services map. However, its effective integration requires deliberate efforts to expand geographic availability and raise awareness, particularly given the current concentration of mediators in Chișinău and limited usage to date.
Promoting mediation as a viable and accessible option will require a two-pronged approach: expanding the pool and geographic spread of qualified mediators and investing in public awareness and trust in ADR as a legitimate pathway to resolution. In particular, mediation may be particularly well-suited to disputes with ongoing relationships, which constitute the majority of legal problems people encounter (i.e. neighbour disputes). These efforts need to be closely monitored to ensure the justice services map remains dynamic and responsive to changing needs and service uptake. Inclusion of mediation centres, mobile ADR units and integration with court-referral systems could support more effective delivery, especially in underserved regions.
Police
As one of the primary points of contact for people entering the justice system, police services play an important role in shaping access to justice. Since 2025, there has been a structural reorganisation of the Police of the Republic of Moldova. The new police map is based on a regional operational model and the principle of the “nearest patrol”. The reform established five Regional Police Directorates comprising the Chișinău Municipal Police Directorate, the Regional Directorates for the “Centre”, “North” and “South” regions, as well as the Regional Police Directorate of the ATU Gagauzia (Ministry of Internal Affairs, Moldova, 2025[31]).
The reform aims to clarify territorial responsibilities, reallocate administrative staff to field operations and preventive activities, and increase patrol presence (Moldova1, 2026[32]). By improving accessibility and reducing response times, the new model seeks to support timely resolution of legal problems, contributing to people-centred justice. The MoJ and the Ministry of Internal Affairs are currently co-operating to increase the alignment of the police map with the existing judicial and prosecutorial maps (IPRE, 2026[33]).
Prosecution services
The prosecution services play a central role in the effective functioning of the justice system in Moldova, acting as a key interface between law enforcement, courts and the public. Recent reforms to align prosecutorial jurisdictions with the judicial map are expected to strengthen co-ordination with courts and investigative bodies, contributing to more coherent case management and timelier proceedings. Prosecutorial services now operate within the same 14 regional jurisdictions as the district courts (a decrease from 36 units), with regional headquarters and branch offices largely mirroring courthouse locations. This alignment supports improved co‑ordination, resource allocation and user navigation to access both services within the same administrative unit. It seeks to ensure a response by law enforcement institutions to new forms of criminality, streamline management procedures and improve investigations conducted across different domains. The reforms also intend to create favourable conditions for the specialisation of prosecutors within the prosecutor’s office in areas such as the combat against human trafficking, systemic and minor corruption, illicit drug trafficking and cybercrime, among others. It also facilitates access by reducing the travel burden for victims, witnesses and legal professionals.
Despite efforts to improve the synchronisation of prosecutorial and judicial maps, misalignments persist in practice. These reforms have not been fully planned and carried out in a co-ordinated manner, leading to territorial inconsistencies. Stakeholders report that, in several regions, these discrepancies require prosecutors to travel to courts located outside their designated jurisdictions. This results in procedural delays, increased workload pressures and additional costs (Moldova1, 2026[32]).
6.2.4. Dispute resolution and adjudication
The formal and quasi-formal mechanisms of justice, courts, legal aid, ADR, ombuds institutions and equality bodies form a core part of the justice service continuum. To ensure people-centred justice, these services must be accessible, responsive and trusted, with safeguards to uphold fairness, protect rights and accommodate diverse user needs.
Qualified legal aid and representation
Qualified legal aid, or secondary legal aid, is primarily delivered by registered private and public lawyers who have passed a national qualification exam. It can be accessed for criminal, civil and administrative cases. Individuals can apply for aid through regional legal aid offices either in person or online, with eligibility assessed based on income and additional vulnerability criteria, including disability or status as a victim of domestic or sexual violence. Emergency aid is also available in cases of arrest or detention and legal entities may also receive assistance. Courts can refer applicants to NCSGLA, but do not have the authority to assign legal aid lawyers directly.19 Legal reforms in recent years have broadened eligibility and expanded coverage, including the introduction of partial legal aid and mediation services (Law No. 128/2025).20 The NCSGLA prioritises underserved groups and specialised legal aid, maintaining lists of trained lawyers and quality standards for groups including children, asylum seekers, persons with disabilities and victims of crime.
While criminal defence continues to dominate legal aid provision, the recent years have seen significant increase in aid for victims of crime and domestic violence, as well as an increase in female beneficiaries, likely due to broader eligibility for women and girls, survivors of violence (see Table 6.1) (CNAJGS, 2026[34]).
Source: Information provided to the OECD questionnaire and website of the NCSGLA.
Source: Information provided to the OECD questionnaire and website of the NCSGLA.
The legal aid system is currently structured around the country’s three appeal courts, with territorial offices located in Chișinău, Bălți and Cahul. These offices are responsible for processing applications for both primary and qualified legal assistance, with legal aid services being provided all across the country. Although legal aid can be accessed remotely (post, online) or through court referrals, physical proximity to obtain legal aid entry points remains a factor influencing accessibility. For instance, following the closure of the territorial legal aid office in Comrat after the merger of appeal courts, the nearest legal aid office is now located approximately 90 kilometres away. Stakeholders have raised concerns that such changes may reduce access, particularly for disadvantaged and underserved groups.21 These concerns may be alleviated by ensuring that the population still has access to the actual services (and not offices that are merely co‑ordinating review requests and the work of lawyers who provide the service).
Recognising that expansion of the territorial offices may not be the most efficient solution in terms of resource management, alternative delivery models warrant greater attention. These include mobile legal aid units in underserved areas, stronger links with community-based paralegal services and closer integration with other justice and social services. As a frontline service, legal aid is key to helping people recognise and act on legal problems. It requires to be planned in close alignment to legal needs and demand, and the broader justice service ecosystem.
Alternative dispute resolution: Mediation
Despite a comprehensive legal framework and extensive efforts to promote ADR mechanisms, non-judicial mediation, conciliation and arbitration remain underutilised, with less than 1% of disputes seeking resolution through these mechanisms (European Commission, 2024[13]). Contributing factors include low public awareness, limited incentives and gaps in institutional support.22
The Mediation Council, under the MoJ, certifies and regulates mediators. As of 2024, 900 mediators had been certified, yet only 65 are actively practising, reflecting limited demand and capacity. Still, there are promising signs: referrals to the Council increased,23 with significant growth in civil mediation.24 There is a growing appreciation for mediation services. Feedback from users highlights that mediators not only treat respondents fairly and respectfully but conduct the process in a manner that is fast, efficient and impartial (UNDP, 2025[8]). This is consistent with the overall global finding that actual users of justice services (ADR, courts, etc.) express positive attitudes compared to those who do not use them.
The introduction of state-guaranteed mediation,25 available in criminal, civil and contravention cases, marks an important step towards institutionalising ADR and diversifying justice pathways. However, early data indicate extremely limited uptake,26 suggesting that legal availability alone is not sufficient. The effectiveness of this reform will depend on awareness-raising, service capacity and trust in mediation as a viable alternative to court proceedings.
Recent legislative reforms aim to mainstream dispute resolution, including by introducing a mandatory services in civil, labour and family disputes.27 By combining procedural requirements with financial incentives, the reforms seeks to enhance service quality, expand access and reduce court burden (Ministry of Justice, Moldova, 2025[35]). This effort is highlighted in the National Programme for the Accession of the Republic of Moldova to the EU. It further aligns the national framework with the EU Directive, enhances service quality, expands access and alleviates the burden on courts (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2025[10]). A professional body of mediators will be established, accompanied by awareness-raising campaigns to promote alternative dispute resolution as part of a broader effort to ensure effective access to both judicial and extra‑judicial remedies. These developments represent promising efforts to further strengthen and promote ADR in the country.
Overall, Moldova has made remarkable progress in strengthening the legal and institutional frameworks for ADR. However, limited use suggests a misalignment between the design of ADR mechanisms and people’s preferences, awareness and trust. It would be important to strengthen demand-side understanding, e.g. through studies on users’ attitudes and choices or targeted outreach. It could allow efforts to be better targeted and ultimately increase uptake of mediation. It would also ensure that mediation functions as a people-centred component of the justice service continuum.
Procedural accessibility, accommodations and user safeguards
Procedural safeguards ensure that individuals are treated fairly, can participate meaningfully in legal processes and have their rights effectively upheld at every stage. These include the right to legal representation, access to interpretation, clear and timely legal information, adequate time to prepare a case and the ability to seek redress in the event of procedural breaches. In Moldova, these safeguards are enshrined in national legislation and reflect international commitments, including the European Convention on Human Rights.
Despite this legal framework, gaps in implementation persist across the justice system. Stakeholders noted that individuals, particularly those in vulnerable situations, often face specific barriers in navigating legal procedures. These include limited access to information about legal rights and procedures, especially in user-friendly or accessible formats, insufficient legal assistance in civil and administrative matters and a shortage of qualified interpreters for persons with hearing impairments or speakers of minority languages. Persons with disabilities encounter physical inaccessibility and systemic discrimination, with limited options for necessary accommodations (UNDP, 2025[8]). These challenges are particularly acute in rural and semi-rural areas, where availability of services is limited, digital connectivity is weaker and familiarity with online platforms is often lower, especially among older individuals or persons with disabilities. For example, stakeholders reported difficulties in accessing interpretation services and navigating the national court portal.
Moldova has made progress in strengthening procedural accessibility through digitalisation and in-person court support services. However, the key e-court system is restricted to legal professionals: steps are being taken to expand this system to self-represented litigants, which could enhance procedural responsiveness. The availability and quality of in-person services (e.g. front desks and information booths) vary by location, leading to an uneven user experience across regions. At the court level, the adoption of certain internal measures, such as adjusting the opening hours of the archive and registry to meet the needs of specific local groups, enabling them to more easily access case files, study them and file submissions, can serve as a useful tool to bring additional flexibility into nationwide regulations.
Importantly, Moldova has also introduced procedural accommodations for individuals who have experienced trauma, including children and survivors of domestic violence. Dedicated measures are in place to promote a trauma-informed approach in relevant proceedings. Most courts have dedicated spaces for interviewing children, according to guidelines provided by the Agency for Digitalisation in Justice and Court Administration. There were, however, some reported instances where victims of violence were not separated from perpetrators in the waiting and court rooms.28 These important safeguards must be systematically applied and reinforced through capacity-building, monitoring and user feedback mechanisms to ensure consistency and effectiveness.
After joining the European Union, sanctions applicable to minors were modified (punishments were replaced with educative measures) and penal laws incorporated more child-friendly procedural accommodations. In 2004, a Tribunal for Minors and Family was set up in Brasov as a pilot court. The rest of the courts have specialised panels adjudicating cases with minors. The National Institute of Magistracy offers periodical initial training and in-service training for judges and prosecutors handling cases with minors (civil and criminal), for instance, on the topic of techniques for hearing minors in criminal cases.
There is similar training for lawyers too, organised by regional bar associations, the National Institute for Lawyers’ Professional Training and the Romanian Institute for Human Rights.
Quasi-judicial institutions: Ombudsoffice and Equality Council
Moldova’s quasi-judicial institutions play an important role in safeguarding rights and promoting equitable access to justice, particularly for individuals who may not engage with formal legal processes. The People’s Advocate institution (Ombudsoffice) is vested with the authority to receive and investigate complaints related to human rights violations. It can make recommendations to public authorities and initiate proceedings before the Constitutional Court in cases where legislation raises concerns of serious or systemic violations of the Constitution and the set of rights it guarantees. Although the Ombudsoffice’s decisions are not legally binding, they carry considerable moral and political weight and serve as a key accountability mechanism in Moldova’s institutional landscape. There is room to strengthen the influence of the Ombudsoffice’s decisions, for example, by requiring formal responses from the parties involved.
While the Ombudsoffice does not typically provide legal representation in individual cases, it fulfils an important referral and triage function, directing individuals, particularly adults, to appropriate channels such as the NCSGLA. The Children’s Advocate, by contrast, has an explicit mandate to intervene directly on behalf of children, including in cases where parental consent is not available. Both bodies contribute to the accessibility of justice by acting as triage mechanisms, helping individuals navigate the system and connecting them to the appropriate remedies, particularly in cases that fall outside the scope of their direct mandates. These functions, though sometimes under-recognised, are critical to a well-functioning justice ecosystem. They underscore the importance of including ombuds services in a comprehensive justice services map. Not only do they provide direct support and referrals, but they also contribute to oversight, accountability and rights awareness, key components of a people-centred justice system. While the caseload remains modest,29 this function provides an important channel for children’s access to redress and is especially relevant in cases involving exposed or at‑risk youth.
Alongside the Ombudsoffice, the Equality Council serves as Moldova’s anti-discrimination body. As an autonomous authority reporting to Parliament, it is responsible for examining complaints of discrimination, promoting equal opportunity policies and monitoring compliance with anti-discrimination legislation. The Council’s role is both preventative and remedial as it may issue findings and recommendations, but these are not legally binding unless upheld by a court. This limited power diminishes the potential role the Council could play within the justice landscape, as seen in the experience of well-established and sound quasi-judicial bodies in other countries, which often serve as important avenues for justice.
Recent caseload data indicate that the Equality Council continues to receive and review a steady number of complaints,30 with direct discrimination most commonly cited, followed by harassment and indirect discrimination. These patterns illustrate both the relevance of the institution and the challenges faced by individuals in securing equal treatment.
Despite its important mandate, the Council’s limited institutional authority and constrained capacity, exacerbated at times by high staff turnover, particularly in partnering bodies, such as law enforcement, can weaken its impact. Moldova could consider revising the role and set-up of the Equality Council in the justice system by exploring ways to strengthen its capacity and mandate. Strengthening institutional follow-up mechanisms and broadening the Council’s outreach and training efforts could also enhance its ability to address structural discrimination more effectively.
6.2.5. Courts and judicial map
Courts remain the backbone of dispute resolution and adjudication, providing authoritative decisions across criminal, civil and administrative matters. The ongoing reform of the judicial map seeks to enhance the efficiency, consistency and quality of adjudication by concentrating resources, enabling judicial specialisation and supporting more balanced caseload distribution across jurisdictions.
Moldova’s judicial map comprises district courts at first instance, courts of appeal and the Supreme Court. A major territorial reform has sought to streamline the court network by consolidating 44 district courts into 15, with further adjustments reducing the number to 14 (Law No. 76/2016).31 Minor technical changes also re‑allocated several courthouses to new districts to address logistical challenges, such as poor transport links between court branches and their central seats.32 At the appellate level, the number of courts was reduced from four to three in January 2025, alongside jurisdictional adjustments aimed at balancing workloads.33 These reforms aim to improve judicial efficiency and quality, enable greater specialisation and reduce administrative fragmentation. Despite these legal reforms, implementation has progressed slowly. The court system continues to operate in 39 geographical locations, much as it did prior to the restructuring. As of 2025, only one district court, Ungheni, has completed full physical consolidation into a single location. The broader reform was expected to be finalised by the end of 2027, but recent legislative amendments have extended the deadline for completing the judicial map infrastructure programme to 2035 (Law No. 241/2025).
Reducing the number of court locations is consistent with practices in other CoE countries. Based on current population density,34 Moldova’s reformed structure, once fully implemented, would result in one of the most streamlined judicial maps in the region in terms of courts per 100 000 inhabitants. From a resource and caseload perspective, consolidation appears justified.
Source: CEPEJ data, number of Moldovan courts/judges from the SCM annual report.
The reform has observed structural constraints. Many district courts in Moldova remain small (with the exception of courthouses in Chișinău): in 2024, 41% had five or fewer judicial positions and 12 courts functioned with three or fewer sitting judges, including three with just one, due to a significant share of vacancies.35 Given that some criminal cases require three-judge panels, such limitations directly affect case allocation, specialisation and procedural fairness.
Moreover, concerns about access remain salient. In areas where closure of local courthouses may create physical access barriers, especially due to weak public transport, mitigation measures are necessary (Human Dynamics, 2021[38]). Alternative service models, such as local service desks or assisted digital access points, can help ensure access and allow the reform to proceed. These solutions enable users to file documents, receive assistance or participate in remote hearings via video-link. They are generally more cost-effective than maintaining underused courthouses and can preserve access while advancing broader reform goals.
Despite its long-term logic, implementation of the judicial map has been hindered by the perception that courthouse mergers require the construction of new facilities. Yet available data indicate that several mergers could be completed without additional infrastructure investment. In district courts such as Căușeni, Chișinău and Criuleni, judges from smaller branch locations could be absorbed by central courts that have sufficient vacancies and physical capacity. In these courts, caseloads per judge are close to or below the national average, suggesting that current levels are manageable.
This analysis, based primarily on the SCM annual statistical reports on caseloads, judicial positions and vacancies, suggests that the revised judicial map could be implemented in several district courts using existing infrastructure. Feasibility will depend on local conditions, such as courthouse capacity, geographic proximity and workload distribution as well as, in certain cases, the need to preserve access to justice for populations in the Transnistrian region and to maintain the institutional continuity of the Moldovan justice system.36
To realise these benefits, stronger co‑ordination and implementation leadership is needed. The SCM is well-placed to assume this role, given its responsibilities for judicial statistics, budgeting and staffing. A more proactive, data-driven approach by SCM could accelerate the reform, while balancing efficiency with equitable access to justice.
Note: Chișinău DC - Caseload differences between the different courthouses within the district court appear to be the results of internal working arrangements and specialisation. E.g. Ciocana judges seem to be specialised more on handling investigating matters, which by nature are less time-consuming than trials.
Source: 2024 SCM annual report.
6.2.6. Implementation of judicial decisions against public authorities in Moldova
In most OECD Member countries, courts have substitutive powers over the administration: they can step in and provide administrative action so judgments with substitutive content will take effect in the administrative body. At a minimum, courts can invalidate the unlawful administrative act and instruct the administrative authority to create a new one in conformity with the law. Courts also tend to oblige the administrative authority to act when it shows passivity before an appellation or request. However, the nature and scope of substitutive powers vary across countries.37 This mechanism plays an important role in fostering a culture of accountability within the executive, enhancing transparency and rebalancing the relationship between citizens and the state.
An important indicator of the quality of judicial control is the extent to which a judicial ruling against a public institution is guaranteed and effectively implemented. Indeed, in cases of non-implementation of a judicial decision by an administrative authority, an appropriate procedure should be implemented to seek execution of that decision through an injunction or a coercive fine (CoE, 2003[39]). This implies that governments are responsible for ensuring administrative authorities are held accountable for cases in which they refuse or neglect to implement judicial decisions.
In Moldova, the responsibility for overseeing the implementation of judicial rulings lies with the judiciary, supported by legal frameworks, such as the Civil Procedure Code and the Administrative Code. However, the effective enforcement of judicial decisions against public authorities remains problematic (OECD, 2023[40]; Ombudsoffice, 2023[41]). Several challenges have been identified:
Delays in execution: Public authorities often delay or avoid implementing court judgments, especially those requiring administrative actions, payment of damages or reinstatement of rights.
Budgetary constraints: One common obstacle is the need for allocated budgetary resources to comply with monetary judgments; public authorities sometimes cite budgetary limitations as grounds for non-execution.
Underdeveloped enforcement mechanisms: Moldova’s legal framework does not yet fully provide for coercive enforcement measures (such as fines or injunctions) against non-complying public bodies, limiting courts' capacity to compel execution beyond mere declarations.
Challenges in ensuring accountability for non-implementation: Administrative leaders rarely face sanctions or disciplinary measures for failing to implement judicial decisions; there are no systematic public reports or registers tracking compliance with judgments against the state.
Lengthy procedures for execution: Execution proceedings themselves can be protracted, creating additional delays for individuals seeking redress.
In practice, when public authorities fail to implement judicial decisions, individuals must initiate additional enforcement actions, often facing legal uncertainty, procedural obstacles and delays. This situation strains trust in the rule of law and access to effective remedies, both of which are core European Union accession benchmarks.
Recognising these challenges, Moldova’s Justice Reform Strategy 2022‑2025 included commitments to:
Strengthen enforcement mechanisms against public authorities;
Introduce legal provisions for coercive fines and substitution measures;
Enhance judicial training on enforcement procedures;
Monitor compliance with judicial decisions and publish regular reports.
Continued efforts to ensure the prompt and effective enforcement of court decisions are essential for reinforcing the principle of legality, strengthening public trust in institutions and meeting EU rule of law standards. Advancing this area requires a robust regulatory framework and targeted measures to improve the enforcement rate of judicial acts, as highlighted in the National Programme on the Accession (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2025[10]).
6.2.7. Enforcement and post-resolution support
Importance of enforcement in a people‑centred justice system and current challenges in Moldova
An effective justice system extends beyond dispute resolution to ensure that outcomes, decisions and agreements are implemented in practice. In many cases, parties involved are left to comply with decisions on their own and any further court support requires a separate application that can be lengthy, costly and may pose a barrier to enforcement (OECD, 2021[16]). A people-centred approach to justice, therefore, requires the development and employment of appropriate enforcement mechanisms that respond to the circumstances of people seeking to enforce their rights. This may include mobilising institutional support and strengthening co‑ordination across courts, enforcement bodies and legal assistance services to ensure that justice outcomes are enforceable, meeting people’s legal and justice needs.
In Moldova, the full picture of enforcement remains challenging due to the limited availability of unified and reliable data, including standardised national indicators on enforcement performance. While the MoJ has taken some steps to address this gap, such as introducing electronic systems and reporting requirements to improve transparency and case tracking (European Commission, 2023[42]), administrative and tracking systems have been historically weak. In a 2020 study, the CoE pointed to stagnation or even decline in enforcement performance (CoE, 2020[43]). While courts have high clearance rates, backlogs and delays in enforcement procedures remain significant. Disposition time for enforcement documents was reported at 715 days at the end of 2022, with the clearance rate for enforcement procedures standing at 83.5% (European Commission, 2023[42]). At the same time, a closing rate under 34% suggests that a substantial share of enforcement cases remain unresolved. These increasing numbers of unenforced or problematic cases is likely to be another significant factor affecting public trust in the justice system.
Various stakeholders also point to a low culture of voluntary enforcement, which is not firmly embedded in social and legal practice, and is reinforced by weak incentives for enforcement (Ombudsoffice, 2025[44]; Ministry of Justice, Moldova, n.d.[45]). For example, a recent report by the Children's Ombudsoffice highlights persistent challenges in the enforcement of court judgments, with direct negative consequences for children’s rights (Ombudsoffice, 2025[44]).
Role of post‑resolution support in people‑centred justice in Moldova
A people-centred justice system extends its support beyond the resolution of disputes, recognising that legal outcomes alone do not always ensure justice. Many individuals, particularly those involved in sensitive cases, such as survivors of violence, children in conflict with the law or persons with disabilities, require sustained support to recover, re‑integrate and prevent re-victimisation. Post-resolution services can include follow-up legal advice, psychosocial support, rehabilitation, and re‑integration programmes and mechanisms to ensure that judgments or settlements are effectively enforced. These services are equally relevant for individuals undergoing rehabilitation, such as juvenile offenders or sexual violence perpetrators whose re‑integration into society must be managed in the interest of both justice and community safety.
Moldova has a dedicated framework for post-resolution support to victims of crime (Law No. 137/2016). It entitles victims who have filed a complaint to information about their rights and available services, psychological counselling (limited to certain crimes), state-guaranteed legal assistance and financial compensation for harm suffered. However, the implementation of this law has been uneven and recent assessments highlight the lack of operational frameworks prevents alignment with European standards (CoE, 2020[46]).
In practice, access to post-resolution support services remains limited. The process for applying for financial compensation is complex and discouraging,38 particularly for victims of trafficking. Establishing legal victim status under the criminal law framework is also a precondition to accessing the rights enshrined in the law, yet this often proves difficult. Moreover, information about available rights and services is frequently inaccessible or ineffective, especially for exposed and underserved individuals. Psychological counselling is restricted in both duration and eligibility; it is only available to victims of domestic violence or trafficking who agree to participate in criminal proceedings (CoE, 2020[46]).
Institutional fragmentation and capacity gaps further compound these issues, particularly in the provision of psychological services. Unclear leadership and co-ordination39 contribute to inconsistent and inadequate service delivery, indicating an implementation gap between legal entitlements and support received in practice. For example, an analysis of 205 cases of child sexual exploitation and abuse concluded between 2017 and 2019 found that psychological support was provided in only 14% of cases (CoE, 2020[46]).
Sector‑specific support for victims of domestic violence
Sector-specific legislation provides additional avenues of support for victims of domestic violence, including access to physical, psychological, legal and social recovery services, irrespective of whether the victim testifies or participates in proceedings (Law No. 45/2007). This includes privacy protections and confidentiality safeguards. Victims of domestic violence are also included in government programmes that provide support for labour market integration, including vocational training and entrepreneurship support. However, uptake remains limited,40 suggesting that the legal framework does not translate into post-resolution support (CoE/GREVIO, 2023[47]).
Efforts to strengthen victim support systems are ongoing. In 2024, a national network of rehabilitation specialists for domestic violence survivors was established with EU and IOM support (IOM, 2024[48]). Yet access remains uneven, particularly in rural areas. Stakeholders have reported that psychological services are largely concentrated in Chișinău, while probation officers in other regions struggle to refer individuals to appropriate mental health services. Civil society continues to play a crucial role in bridging service gaps, through helplines and community-based support.41
Reintegration support
In addition to support for victims, gaps remain in services for individuals undergoing re‑integration, particularly child offenders and sexual violence perpetrators. While the probation service has identified rehabilitation as a strategic priority, substantial progress has yet to be achieved (CoE, 2020[49]; CoE, 2020[50]). Stakeholders highlight challenges in the support provided to children and their families during and after criminal sentencing.42 Limited professional capacity, especially outside urban areas, can result in punitive or stigmatising responses rather than rehabilitative interventions. In rural regions, the absence of specialised treatment providers undermines the delivery of appropriate and targeted services. The need for a coherent, multi-agency approach contributes to fragmented outcomes and undermines the goal of social re‑integration.
An effective people-centred justice system must invest in post-resolution services that are timely, appropriate and accessible across the country. This requires clear institutional responsibilities, better co‑ordination across justice and social sectors, and the allocation of adequate resources. Only by addressing the full arc of justice journeys, from prevention to resolution and recovery, can Moldova realise a justice system that is responsive to the needs and dignity of all people.
Moldova has developed a wide range of legal and justice services, underpinned by significant legal and institutional reforms. However, the analysis in this chapter suggests that the adequacy of services remains uneven across the justice continuum. Reform and service provision are strongest in formal, court‑centred and criminal justice processes, while preventive and early‑stage assistance or support for everyday legal problems are only developing. Moldova also faces geographic disparities in service availability and quality, capacity shortages and weak co-ordination which further impedes the justice system’s ability to respond effectively to people’s needs. These gaps point to the limits of infrastructure‑driven planning and highlight the need for a shift toward needs‑based service design and delivery.
Courts are foundational institutions within the justice system and the concept of a judicial map, as a territorial framework, has long defined access to justice. However, an evolving understanding of people-centred justice underscores that courts represent only one component of a broader justice services ecosystem, with various pathways people can take to address their legal needs, often outside judicial avenues. As a result, justice sector planning is evolving from a narrow focus on court locations towards a broader justice services map that reflects the full range of justice entry points, institutions, mechanisms and services people use to access justice. By integrating courts with other justice-related services into a coherent framework, countries can ensure more equitable geographic coverage, and accessible and responsive service delivery, and enhance efficiency.
Evidence from Moldova illustrates why such a shift would be necessary. Legal needs and justice problems data show that courts are rarely the first point of contact when people encounter a legal problem. Most Moldovans first seek advice from trusted individuals or institutions – police, local authorities, lawyers, also relatives or acquaintances (UNDP, 2025[8]).43 These help-seeking patterns do not consistently lead to resolution;44 many disputes never progress beyond this initial stage, and more than one-third of people abandon efforts to address their problems altogether. Overall, only about four in ten people succeeded in resolving their legal issue with the support of formal institutions, such as courts, police, prosecutors, legal aid providers or local authorities (UNDP, 2025[8]).
These data show that people in Moldova pursue various avenues to address their legal issues, pointing to the need for a more comprehensive approach to justice service planning and delivery. Notably, public planning and resource allocation within the sector in Moldova remains primarily guided by the judicial map, centred on the geographical distribution and infrastructure of courts. Reforms to the judicial map have had system-wide effects, shaping the organisation of the prosecution service and legal aid.45 These developments underscore the dominance of a court-centric planning model. While such an approach serves important administrative and efficiency objectives, it risks overlooking broader service delivery needs and the reality that many legal problems are addressed outside of court.
To deliver on the promise of people-centred justice, Moldova could complement its judicial map with a comprehensive justice services map. This would involve mapping the full range of justice-related services, including legal aid, mediation, paralegal and community-based support, ombuds mechanisms, digital access points and mobile services. Such a map would reflect the actual pathways people use to resolve their legal issues, many of which never result in court proceedings. It would also help to identify and address territorial disparities in service availability, particularly in underserved or rural areas.
Developing a justice services map would support more informed and strategic decisions about the allocation of resources, prioritisation of reform efforts and design of outreach initiatives. It would allow planners and policymakers to visualise the full continuum of services, understand user journeys and identify gaps or overlaps across the system. This approach is consistent with the OECD Recommendation on Access to Justice and People-Centred Justice Systems, which calls on countries to map service provision across digital, in-person and hybrid formats and to tailor services to the needs of different population groups.
A people-centred justice system requires more than the efficient distribution of courts. It must recognise the diversity of legal needs and ensure that services, whether formal or informal, public or community-based, are accessible, co‑ordinated and responsive. A justice services map offers a practical tool to support this shift, helping Moldova move from infrastructure-driven reform to need-driven delivery.
6.3.1. From concept to implementation: A path forward
Moving from a court-centric justice map to a whole-of-sector justice services map requires a shift in perspective, from planning infrastructure around institutions to designing services around people. A comprehensive justice services map aims to ensure that services respond to people’s legal needs and justice problems, integrate user experiences and ensure that justice is delivered through the right mix of services to the right people in the right areas of law in the right locations and at the right time. This approach echoes the OECD’s people-centred justice framework and can be guided by key questions (OECD, 2019[6]; Pleasance et al., 2014[51]):
Who experiences legal problems and what are those problems?
Where and when do these needs arise?
What types of services are most effective in addressing them?
How and where should these services be delivered, accessed and evaluated?
The shift from a traditional judicial map to a whole-of-sector justice services map would mark a fundamental rethinking of how justice is conceived, planned and delivered. It extends beyond infrastructure mapping and geographic distribution of courts to reflect the full continuum through which people encounter and resolve legal issues, whether through information, advice, mediation, community services or formal adjudication. The Netherlands provides a practical example of how a consultation mechanism can inform access to justice reform efforts in a more deliberate manner, as shown in Box 6.6, below.
At present, information about Moldova’s justice services, formal and informal, is fragmented and difficult to navigate. People are often left to search multiple websites, leaflets or informal channels to find legal information or services. No central platform exists to guide individuals to the most appropriate, accessible and timely solutions. This absence of a co‑ordinated, people-centred service map reinforces the perception that justice is synonymous with the courts. Stakeholders have highlighted the need for more user-oriented planning, particularly for marginalised communities who may face additional obstacles.
The Netherlands provides an example of how access-to-justice reform can be supported through a structured and standing consultation mechanism. In 2023, the Ministry of Justice and Security proposed a consultation structure for its access to justice programme, aimed at building a shared approach among institutions and organisations involved in the justice system. The structure is designed to identify barriers and bottlenecks, discuss solution pathways and support reflection on the future organisation of the legal system.
The model includes a Core Group bringing together justice institutions, service providers and professional bodies, including the Council for the Judiciary, the Legal Aid Board, the Legal Services Counter, the Bar Association, notaries, judicial officers, mediators and dispute resolution bodies. The Core Group meets regularly to exchange information, review ongoing measures, identify access barriers and test possible reforms. A separate Executive Consultation, composed of senior representatives of the same organisations, helps build commitment, promote co-operation and ensure that strategic discussions are connected to institutional leadership.
Although the consultation structure does not itself make decisions, it provides organised input for policy development. This model illustrates how a justice services map can be supported by a permanent governance mechanism that keeps justice institutions, legal service providers and policymakers aligned around user needs, access barriers and practical reform options.
A justice services map does more than list institutions. It also provides a dynamic, demand-informed picture of how people experience legal problems and access support. This requires shifting from supply-based planning to needs-based governance that places user outcomes at the centre.
Such a map could include:
Data on legal needs and justice demand (from legal needs and justice problems surveys, administrative data, CSO input);
Locations and scope of services (courts, legal aid offices, NGO legal clinics, paralegal networks, ADR centres);
Digital tools (e.g. hotlines, triage tools, online dispute resolution);
Types of support offered (legal advice, mediation, complaint resolution, psychosocial or re‑integration support);
Accessibility information (e.g. language availability, disability accommodations);
Identification of service gaps by geography, income level, ethnicity, disability status or other dimensions of inequality.
By operationalising a justice services map in this way, Moldova would be taking a critical step toward building a justice system that is efficient and cost-effective as well as responsive and accessible to all.
6.3.2. Co‑ordinated and integrated service models
People’s legal and justice problems are rarely isolated. They are often shaped by broader socio-economic challenges, such as poverty, violence, discrimination and insecure housing. Delivering people-centred justice, therefore, requires service models that are responsive to the complex and intersecting needs of people. This, in turn, calls for effective co‑ordination across justice institutions and with social, health, education and administrative services. Co‑ordination mechanisms must be designed to enable seamless referrals, joint case management and integrated service responses and be underpinned by a coherent governance and planning at the strategic level.
Strengthening strategic planning mechanisms, particularly those led by the State Chancellery and the MoJ, is key to ensuring that justice is embedded in wider policy frameworks and resourced accordingly. Moldova has adopted several cross-sectoral initiatives, such as the National Human Rights Programme (Government Decision No. 164/2024), the Roma Inclusion Programme (Government Decision No. 576/2022), or the National Programme on Violence Against Women (Government Decision No. 332/2023) that rely on collaboration between multiple institutions and assign them specific responsibilities. Yet the co‑ordination often breaks down at the implementation stage due to fragmented mandates, limited information sharing and insufficient involvement of justice actors in non-justice-led programmes. Improved use of shared performance indicators, interoperable data systems and accountability tools can help align high-level strategies with operational service delivery.
One-stop shops offer a promising model to simplify access, promote service efficiency and improve user experience. By consolidating multiple forms of legal, medical, psychological and financial assistance under a single roof, they allow individuals to receive co‑ordinated support in one location rather than navigating disconnected service providers (OECD, 2020[53]; OECD, 2019[6]). Moldova’s experience demonstrates the feasibility and value of such approaches, even in resource-constrained environments:
Barnahus Centre in Bălți: Internationally recognised multi‑disciplinary model for child protection, this centre provides integrated services to child victims of violence in Northern Moldova. Two additional centres are planned in the Southern and Central regions. While the current facility is co-funded by development partners, the state now covers around 50% of its operating budget, signalling increasing national ownership.
Victim Support Centres: Operating in several regions and primarily managed by NGOs with donor funding, these centres provide survivors of violence with a wide range of support, including forensic medical services, emergency shelter, legal advice and psychosocial assistance. Notably, the victim support centre in Ungheni, initially established with donor support, has now been integrated into the national system and is publicly funded by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, encouraging sustainability and institutionalisation.46
While these promising models exist, Moldova’s broader justice service landscape remains fragmented. Public institutions, such as courts, prosecution offices, the NCSGLA, the Ombudsoffice and various ministries often operate with overlapping or insufficiently co‑ordinated mandates. This fragmentation constrains the delivery of coherent, people-centred justice and limits the ability to manage legal problems through seamless referral pathways and integrated case management.
Steps have been taken to improve co‑ordination and increase the transparency of the decision-making process by promoting participatory and consultative mechanisms, including inter‑agency working groups, operational protocols and dialogue platforms involving civil society and professional associations.47 However, these mechanisms are often limited in scope, inconsistently applied and overly dependent on individual initiative rather than embedded within a coherent institutional framework. Formal agreements frequently lack binding authority and co‑ordination efforts are not systematically monitored or evaluated. Fragmented data systems, unclear accountability lines and insufficient engagement with non-justice stakeholders, such as health, education and social protection providers, further constrain effective service delivery. The cross-collaboration equally applies to service delivery at the local level, where there are more opportunities for quick consultations and practical solutions tailored to the needs and circumstances of a local community.
To move beyond isolated good practices and toward a truly integrated justice services map, Moldova will need to operationalise multi-sector co‑ordination mechanisms that are institutionally anchored, sustainably funded and backed by shared objectives. Together, these dimensions can help Moldova shift from fragmented service provision to a coherent justice services ecosystem that is responsive and centred on actual needs of all populations.
Co‑ordination within the justice system in Moldova: Addressing domestic violence
Moldova’s national framework for preventing and combating domestic violence demonstrates how cross‑sectoral and inter‑institutional co‑ordination can support more integrated, user-responsive justice services. This model brings together justice and non-justice actors, law enforcement, social protection, healthcare, education and civil society under shared mandates and institutional arrangements to address complex, intersectional legal issues.
The system operates through a comprehensive multi-level and multi-actor structure, this layered co-ordination model illustrates a functional architecture for delivering people-centred justice: one that spans national strategy, operational implementation and local service delivery. It also highlights the potential of embedding people-centred approaches within justice governance when supported by specialised mandates, dedicated institutions and cross-sectoral collaboration. Further details on co-ordination bodies, specialised units and operational mechanisms are presented in Annex 6.B.
While Moldova’s domestic violence co‑ordination system represents a notable step toward integrated, people-centred justice, further efforts are needed to strengthen its reach, resilience and sustainability. Many specialised services remain limited to selected regions, with inconsistent government funding and high reliance on international donors. Monitoring and evaluation systems to assess co‑ordination outcomes are still underdeveloped, with a need for clearer indicators, routine data collection and mechanisms to evaluate service effectiveness. Fragmented data systems and limited interoperability between institutions continue to hamper seamless case management and joint action. Moreover, while NGOs play a key role in service delivery, their involvement in the design, governance and oversight of services remains insufficiently institutionalised.
Expanding these multi‑disciplinary models nationwide, backed by predictable public funding, robust data-sharing frameworks and embedded civil society participation, would be essential to delivering effective responses to complex legal and social needs.
Based on these findings, potential pathways and policy levers to reinforce Moldova’s efforts to build a people-centred justice system:
1. Deepen public institutions’ and service providers’ understanding of people’s legal needs and justice problems, and experiences across regions and population groups. This could include:
Strengthening the collection and analysis of disaggregated data. This includes data by age, income, disability, ethnicity, minority status and region, and other relevant demographic characteristics, using legal needs and justice problems assessments, administrative records and participatory research methods involving civil society and local communities.
2. Broaden the strategic focus of legal and justice services to promote a people-centred continuum of services, from prevention and early intervention to resolution and post-resolution support. This could include:
Expanding the legal and policy definitions of access to justice beyond the courts, acknowledging diverse justice pathways and encompassing the full spectrum of formal, informal, alternative and community-based mechanisms;
Improving public access to justice-related information by ensuring that justice information systems are accessible, up-to-date and user-friendly, and safeguarding personal information by ensuring compliance with privacy regulations and data protection standards, in line with relevant EU directives and regulations;
Reviewing existing legal and justice services to review duplication and overlapping mandates, and service linkages, and enhance accessibility and quality through seamless referral pathways and integrated case management;
Scaling specialised, integrated, multi-disciplinary services, particularly for vulnerable and underserved groups.
3. Promoting a more problem-solving approach to justice service design and delivery by complementing institution- and infrastructure-focused reforms with the development of a comprehensive justice services map that identifies and visualises all formal and informal justice-related services. This could include:
Establishing a whole-of-government approach to legal and justice services planning. This includes aligning justice sector strategies with broader public administration reforms, integrating legal and justice services planning into national development strategies and ensuring funding mechanisms to support service expansion and accessibility;
Mapping existing formal and informal services using a standard taxonomy (or categorisation framework) and participatory methodology that involves CSOs, local authorities and service users;
Reviewing and analysing current service maps, including judicial, prosecutorial, legal aid and ombudsoffices, to detect territorial disparities and improve co-ordination and co‑location of services;
Developing strategies to address service gaps and inequities, including enhancing geographic coverage, alignment and integration of justice-related services, and prioritising needs of underserved communities and areas for resource allocation and service expansion.
4. Operationalise the “justice services map” to enable people to seamlessly navigate services and support government efforts to design, deliver, monitor and evaluate service delivery and resource allocation. This could include:
Creating a user-facing digital platform that displays available services with filter functions (e.g. by location, language or service type), including accessibility features and multi‑lingual support, taking into account digital literacy levels;
Using the map for strategic resource planning and investment, such as mobile legal aid deployment and expansion of alternative dispute resolution in rural areas or targeting outreach to underserved regions;
Institutionalising regular updates and feedback mechanisms that leverage population data, administrative records and civil society input to track changes in demand, identify gaps and improve service quality and coverage over time.
5. Advance implementation of the current judicial map reform by analysing options within the existing courthouse network. This could include:
Assessing opportunities for courthouse mergers and closure, where possible, including transferring judges from current branch courthouses to central courthouses of district courts, where actual need for judges, current number of judges and availability of space allow a merging of judges in the existing system of district courts;
Creating court service desks in towns affected by closures to maintain proximity to essential court functions (e.g. document submission, video hearings);
Re-investing savings from closing courthouses in renovating or building new courthouses, where relevant.
Law No. 128 of 29 May 2025 on the amendment of certain normative acts (partially free state guaranteed legal aid), https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/148993.
Law No. 241 of 10 July 2025 on amending some normative acts (evaluation of the performance of judges and prosecutors), https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/150133.
Law No. 213 of 31 July 2023 on State Fee, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/152741.
Law No. 137 of 29 July 2016 on the Rehabilitation of Victims of Crime, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/153185.
Law No. 76 of 21 April 2016 on the reorganisation of the courts, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/93527.
Law No. 198 of 26 July 2007 on the state guaranteed legal aid, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/24281.
Law No. 45 of 1 March 2007 on preventing and combating domestic violence, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/110200.
Government Decision No. 306 of 28 May 2025 on the approval of the National Programme for the accession of the Republic of Moldova to the European Union for the years 2025–2029, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/152627.
Government Decision No. 846 of 18 December 2024 on the establishment of the minimum wage amount per country for the year 2025, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/146270.
Government Decision No. 164 of 6 March 2024 on the approval of the National Program on Ensuring Respect for Human Rights for 2024-2027, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/142723.
Government Decision No. 332 of 31 May 2023 on the approval of the National Program on the Prevention and Combating of Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence for 2023-2027, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/140367.
Government Decision No. 576 of 3 August 2022 on the approval of the Program for Supporting the Roma Population in the Republic of Moldova for 2022-2025, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/133208.
Government Decision No. 347 of 1 June 2022 on approving the National Programme for Child Protection for 2022–2026 and its Action Plan, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/145280.
Government Decision No. 228 of 28 March 2014 on the approval of the Regulation on the activity of territorial multidisciplinary teams within the National Referral System, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/103074.
Government decision No. 557 of 17 July 2013 on the approval of the Framework Regulation regarding the organization of the activity of the community mediator, https://www.legis.md/cautare/downloadpdf/125326.
References
[102] ACTED (2023), Republic of Moldova: Roma Community Needs Assessment, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj1guvwhO2TAxV_TKQEHaXpOvcQFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdata.unhcr.org%2Fen%2Fdocuments%2Fdownload%2F102293&usg=AOvVaw1oHrjEwGnCKEdht7fBLi86&opi=89978449.
[72] Administrative Review Tribunal (n.d.), Our role, https://www.art.gov.au/about-us/our-role#section-0-0.
[95] Alber, E. and C. Zwilling (2022), “A Primer on the Autonomy of South Tyrol: History, Law, Politics”, Autonomy Arrangements in the World, https://webassets.eurac.edu/31538/1666883756-south-tyrol-2022.pdf#:~:text=In%20practice%2C%20German%20is%20today,use%20of%20Ladin%20language%2C%20they.
[54] ANPCV (2025), The National Program on the Prevention and Combating of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence for the years 2023–2027, evaluated at the midpoint of its implementation period, National Agency for Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, https://anpcv.gov.md/ro/communication/comunicate-de-presa/programul-national-privind-prevenirea-si-combaterea-violentei.
[113] APSCF (2023), “APSCF presents the study “Knowledge, attitudes, practices in preventing and combating bullying in schools in the Republic of Moldova””, The Alliance of Active NGOs in the field of Child and Family Social Protection (APSCF), https://aliantacf.md/en/news/2023/06/16/apscf-presents-the-study-knowledge-attitudes-practices-in-preventing-and-combating-bullying-in-schools-in-the-republic-of-moldova/.
[88] APSCF (2016), NGO Alternative Report to the Republic of Moldova Combined 4th and 5th periodic Report on the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/DownloadDraft.aspx?key=Y0y5DeYa1IyYUCbXdoUgvJ8X4fkjPsvOBRfidItBHilG%2B56Q9c9mNKDGRage7ZKu.
[29] ASA (n.d.), The Advice Quality Standard, Advice Services Alliance, https://asauk.org.uk/advice-quality-standard/ (accessed on 17 July 2025).
[63] Association of Independent Press (n.d.), Active Informing and Promotion of Human Rights and Equal Access to Justice for all Citizens, https://api.md/active-informing-and-promotion-of-human-rights-and-equal-access-to-justice-for-all-citizens/.
[18] Attorney-General’s Department of Australia (2009), A Strategic Framework for Access to Justice in the Federal Civil Justice System, https://www.ag.gov.au/legal-system/publications/strategic-framework-access-justice-federal-civil-justice-system (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[99] Belser, E. and S. Mazidi (2022), “Linguistic Diversity in Switzerland: Going Beyond Territorial”, Forum of Federations, Occasional Paper Series 57, https://forumfed.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/OPS-57-Language-Policy-Switzerland.pdf.
[96] Brennan Center for Justice (2011), Language Access in Immigration Courts, https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/Justice/LangAccess/Language_Access_in_Immigration_Courts.pdf. (accessed on 15 January 2026).
[19] Canadian Bar Association (2013), Reaching Equal Justice: An Invitation to Envision and Act, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwihgMHkhu2TAxW4fKQEHWj3DbQQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cba.org%2FCBAMediaLibrary%2Fcba_na%2Fimages%2FEqual%2520Justice%2520-%2520Microsite%2FPDFs%2FEqual-Justice-.
[70] Canadian Human Rights Commission (n.d.), File a discrimination complaint, https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/find-help/file-discrimination-complaint.
[62] CEPEJ (2023), Programme “Support to further strengthening the efficiency and quality of the judicial system in the Republic of Moldova”, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, https://www.coe.int/fr/web/cepej/programme-support-to-further-strengthening-the-efficiency-and-quality-of-the-judicial-system-in-the-republic-of-moldova- (accessed on 14 January 2026).
[28] Citizens Advice (2024), What we do, https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/information/what-we-do/ (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[105] CIVIS Centre (2021), CIVIS Centre, Centre for Sociological, Politological and Psychological Analysis and Investigations CIVIS, https://cdn.osce.org/sites/default/files/f/documents/0/7/505306_0.pdf.
[34] CNAJGS (2026), Annual activity report, National Council for State Guaranteed Legal Aid, https://cnajgs.md/uploads/asset/file/ro/3232/Raport_anual_de_activitate_2025.pdf (accessed on 26 February 2026).
[24] CNAJGS (2025), Statistics on paralegal activity in Moldova [online database], National Council for State Guaranteed Legal Aid, https://statparajurist.cnajgs.md/ (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[109] CNFACEM (2025), Telefonul Copilului 116 111 (The Children’s Phone), https://telefonulcopilului.md/.
[56] CNPAC (2019), Annual report 2019, National Centre for the Prevention of Child Abuse, https://www.cnpac.md/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/CNPAC_raport-2019-RO-sm.pdf.
[58] CNPAC (2015), Kiki and the Hand, Centrul Național de Prevenire a Abuzului față de Copii, https://www.cnpac.md/ro/kiko-si-mina-2015/.
[57] CNPAC (n.d.), 12plus - a site for adolescents inspired from your life, Centrul Național de Prevenire a Abuzului față de Copii, https://12plus.md/ (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[25] CoE (2025), Sixth Periodic Report of the Republic of Moldova on the Implementation of the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/6th-sr-moldova-en/1680b51635.
[85] CoE (2023), Barriers, remedies and good practices on women’s access to justice in the Republic of Moldova, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/barriers-remedies-good-practices-republic-moldova-2748-8251-8536-1/1680ac9b82 (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[108] CoE (2022), Improving the Access to Justice of Roma Women - Collection of Good Practices from Bulgaria, Greece, Italy and Romania, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/improving-the-access-to-justice-of-roma-women-collection-of-good-pract/1680a6d7f1.
[67] CoE (2022), Improving the access to justice of Roma women: Collection of good practices from Bulgaria, Greece, Italy and Romania, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/improving-the-access-to-justice-of-roma-women-collection-of-good-pract/1680a6d7f1.
[50] CoE (2020), Baseline Study on systemic issues aff ecting the child protection system’s response to child sexual exploitation and abuse in the Republic of Moldova, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/baseline-study-on-systemic-issues-aff-ecting-the-child-protection-syst/16809fa8f1.
[43] CoE (2020), Report on the enforcement of court decisions in civil and administrative matters in the Republic of Moldova, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/expert-report-enforcement-of-court-decisions-eng/1680a179d1.
[49] CoE (2020), Research of the judicial practice related to child sexual exploitation and abuse cases in the Republic of Moldova, https://rm.coe.int/judicial-practice-en-dupa-modificari/1680a12437.
[46] CoE (2020), Research of the judicial practice related to child sexual exploitation and abuse cases in the Republic of Moldova, Council of Europe, https://rm.coe.int/judicial-practice-en-dupa-modificari/1680a12437.
[39] CoE (2003), Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the execution of administrative and judicial decisions in the field of administrative law, Council of Europe.
[47] CoE/GREVIO (2023), GREVIO’s (Baseline) Evaluation Report, Council of Europe/GREVIO, https://rm.coe.int/grevio-s-baseline-evaluation-report-on-legislative-and-other-measures-/1680ad46a1.
[104] CPR (2024), Alternative report submitted to the 112th session (08 April – 26 April 2024) of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Center for Policies and Reforms, Moldova, https://cpr.md/anunturi/alternative-report-submitted-to-the-112th-session-08-april-26-april-2024-of-the-un-committee-on-the-elimination-of-racial-discrimination.
[103] Equal Rights Trust (2015), No Jobs for Roma: Situation Report on Discrimination against the Roma in Moldova.
[92] Equality Council (2025), General Report - Regarding the Situation in the Field of Prevention and Combating Discrimination in the Republic of Moldova, https://egalitate.md/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/CE_Raport_situatie_2024_final.pdf.
[82] Equality Council (2024), Discrimination in the Republic of Moldova 2023, https://egalitate.md/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/brosura-sumar-2023-1.pdf.
[101] Ergo Network (2023), Challenges faced by Roma refugees from Ukraine in Moldova, https://ergonetwork.org/2023/09/challenges-faced-by-roma-refugees-from-ukraine-in-moldova/.
[13] European Commission (2024), Republic of Moldova 2024 Report, https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/document/download/858717b3-f8ef-4514-89fe-54a6aa15ef69_en?filename=Moldova%20Report%202024.pdf.
[42] European Commission (2023), Republic of Moldova 2023 Report, https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-11/SWD_2023_698%20Moldova%20report.pdf.
[74] Finnish Consumer Disputes Board (n.d.), About the Board, https://www.kuluttajariita.fi/fi/index/tietoameista.html.
[75] Finnish Government (n.d.), Consumer Disputes Board, https://valtiolle.fi/en/employers/consumer-disputes-board/.
[64] FLOWS (2025), About us, https://www.flows.org.uk/about-us (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[98] French Parliament (1994), Toubon Law: Law No 94-665, https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/loda/id/JORFTEXT000000349929/.
[97] French Parliament (n.d.), Code of Criminal Procedure, https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000006071154/LEGISCTA000038556630.
[111] GIZ (2021), Updated Report on the Mapping of Densely Populated Roma Communities in the Republic of Moldova, Deutsche Gesellschaftfür InternationaleZusammenarbeit (GIZ), https://mecc.gov.md/sites/default/files/final_raport_privind_cartografierea_localitatilor_dens_populate_de_romi.pdf.
[66] Government of Canada (2024), Immigration and refugee legal aid, https://justice.canada.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/aid-aide/2023/p8.html.
[65] Government of Nova Scotia (n.d.), Independent legal advice for adult survivors of sexual assault, https://novascotia.ca/sexualassaultlegaladvice/ (accessed on 14 January 2026).
[81] Government of the Republic of Moldova (2026), Cases of violence to be monitored uniformly at national level for early prevention and more effective intervention, https://gov.md/en/comunicate-de-presa/cases-violence-be-monitored-uniformly-national-level-early-prevention-and-more (accessed on 10 May 2026).
[10] Government of the Republic of Moldova (2025), National Accession Program 2025-2029, https://old.gov.md/ro/advanced-page-type/2025-2029-national-programme-accession-republic-moldova-eu (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[38] Human Dynamics (2021), Report on the Evaluation of the Judicial Map Reform, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjauoqdke2TAxV4UaQEHYvSGRIQFnoECBYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcrjm.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2022%2F05%2FFinal-Report-JMA_Ro.pdf&usg=AOvVaw01jIv_ycr_Ui6dApN8wd5a&opi=8997.
[114] Human Rights Guide (n.d.), La Strada Moldova, https://www.humanrightsguide.md/en/themes/organisations/non-govermental-organisations/la-strada-moldova.
[61] IOM (2024), IOM and Police awareness campaign to promote community safety in the Republic of Moldova marked the start, International Organization for Migration, https://moldova.iom.int/news/iom-and-police-awareness-campaign-promote-community-safety-republic-moldova-marked-start#:~:text=The%20Community%20Police%20awareness%20campaign,respect%20fundamental%20rights%20and%20freedoms.
[48] IOM (2024), Launch of the national network of specialists in the protection of victims of violence and rehabilitation of victims of crime and provision of high-performance IT equipment, with the financial support of the European Union through IOM, International Organization for Migration, https://moldova.iom.int/news/launch-national-network-specialists-protection-victims-violence-and-rehabilitation-victims-crime-and-provision-high-performance-it-equipment-financial-support-european-union-donated-through-iom#:~:text=Chi%C8%99in%C4%83u%2C%20.
[33] IPRE (2026), Policy Dialogue #Justice4Moldova on the alignment of the three maps of the justice system: courts, prosecution offices, and police, https://ipre.md/2026/02/10/dialog-de-politici-justitiepentrumoldova-privind-alinierea-celor-trei-harti-ale-sistemului-de-justitie-instante-procuraturi-politie/?lang=en#:~:text=importance%20of%20institutional%20coherence%20in,overlaps%20and%20to%20ensure%2.
[77] JLSC (2025), “About Houterasu”, https://www.houterasu.or.jp/site/about-houterasu/.
[76] JLSC (2023), “Houterasu”, https://www.houterasu.or.jp/uploaded/attachment/3364.pdf#:~:text=The%20principal%20services%20of%20the,ensure%20and%20strengthen%20coordina%02tion%20among.
[100] Kużelewska, E. (2016), “Language Policy in Switzerland”, Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, Vol. 45/1, pp. 125-140, https://doi.org/10.1515/slgr-2016-0020.
[112] La Strada Moldova (2021), Child safety online. Research on the online experiences of children, https://lastrada.md/storage/pic/uploaded/COS%20Research%202021_summary.pdf.
[59] La Strada Moldova (n.d.), About Us, https://lastrada.md/despre (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[2] Legal Services Board (2024), 2023 Individual Legal Needs Survey: Exploring Unmet Legal Needs, https://legalservicesboard.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ILNS-unmet-needs-topic-report-FINAL.pdf.
[93] Machnyikova, Z. and I. Beschieru (2021), The centre-autonomy institutional arrangements and relationships of the Gagauz Autonomy, https://gagauziadialogue.md/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/The-Guide-English-version-WEB.pdf.
[110] Management of the General Directorate for Education, Youth and Sport of the Municipality of Chisinau, Moldova (2023), Education for Legal Socialization, https://chisinauedu.md/educatie-pentru-socializare-juridica/ (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[115] Mediation Council (2025), Activity report of the Mediation Council for the year 2024, https://mediere.gov.md/sites/default/files/document/attachments/raport_2024_narativ.pdf.
[21] Ministry of Education and Research, Moldova (2021), Eighth-grade students from 22 schools across the country benefited from legal education as part of the pilot implementation of the optional subject ‘Education for Legal Socialisation, https://mec.gov.md/ro/content/elevii-claselor-viii-din-22-de-scoli-din-tara-au-beneficiat-de-instruire-juridica-cadrul (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[31] Ministry of Internal Affairs, Moldova (2025), Police reorganisation: more patrols on the ground and faster interventions, https://mai.gov.md/ro/node/9900 (accessed on 4 May 2026).
[52] Ministry of Justice and Security of the Netherlands (2026), Start Memorandum on the Consultation Structure for the Access to Justice Programme.
[35] Ministry of Justice, Moldova (2025), The draft of the new law on mediation – the central topic at the international conference organised by the Ministry of Justice, https://justice.gov.md/ro/content/proiectul-noii-legi-privind-medierea-subiectul-central-la-conferinta-internationala (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[45] Ministry of Justice, Moldova (n.d.), Justice Minister Alexandru Tănase discusses the issue of failure to enforce court decisions in Strasbourg, https://www.justice.gov.md/en/content/ministrul-justitiei-alexandru-tanase-discuta-la-strasbourg-problema-neexecutarii-hotararilor (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[4] Ministry of Justice, New Zealand (2024), Access to Justice: 2023 Legal Needs Survey, https://lawfoundation.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Access-to-Justice-Legal-Needs-Survey-Final-Report-October-2024.pdf.
[37] Ministry of Justice, Romania (n.d.), Presentation of courts Brașov Juvenile and Family Court, https://portal.just.ro/1372/SitePages/prezentare.aspx?id_inst=1372 (accessed on 7 August 2025).
[94] Ministry of Justice, United Kingdom (2011), Practice Direction Relating to the Use of the Welsh Language in Cases in the Civil Courts In or Having a Connection with Wales, https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/welshpd.
[80] Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, Moldova (2023), Actions undertaken and results achieved in the implementation of the Action Plan for the implementation of the National Programme for Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence for the period 2023-2027, https://social.gov.md/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Plan-VAW_15.03.23.pdf.
[79] Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, Moldova (2023), National Action Plan 2022-2025.
[9] Mironova, S. (2022), Access to justice for socially vulnerable and marginalized groups of the population in UTA Gagauzia, https://legalclinic.md/report-access-to-justice-for-vulnerable-and-marginalized-groups-in-atu-gagauzia/.
[32] Moldova1 (2026), Territorial reorganisation of justice: the map of courts does not correspond to that of prosecutor’s offices and creates difficulties for state prosecutors, https://moldova1.md/p/68373/reorganizarea-teritoriala-a-justitiei-harta-judecatoriilor-nu-corespunde-cu-cea-a-procuraturilor-si-creeaza-dificultati-acuzatorilor-de-stat (accessed on 4 May 2026).
[87] Moldovan National Bureau of Statistics (2024), Children in Contact With the Law, https://statistica.gov.md/files/files/publicatii_electronice/Copiii_Moldovei/Infografice/2024/Justitia.pdf.
[36] National Institute of Magistracy (2025), Seminar on “Techniques for hearing minors in criminal cases – judges,” organized as part of the 2025 Continuing Education Program, Bucharest, June 19-20, 2025 – National Institute of Magistracy), https://inm-lex.ro/seminarul-cu-tema-tehnici-de-audiere-a-minorilor-in-cauzele-penale-judecatori-organizat-in-cadrul-programului-de-formare-continua-pe-anul-2025-bucuresti-19-20-iunie-2025/ (accessed on 7 August 2025).
[91] Northern Ireland Assembly (n.d.), The Legal Needs of Children and Young People in Northern Ireland: the views of young people and adult stakeholders, https://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/knowledge_exchange/briefing_papers/series3/emerson290514.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2026).
[12] Nunavut Courts (2025), Nunavut Court of Justice, https://www.nunavutcourts.ca/index.php/nunavut-court-of-justice.
[17] OECD (2024), OECD Justice Review of Peru: Towards Effective and Transparent Justice Institutions for Inclusive Growth, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bb556518-en.
[86] OECD (2023), “OECD Child-Friendly Justice Framework: Building a people-centred justice system”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 41, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6a60970e-en.
[40] OECD (2023), Public administration in the Republic of Moldova.
[14] OECD (2023), “Recommendation of the Council on Access to Justice and People-Centred Justice Systems”, OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0498, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0498.
[16] OECD (2021), OECD Framework and Good Practice Principles for People-Centred Justice, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cdc3bde7-en.
[53] OECD (2020), One-Stop Shops for Citizens and Business, OECD Best Practice Principles for Regulatory Policy, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b0b0924e-en.
[6] OECD (2019), Equal Access to Justice for Inclusive Growth: Putting People at the Centre, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/597f5b7f-en.
[84] OECD Development Centre/OECD (2023), “Gender, Institutions and Development (Edition 2023)”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), https://doi.org/10.1787/7b0af638-en (accessed on 27 August 2025).
[7] OECD/Open Society Foundations (2019), Legal Needs Surveys and Access to Justice, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/g2g9a36c-en.
[1] OECD/Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies (2023), “Improving the monitoring of SDG 16.3.3: Towards better access to justice”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 38, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c5fbed7e-en.
[20] OECD/World Justice Project (2019), Building a business case for access to justice. White Paper..
[60] Office of the People’s Advocate for Children (n.d.), Consiliul Consultativ al Copiilor (Children’s Advisory Council), https://ombudsman.md/despre-noi/consiliul-consultativ-al-copiilor/ (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[30] OISC (2024), OISC Code of Standards, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/oisc-code-of-standards (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[44] Ombudsoffice (2025), Annual Report on Human rights and Freedoms in the Republic of Moldova 2024.
[22] Ombudsoffice (2024), Raport anual privind respectarea drepturilor și libertăților omului în Republica Moldova în anul 2023, https://ombudsman.md/post-document/raport-anual-privind-respectarea-drepturilor-si-libertatilor-omului-in-republica-moldova-in-anul-2023/ (accessed on 15 July 2025).
[41] Ombudsoffice (2023), Proposal for Legislative Amendments to Address Systemic Issues in the Enforcement of Judgments in Administrative Disputes, https://ombudsman.md/avocatul-poporului-propune-modificari-legislative-pentru-a-remedia-problema-executarii-titlurilor-executorii-in-contencios-administrativ/.
[23] Ombudsoffice (2023), “Strategic Development Programme 2023-2030”, https://ombudsman.md/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/strategic-development-program-of-the-peoples-advocate-office-.pdf.
[89] Ombudsoffice (2022), Report on Human Rights and Freedoms in the Republic of Moldova, https://ombudsman.md/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/annual-report-on-the-observance-of-human-rights-and-freedoms-in-the-republic-of-moldova-in-2022.pdf.
[71] Ontario Human Rights Commission (n.d.), Litigation and inquiry strategy, https://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/our-commitment-service/litigation-and-inquiry-strategy (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[107] Plaza, J., C. Fernández and E. Kadyear (2022), CLARA Project: Transferability Report – Learning Communities Against Racism, Xenophobia and Hate Crimes, https://proyectoclara.es/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/CLARA-Project-Transferability-report_EN-1.pdf.
[51] Pleasance, P. et al. (2014), Reshaping legal assistance services: building on the evidence base: A discussion paper, https://lawfoundation.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/25PJR_Reshaping-legal-assistance-services.-building-on-the-evidence-base.-a-discussion-paper_2014.pdf (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[15] Praia City Group (2019), Handbook on Governance Statistics: Access to and Quality of Justice.
[78] Reggers, S. and D. Wyckmans (2020), “Family Justice Center Limburg: “Together we really make a difference””, Confederation of European Probation, https://www.cep-probation.org/family-justice-center-limburg-together-we-really-make-a-difference-concerning-violence/#:~:text=this%2C%20with%20assistance%20and%20probation,done%20by%20the%20Flemish%20government (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[55] Safe to Learn Coalition (2023), Safe to Learn progress 2019-2023 – The Republic of Moldova, https://www.safetolearncoalition.org/ (accessed on 14 January 2026).
[90] Soros Foundation Moldova (2022), Assessment of the Legal Empowerment Needs of the Young People in the Republic of Moldova, https://soros.md/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/RO_EN.pdf.
[68] Stanford Legal Design Lab (2025), How AI is Augmenting Human-Led Legal Advice at Citizens Advice, https://justiceinnovation.law.stanford.edu/how-ai-is-augmenting-human-led-legal-advice-at-citizens-advice/ (accessed on 14 January 2026).
[27] Trabucco, L. (2023), Paralegal Regulation in Ontario, Canada: A Northern Experience, University of Denver, https://iaals.du.edu/blog/paralegal-regulation-ontario-canada-northern-experience#:~:text=Since%202007%2C%20the%20Law%20Society,2.
[26] Trabucco, L. (2018), What Are We Waiting For? It’s Time to Regulate Paralegals in Canada, University of Windsor, https://doi.org/10.22329/wyaj.v35i0.5277.
[73] Transparency Portal (2025), Administrative Review Tribunal Annual Report 2024–25, https://www.transparency.gov.au/publications/attorney-general-s/administrative-review-tribunal/administrative-review-tribunal-annual-report-2024-25/administrative-review-tribunal.
[106] UN Women/UNDP/OHCHR (2014), Study on the Situation of Romani Women and Girls in the Republic of Moldova, https://eca.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Field%20Office%20ECA/Attachments/Publications/2014/Study%20on%20the%20Situation%20of%20Romani%20women%20and%20girls%20in%20the%20Republic%20of%20Moldovaeng.pdf.
[5] UNDP (2025), Survey on access to justice in the Republic of Moldova, United Nations Development Programme, https://www.undp.org/moldova/publications/survey-access-justice-republic-moldova (accessed on 13 February 2026).
[8] UNDP (2025), Survey on access to justice in the Republic of Moldova, United Nations Development Programme, https://www.undp.org/moldova/publications/survey-access-justice-republic-moldova.
[83] UNDP (n.d.), Summary: Women’s rights are human rights, United Nations Development Programme, https://www.undp.org/moldova/our-focus/gender-equality (accessed on 9 January 2026).
[11] UNDP Moldova (2025), People with lower incomes and those from vulnerable groups are less likely to turn to the justice system to resolve their issues, according to a UNDP survey, United Nations Development Programme, https://www.undp.org/moldova/press-releases/people-lower-incomes-and-those-vulnerable-groups-are-less-likely-turn-justice-system-resolve-their-issues-according-undp.
[69] UNSW Sydney (2025), Hear me out: What if AI could help solve your legal problems?, University of New South Wales, Sydney, https://www.unsw.edu.au/newsroom/news/2025/04/hear-me-out (accessed on 14 January 2026).
[3] Victoria Law Foundation (2023), Public Understanding of Law Survey: Volume 1 - Everyday Problems and Legal Need, https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/64cb3eaa05058fe9b199601b/66d6a986f46cb803fc4fc2e2_The%20Public%20Understanding%20of%20Law%20Survey%20Volume%201.pdf.
This annex presents additional good practice examples from Moldova and EU and OECD countries. The examples complement the analysis in Chapter 6 and highlight practical measures implemented by Moldovan government, civil society and non-governmental organisations, as well as international partners. The annex also shares relevant experiences and innovative approaches from other countries that may inspire and inform future policy development in Moldova.
Initiatives aimed at strengthening preventive and early-stage interventions
Programme on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence for 2023-2027
The Programme on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence was launched by the Moldovan Ministry of Labour and Social Protection with the aim of building a coherent and effective response to violence through collaboration between authorities, civil society, the private sector and the media. The focus is on preventing all forms of violence against women and girls, and supporting affected children. It is structured around the four pillars of the Istanbul Convention: prevention, protection, punishment and integrated policies. In the context of the first pillar, the strategy contributes to a societal environment in which there is zero tolerance towards all forms of violence against women and girls, and domestic violence by including awareness-raising measures in education manuals (ANPCV, 2025[54]).
“Education 2030” strategy
Moldova is part of the global Safe to Learn coalition, which works to end violence in and through education (ANPCV, 2025[54]; Safe to Learn Coalition, 2023[55]).The Education 2030 Strategy, a national plan extending Moldova’s education reforms, commits to reducing school dropouts, bullying and demographic violence including against women and girls by 40% by 2025. Moldova is part of the global Safe to Learn coalition, which works to end violence in and through education (ANPCV, 2025[54]; Safe to Learn Coalition, 2023[55]).The Education 2030 Strategy, a national plan extending Moldova’s education reforms, commits to reducing school dropouts, bullying and demographic violence including against women and girls by 40% by 2025. In this context, a 2022 amendment to the Education Code defines bullying and is accompanied by a national methodology for prevention and intervention, and new online child safety standards. These legal reforms clarify the roles of the Ministry of Education in responding to violence and ensure multi sector co-ordination with the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, and the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The report notes that optional curricula, such as the “Harmonious Family Relations” and “Personal Development” modules, teach nonviolent communication and equality skills to students.
In parallel, the Ministry has developed child protection policies for schools, including codes of conduct and safe recruitment standards which, by 2021, had been piloted by 21 schools with UNICEF’s support. Each school is expected to have a focal point trained to offer mental health and psychosocial support to children experiencing violence. Through policy reforms, curriculum changes, teacher training and mental health support, Moldova is institutionalising early detection and response to bullying and violence, aiming to create safe learning environments that prevent harm before it escalates (ANPCV, 2025[54]; Safe to Learn Coalition, 2023[55]; CNPAC, 2019[56]).
Children in focus: NGO-led education and awareness initiatives for the protection of children in Moldova
12 Plus
12plus.md is an online platform developed by the National Centre for the Prevention of Child Abuse (CNPAC) in Moldova, aimed at preventing sexual abuse and exploitation among adolescents.48 It offers a free, confidential online chat with psychologists trained to support young people through emotional changes, identity exploration and difficult life situations. The platform encourages open dialogue to promote well-being and help adolescents build healthy relationships (CNPAC, n.d.[57]).
The site features educational tools such as real-life stories, video blogs by psychologists, informative articles and interactive personality tests to foster self-understanding and emotional resilience. 12plus.md also serves as a resource for parents, helping them better understand the physical, emotional and social changes their children experience during adolescence. It provides a safe virtual space to support adolescents' growth and ensure their safety
National Centre for the Prevention of Child Abuse (CNPAC)
The CNPAC, with support from the Council of Europe, is promoting a brochure called “Kiko and the Hand”, designed to prevent child abuse from the earliest age (CNPAC, 2015[58]). In 2019, CNPAC piloted a training programme for schools targeting young children. In Moldova, the publication was adapted as part of the national campaign “Aici nu se pune mâna” (“Hands Off Here”), implemented in partnership with the Ministry of Education, Council of Europe and Nobody’s Children Foundation, and with financial support from the OAK Foundation and the U.S. Embassy. The brochure explains the “Hands Off Here” rule in child-friendly language to help children understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touching. Parents and educators are encouraged to use the material to support early prevention efforts.
La Strada
La Strada Moldova is a civil society organisation focused on protecting and promoting the rights of underserved groups, particularly women and children, at the individual, legislative and institutional levels. Founded in 2001 within an international anti-trafficking initiative, the organisation has since expanded its work to three key areas: preventing human trafficking, combating domestic and sexual violence, and promoting online safety for children (La Strada Moldova, n.d.[59]).. La Strada provides psychological, legal and social assistance, while also engaging in training, advocacy and systemic reform efforts. It collaborates closely with government institutions, law enforcement, the judiciary, social services, the media and academia. As a member of La Strada International, a European network of anti-trafficking NGOs, the organisation adopts a human rights-based and holistic approach, ensuring confidentiality, non-discrimination and respect for the autonomy of its beneficiaries. To enhance access to support, La Strada operates several free and confidential hotlines, including a safe migration and anti-trafficking line, a trust line for women and girls, and an online service for reporting and counselling in cases of child sexual violence.
Child Rights Information and Documentation Centre
A toolkit for child participation in law‑making in Moldova has been prepared by the NGO Child Rights Information and Documentation Centre in partnership with the Children’s Advocate (Office of the People’s Advocate for Children, n.d.[60]). It usefully sets out how child participation can be incorporated into the law‑making process in Moldova. Child participation in Moldova is developing but affected by limited funding. Stakeholders interviewed for this report highlighted the importance of child participation. The Ministry of Education has established youth councils, and the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection is seeking funding for a child advisory group to inform child guardianship. The children’s advisory council of the Children’s Advocate was described as presently not functioning due to the need for funds.
Examples of justice awareness-raising campaigns in Moldova
Active partnership for community safety
In 2024, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), in collaboration with the Moldovan General Inspectorate of Police, launched a nationwide series of awareness-raising events to strengthen community safety principles. These activities, held in Rezina, Dondușeni, Ocniţa and Căușeni, focus on delivering practical messages on personal safety, road traffic rules and the appropriate use of police emergency numbers. They also address social issues, such as bullying and promoting kindness, respect and participation. Beyond these immediate concerns, the initiative seeks to raise awareness of systemic challenges, including corruption and violence against women and girls. By adopting a whole-of-society approach, the measure aims to foster stronger co‑operation between law enforcement and local communities, creating safer and more resilient environments (IOM, 2024[61]).
Public awareness campaign in co‑operation with CEPEJ, the CoE and the EU
The European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), together with the CoE and the EU, launched a public awareness campaign in Moldova in 2023 under the project “Support to further strengthening the efficiency and quality of the judicial system”. The campaign’s objective is to raise the public’s awareness of the importance of universal access to justice without discrimination. It highlights the rights of people with disabilities, minors and refugees as court users and disseminates multi‑media materials, such as banners, audio spots and video clips, through online channels and mass media (CEPEJ, 2023[62]).
Association of Independent Press project promoting human rights and access to justice
The Association of Independent Press (API) implemented a project called “Active Informing and Promotion of Human Rights and Equal Access to Justice for all Citizens” between October 2021 and November 2022. Funded by the U.S. Department of State through Millennium DPI Partners, the project aimed to promote rights, improve access to justice for underserved and minority groups, as well as facilitate the access of human-rights and justice NGOs to the media through the dissemination of audiovisual materials (Association of Independent Press, n.d.[63]).
Targeted legal needs and justice problems studies
Legal needs survey for Small and Medium Enterprises in the United Kingdom
The United Kingdom’s Small Business Legal Needs Survey conducted by the Legal Services Board provides a comprehensive picture of how small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) experience and manage legal issues. Covering businesses with fewer than 50 employees across England and Wales, the study assessed legal capability, unmet needs and the impact of external shocks, such as Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic (Citizens Advice, 2024[28]).
The survey revealed that nearly one-third (32%) of small businesses encountered at least one legal problem in the previous year. Common issues included contract disputes, regulatory compliance and employment matters. Despite the prevalence of these challenges, only 25% of affected businesses sought professional legal assistance, and among those, fewer than 30% compared providers before choosing one. The study also highlighted significant consequences of unresolved legal problems: 28% of businesses reported income loss and 10% lost customers or contracts as a direct result. Furthermore, 12% of SMEs had unmet legal needs, while only 3% reported that all their legal needs were fully addressed
Justice Gap Study in the United States
The Legal Services Corporation’s Justice Gap Study (2022) offers a comprehensive analysis of civil legal needs among low-income populations in the United States. Drawing on large and nationally representative sample data from nearly 5 000 respondents, the study found that 92% of civil legal problems faced by low-income Americans receive inadequate or no legal help. Common issues include housing, family law, income maintenance and consumer debt. These unmet needs often lead to cascading social and economic consequences, such as eviction, loss of income and family instability. The study identifies key barriers to access: cost remains the most significant obstacle, with 46% of respondents citing inability to afford legal assistance, while 53% expressed doubts about finding affordable help. Additionally, many individuals lack awareness of available services or perceive legal processes as too complex to navigate without professional support.
Study on the legal needs of people with disabilities in Ontario and Québec, Canada
The Canadian Department of Justice commissioned a qualitative study on how people with mental and physical disabilities in the provinces of Ontario and Québec experience and attempt to resolve serious legal problems (Trabucco, 2018[26]; Trabucco, 2023[27]). The study used various means such as interviews, an online survey, stakeholder consultation and an accessible virtual focus group. The most frequently reported problems were related to issues such as employment discrimination, housing, access to health care, education barriers and inaccessible public services. The participants perceived these issues as embedded in broader structures rather than as isolated problems. The study found that participants attempted informal resolutions first after which they frequently turned to institutions such as human rights tribunals, legal aid clinics and community advocates. The process was widely perceived to be confusing, inaccessible, emotionally taxing and costly.
Furthermore, the study’s results showed that unresolved legal problems resulted in significant consequences, including emotional distress and financial hardship in the form of debt and loss of income as well as social impacts comprising strained relationships and reduced access to community support.
Specialised legal aid in OECD countries
Access to legal support for women survivors of domestic abuse, England and Wales
Finding Legal Options for Women Survivors (FLOWS) is an initiative providing legal support to women affected by domestic abuse across England and Wales (FLOWS, 2025[64]). The service offers assistance with securing protective court orders, accessing legal aid and navigating the court process. FLOWS operates through a network that includes legal professionals, Citizens Advice services, women’s refuges and specialised NGOs. This structure enables women to access support in safe and trusted environments. The programme is delivered by the Royal Courts of Justice Advice in partnership with the charity Rights of Women. It was developed in response to an identified need for improved legal provision for women survivors of domestic abuse, as recognised by civil society organisations and legal service providers.
Government-funded legal aid for immigrants and asylum claimants, Canada
In order to ensure that individuals involved in immigration and refugee (I&R) proceedings can effectively exercise their right to legal representation, concerned individuals have a right to legal representation throughout their administrative and judicial proceedings under Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. In this context, the federal government provides annual funding for I&R legal aid services across the provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, Newfoundland, Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Québec (Government of Nova Scotia, n.d.[65]; Government of Canada, 2024[66]).
The provided legal aid includes assistance, legal advice and representation before institutions such as the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, federal immigration authorities for post determination actions, and the Federal Court.
To ensure flexibility and access to specialist expertise, services are delivered through a variety of channels. While the vast majority are handled by private bar lawyers, the support is also provided through specialised law clinics and by staff lawyers (Government of Nova Scotia, n.d.[65]; Government of Canada, 2024[66]).
Legal aid for Roma women in Thessaloniki, Greece
As part of the JUSTROM3 Programme, a range of specialised legal aid services was introduced to address the legal and social needs of Roma women (CoE, 2022[67]). These included:
Legal consultations: Roma women were provided with legal guidance to help them understand their rights and the legal processes available for seeking redress. They learned how to file complaints with the police, particularly concerning gender-based violence and racist incidents. For instance, a Roma woman in Dendropotamos, Greece, who had faced discrimination at a supermarket, was empowered to report the incident, understanding that the police should escalate it to the Special Department for Combating Racist Violence.
Awareness-raising events and training: Workshops were conducted to increase awareness of various forms of violence, including physical, psychological, sexual and socio-economic violence. These events also provided information on legal tools, such as the Istanbul Convention, and discussed the intersectionality of discrimination faced by Roma women. Participants were also introduced to the 15 900 national helpline for women, which offers counselling and referrals to specialised support services.
Cross-professional support: Roma women were given the opportunity to interact with a range of professionals, including psychologists, criminologists, police officers and legal experts. This holistic approach increased their knowledge of available legal remedies and also helped normalise seeking help.
Legal aid innovations in EU and OECD countries
AI-supported, human-led legal advice, England and Wales
Citizens Advice, the leading legal and social advice provider in England and Wales, has introduced an AI tool called Caddy to support its network of advisers and supervisors (Stanford Legal Design Lab, 2025[68]). Designed as a human-in-the-loop system, Caddy assists trainees and supervisors by answering legal queries based on trusted sources, such as GOV.UK and Citizens Advice’s own knowledge base. This innovation helps reduce bottlenecks in supervision, enabling advisers to respond more quickly and accurately to complex cases, while maintaining professional oversight. By streamlining the supervision process and improving service consistency, Caddy enhances efficiency without replacing human judgment
Legal advice from an AI assistant, Australia
Hear Me Out is a conversational AI platform launched in New South Wales (NSW) in 2025 by University of New South Wales (UNSW) Kaldor Centre in collaboration with the National Justice Project (UNSW Sydney, 2025[69]). It guides users in lodging formal complaints across more than 300 official complaint bodies – such as the Fair Work Ombudsoffice and NSW Ombudsoffice – by training AI on regional regulations and procedures. Users describe their issue in their own words and the system identifies key legal and regulatory aspects of their situation. It then informs users of which authority is most relevant and provides a step-by-step guide for preparing and submitting a complaint. A six-month pilot saw over 400 complaints lodged, with roughly one-third involving police, legal rights or discrimination issues. It was recognised with the 2025 Australian Web Award for Most Innovative Website.
Quasi-judicial bodies supporting access to justice
Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals, Canada
Canada’s human rights architecture includes both investigative commissions and quasi-judicial tribunals operating at federal and provincial levels. For instance, the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) screens and investigates human rights or discrimination complaints, while the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) adjudicates those that move forward. At the provincial level, entities like the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal (HRTO) operate independently to hear claims related to discrimination in employment, housing and services. These bodies enhance access to justice through cost-free complaint mechanisms, procedural informality and language accommodations. The CHRC also provides legal support and public education, and often engages in systemic advocacy, addressing patterns of discrimination beyond individual complaints. In Ontario, the HRTO’s direct access model allows complainants to file claims without needing to go through an investigative body first, streamlining the process and reducing possible delays (Canadian Human Rights Commission, n.d.[70]; Ontario Human Rights Commission, n.d.[71]).
Administrative Review Tribunal, Australia
Australia’s Administrative Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) is an independent body established on 14 October 2024, replacing the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). It reviews decisions made under more than 400 Commonwealth Acts and legislative instruments (Administrative Review Tribunal, n.d.[72]). The most common types of decisions it reviews include matters relating to migration, social services and taxation. The Tribunal does not have a general power to review decisions; it can only review a decision under express legislative authorisation. The Tribunal ensures fair and efficient access to justice through merits review. Importantly, the Tribunal is structured to support self-represented applicants through plain-language communication, interpreters, ADR mechanisms and flexible hearings. It finalised more than 46 000 cases in 2024-25 , with a significant portion resolved without a formal hearing, demonstrating its commitment to accessible informal resolution pathways (Transparency Portal, 2025[73]).
Consumer Disputes Board, Finland
Finland’s Consumer Disputes Board is an impartial and independent dispute resolver that provides recommendations for solutions to legal disputes between consumers and businesses (Finnish Consumer Disputes Board, n.d.[74]; Finnish Government, n.d.[75]). It offers a free, impartial and non-binding mechanism to settle consumer complaints across a broad spectrum of goods and services, including housing, automotive, travel and digital services. The process is entirely in writing and can be initiated online, eliminating cost and travel barriers for claimants. While its decisions are not enforceable by law, compliance rates are high (80%) due to the Board’s reputation and public trust, and visibility of non-compliance outcomes. The Board operates with sector-specific panels, including legal and subject-matter experts, ensuring technically sound decisions. It also serves a systemic function by feeding policy insights to the Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority, helping shape national consumer protection strategies.
Integrated service delivery models in EU and OECD countries
Legal Support Centre, Japan
Japan’s Legal Support Centre, known as Houterasu, is an independent public institution created in 2006 under the Comprehensive Legal Support Act to provide nationwide “one-stop” access to legal help (JLSC, 2023[76]; JLSC, 2025[77]). Houterasu integrates multiple services under one roof: it offers legal information and referral services, civil legal aid (free legal consultations for those who cannot afford help and advance payment of lawyer fees), co‑ordination of court-appointed defence counsel in criminal cases, outreach to “legal deserts” (areas with few or no lawyers) and support for crime victims. It operates through a network of district offices, a call centre and multilingual support in 10 languages for foreign residents, thereby lowering linguistic and geographic barriers to justice.
This integrated model has significantly improved access to justice for underserved groups in Japan. By deploying staff attorneys and partnering with the bar, Houterasu has reduced the number of rural districts with no lawyers, from 38 such jurisdictions in 2006 down to only 2 by 2022. Its civil legal aid services ensure that low-income individuals, disaster victims and people with cognitive impairments can obtain legal advice and representation that would otherwise be out of reach.
Family Justice Centres for Domestic Violence, Belgium
The Family Justice Centre (FJC) model in Flanders, Belgium offers an integrated, multi-agency approach to supporting victims of domestic and family violence (Reggers and Wyckmans, 2020[78]). Established in 2017 in Limburg, the FJC brings together professionals from justice, police, social welfare, child protection, probation and healthcare under one roof. Rather than requiring victims to navigate multiple institutions, the FJC provides a single, co‑ordinated access point where individuals can receive legal assistance, protection measures, counselling and practical support through a unified intake system. Agencies conduct joint risk assessments and collaboratively develop tailored action plans for each family, ensuring that both victims and perpetrators are supported through judicial, social and therapeutic interventions.
The model primarily serves families affected by intimate partner violence, child abuse and high-conflict divorces, with around 1 250 families referred annually. A 2019 government-commissioned evaluation found high levels of satisfaction among both service users and partner agencies. Victims reported feeling taken seriously and supported by a co‑ordinated response, while professionals cited improved communication, faster interventions and clearer risk management. Risk factors addressed include substance misuse, mental health challenges and housing insecurity. The success of the Limburg FJC has led to the expansion of the model across Flanders and inspired similar initiatives in other Belgian regions and EU countries, positioning it as a best practice in institutional co‑ordination for justice and victim support.
Law No. 45/2007 on Preventing and Combating Domestic Violence established a comprehensive multi-level and multi-actor system, underpinned by the principle that effective responses require co‑ordination across justice, health and social protection institutions. Over time, this framework has been progressively operationalised and reinforced through national strategies, action plans, specialised mechanisms and dedicated financing instruments, resulting in a more integrated response to tackle domestic violence and violence against women and girls in Moldova.
The National Agency for Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, created in 2023, serves as the central operational body for co‑ordination and implementation. This agency is mandated to co‑ordinate inter-institutional actions, implement national programmes, monitor policy outcomes and facilitate co‑operation with both state and non‑state actors. Specialised structures have been gradually established within the judiciary, prosecution services and police to strengthen the prevention, sanction and eradication of domestic violence. These include:
Specialised units in courts for domestic violence cases (e.g. family sections with trained judges);
Prosecutor’s Offices specialised in domestic violence operating in key regions;
Police officers trained as Domestic Violence Officers (Ofițeri de Violenta Domestică) assigned to district police inspectorates;
Integrated Assistance Centres offering multi-disciplinary services for victims, managed by local governments and civil society partners.
At the strategic level, co-ordination is ensured by the Inter‑ministerial Co‑ordinating Council on Preventing and Combating Domestic Violence, chaired by the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection. This Council includes representatives from the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ministry of Health, the Prosecutor General’s Office and civil society. It plays a strategic steering role, reviewing legal frameworks, monitoring implementation of national action plans and proposing reforms and improvements.
At the operational level, Moldova has developed specialised co-ordination mechanisms to translate strategic frameworks into practice. At the local level, inter-institutional co-ordination is primarily ensured through multi‑disciplinary Territorial Teams (Government Decision No. 228/2014). These teams bring together professionals from police, social services, health, education and NGOs to manage individual cases and provide integrated responses to victims and families. They are designed to ensure timely co‑ordination, reduce duplication and tailor services to the specific circumstances of each case. Civil society organisations are involved mostly through consultative roles, but there is no systematic involvement of community groups or private actors in the management of these specialised justice services.
Complementarily, local Co‑ordinating Mechanisms (Consultative Platforms) bring together justice system actors (police, prosecutors, courts), social workers, healthcare professionals and NGOs to plan and monitor the local delivery of services. These platforms play a vital role in ensuring that protection orders are enforced, victims are supported and community-level prevention efforts are sustained.
To operationalise and finance integrated actions, Moldova developed:
A National Action Plan for Combating Violence Against Women (2022-2025), aligning sectoral efforts and setting deliverables across institutions.
A dedicated Results-Oriented Budgeting Programme linked to domestic violence prevention and victim support services, co‑ordinated by the Ministry of Finance.
These governance and co-ordination arrangements have brought tangible achievements (Law No. 45/2007 on Preventing and Combating Domestic Violence; National Action Plan 2022-2025 (Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, Moldova, 2023[79]); Ministry of Labour and Social Protection Reports (Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, Moldova, 2023[80]), including:
Training and capacity building: Over 2 500 judges, prosecutors, police officers and social workers received specialised training in the prevention, sanction and handling of domestic violence cases between 2021 and 2023;
Creation of specialised units: Specialised court sections and Prosecutor’s Offices for domestic violence have been established in nine judicial districts, with dedicated staff and procedures for accelerated handling of domestic violence cases;
Development of an integrated information system: Work is underway to establish a Registry of Victims and Perpetrators, allowing for data sharing between the judiciary, prosecution services, police and social protection services;
Expansion of victim support services: Approximately 14 shelters and integrated assistance centres provide multi‑disciplinary services to victims of domestic violence nationwide;
Increased access to legal aid: The NCSGLA has expanded specialised legal assistance for victims of domestic violence, particularly in regions where services were previously limited;
Approval of improved protocols and operational frameworks: New inter‑institutional co‑operation protocols have been adopted, clarifying procedures for handling cases, protection orders and co‑ordination between justice and social services.
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
Recently, the Government approved a set of national indicators for the prevention and combating of violence against women and domestic violence. These indicators will be used by the responsible institutions in the areas of law enforcement, prosecution, justice, social assistance, health, education and other relevant sectors. The measures seek to strengthen the role of the National Agency for the Prevention and Combating of Violence against Women and Domestic Violence as the co-ordinating authority and will support the functioning of the new “VioData State Register” information system. Through the adoption of these indicators, the authorities aim to improve the consistency of monitoring, enable early risk identification, strengthen institutional responses and reinforce victim protections (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2026[81]). Legal and justice needs of specific populations in Moldova
Women in Moldova face distinct needs shaped by intersecting factors, such as socio-economic status and norms, geography and institutional barriers. In 2023, discrimination based on sex, social norms or motherhood accounted for 44% of all decisions issued by the Equality Council, with the majority relating to employment (Equality Council, 2024[82]). While the overall incidence of legal disputes is similar for men and women (UNDP, 2025[8]), the nature of the problems, experiences with the justice system and pathways to resolution and consequences often differ. Women are more frequently affected by legal issues related to social welfare, public services, domestic violence, family relationships, housing and healthcare. In contrast, men report disputes involving land ownership, wrongful damage, the police and employment more often. Crucially, the impact of justice problems is more severe for women overall, with physical violence and job loss reported more often than among men.
Particular legal needs and justice problems arise for women and girls, survivors of violence. Such violence remains widespread in Moldova: 73% of women over 15 have faced violence from a partner and nearly 40% of women report having experienced physical and/or sexual violence (UNDP, n.d.[83]). Barriers to justice are multiple and intersecting, ranging from financial dependency on perpetrators, social stigma, fear of fines and loss of income to limited access to legal information, safe reporting mechanisms and victim-centred judicial procedures.49
Stakeholders repeatedly emphasised that women’s legal literacy levels are low, that they are often confined to domestic spheres and rarely reach out to support services.50 Legal aid is, in fact, most commonly accessed by men (see Section on Qualified legal aid and representation) and primarily by defendants rather than victims51 despite ongoing efforts to expand access for victims of such violence.52 The legal awareness gap is further illustrated by findings of the legal needs and justice problems survey, which showed that only 56% of women knew that they could obtain a divorce without their husband's consent, pointing to serious misunderstandings of basic legal rights (UNDP, 2025[8]). Other factors, including insensitive and discriminatory attitudes among justice actors, social stigma and broader social norms, such as the belief that domestic violence is a private matter, further discourage reporting and access to justice (OECD Development Centre/OECD, 2023[84]).
Stakeholders also highlighted the complex needs of women survivors, including legal assistance, social welfare, psychological care and support for achieving financial independence – many of which require sustained and long-term service provision.53 Regional visits to shelters and women’s centres indicated promising multi‑disciplinary approaches. However, national stakeholders noted that practices are not standardised across shelters in the country, and the scope and quality of support remains uneven.54
Importantly, women are not a homogenous group. Certain groups, including Roma women, women with disabilities and rural women, face additional challenges due to higher rates of illiteracy, limited services and heightened exposure to violence (CoE, 2023[85]).
Addressing women’s justice needs is central to Moldova’s broader commitments to equality and empowerment. Moldova ratified the Istanbul Convention in 2022 and adopted legislation to align national laws with the provisions of the Convention and other international standards. The government also adopted the National Programme on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Family Violence (2023‑2027), which focuses on reducing violence, increasing reporting, improving access to legal aid and training police, prosecutors and judges, while recognising the role of enduring stereotypes and structural inequalities (Government Decision No. 332/2023). A new National Agency for the Prevention and Combating of Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence was established in 2024 to co‑ordinate these efforts. However, implementation remains uneven and stakeholder interviews underscore the need for strengthened victim protections, improved inter‑agency co‑operation and sustained investment in accessible justice services tailored to women’s diverse needs.
These findings underline the need for targeted and responsive justice policies. Addressing the justice needs of women, especially those facing intersecting forms of exclusion, is essential to ensuring equality before the law, preventing violence, reducing poverty and enabling full participation in society.
Children are among the most underserved groups in their interactions with the justice system, whether as victims, witnesses or children in conflict with the law (OECD, 2023[86]). Their legal needs are shaped by a range of individual, family, institutional and societal factors. In Moldova, they face many challenges, including insufficient protection from abuse and violence in educational institutions, limited access to child-friendly justice, weak protection against torture and ill treatment, limited psychological support to child victims, inadequate protection for children in street situations or where parents are working abroad and protection against abuse and neglect, including by family (European Commission, 2023[42]).
Evidence shows that children already experiencing adversity, such as poverty, domestic violence or family instability, are more likely to encounter justice problems (OECD, 2023[86]). Moreover, in Moldova, social stereotypes play a significant role, where girls account for 60% of all child victims of reported crimes (Moldovan National Bureau of Statistics, 2024[87]). Children with disabilities face heightened risks of violence (European Commission, 2024[13]). Children separated from their parents are another group in fragile conditions, with almost 70% of children living without parental care residing in rural areas of Moldova (APSCF, 2016[88]), driven primarily by socio-economic hardship and high rates of parental migration.55 Other disadvantaged groups of children identified by stakeholders include those living in poverty (particularly in rural areas in the south of Moldova), Roma children, LGBTQIA+ children and those deprived of liberty.56
Although justice systems often distinguish between children as victims/witnesses and children as suspects/offenders, this distinction may not fully reflect experiences. Research in Moldova shows strong links between offending behaviour and prior experiences of violence, abuse or neglect at home (Ombudsoffice, 2022[89]). This highlights the need for integrated approaches that address children’s vulnerabilities, specific needs and best interests whenever in contact with the law across the justice continuum.
Children face a range of barriers to accessing justice, which can be grouped into three categories:
General barriers that also affect adults, such as poverty, inability to pay legal fees or transport costs, limited legal awareness, language barriers or distrust in the justice system;
Age-specific barriers, including legal capacity restrictions that prevent children from initiating legal action independently;
Systemic barriers, such as procedures that are not adapted to children’s needs and capacities, little co‑ordination among institutions and justice processes that are intimidating, complex and not designed with children in mind (OECD, 2023[86]).
Stakeholders highlighted limited legal awareness not only among children, but also among their parents, custodians and teachers, who play a critical role in supporting them.57 Not all schools have psychologists, which limits their ability to go beyond merely reporting cases to public authorities. Psychological care would be essential to identify and support children in need – whether they are victims, at risk or experiencing parental neglect. There is somewhat greater specialised support offered by trained judges, lawyers, prosecutors and police, but quality and availability remain challenges. These gaps are particularly problematic for children who rely heavily on external support and guidance for accessing justice. The Ombudsoffice seeks to fill these gaps by providing child-friendly justice materials on their website, operating a children’s hotline and organising seminars and training. However, there remains a need to establish multiple child-sensitive entry points, including in children’s closest environments.
In 2017, Moldova became one of the few countries to conduct a dedicated legal needs and justice problems survey of children and youth (see Annex Box 6.B.1). While no updated data currently exist, global evidence suggests that children’s legal needs remain relatively consistent over time, particularly those linked to everyday life (see Annex Box 6.B.2). Newer challenges, such as technology-facilitated violence,58 cyberbullying,59 and online exploitation, may also be emerging and remain underexplored in Moldova’s justice landscape.
Implemented by the Ministry of Justice and the Soros Foundation, the survey targeted individuals aged 14 to 23. It found that one in four respondents experienced a legal issue in the past year, often arising from interactions with public authorities. Common problems included discrimination, bribery and lack of response to complaints. In dealings with private actors, young people reported issues such as unfair commercial practices, unpaid overtime, lack of contracts and unlawful dismissals.
Most young respondents turned to family or friends for support. Some expressed willingness to resolve issues through unofficial means, including violence, bribery or pressure. This signals low trust in formal mechanisms and highlights gaps in both accessibility and effectiveness of justice services for youth.
Source: (Soros Foundation Moldova, 2022[90]).
In 2013, the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland commissioned a study to explore the legal needs and justice problems of children and young people. The survey instrument was informed by key themes identified in focus group discussions with young participants. The study revealed several key findings: a significant barrier to meeting young people's justice problems was their limited awareness of their rights; children and young people encountered a broad spectrum of legal issues, including bullying, purchasing defective goods, and interactions with the police; and there was a clear need for their recognition as rights-holders within the legal system.
The situation analysis of Moldova’s National Programme for Child Protection points out that despite legislative and institutional efforts, violence against children remains widespread, with approximately two in five children experiencing some form of abuse. Physical violence is the most prevalent, particularly among boys, while sexual and emotional abuse disproportionately affect girls. Despite widespread awareness campaigns and legal reforms, under-reporting persists due to stigma, limited access to support services and lack of trust in institutions. Digital environments have introduced new risks, including exposure to harmful content and online abuse, highlighting the need for enhanced prevention and protection measures.
Strategic policy documents in Moldova highlight challenges that hinder the realisation of human rights and child protection in Moldova. Key justice problems include the enforcement of court decisions, access to justice for marginalised groups and the alignment of national legislation with international human rights instruments. Barriers such as discrimination, poor detention conditions, limited availability of legal aid, particularly for persons with disabilities and children, and the need for specialised child justice infrastructure persist. The Child Protection Strategy also underscores gaps in early education, inadequate community-level services and under-resourced monitoring systems. The current National Programme on the Accession to the European Union commits to strengthening child-friendly justice legal frameworks, including further alignment with relevant EU Directives and international conventions,60 and building administrative capacities to deliver responsive, specialised and integrated assistance to children (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2025[10]). These efforts are also in line with the implementation of the National Programme for Child Protection (2022‑2026), which commits to strengthening protection frameworks and ensuring zero tolerance for violence against children and corresponds with the National Programme on Human Rights (2024‑2027), which foresees legal reforms and measures conforming to international instruments (Government Decisions No. 347/2022, No. 306/2025 and No. 164/2024).
Moldova is a culturally and ethnically diverse country, home to a range of minority communities. According to the 2024 census, ethnic minorities in Moldova comprise 4.9% Ukrainians, 4.2% Gagauz, 3.2% Russians, 1.6% Bulgarians and 0.4% Roma, with other ethnic groups accounting for a combined 0.5% (CoE, 2025[25]). Russian remains the most widely spoken minority language in Moldova, reported by 15.3% of respondents, followed by Gagauz (2.3%), Ukrainian (2.0%), Bulgarian (0.8%) and Romani (0.3%). With regards to territorial distribution, Moldovans comprise the majority population across most regions. One exception is the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia, where individuals identifying as Gagauz account for 81.9% of the resident population.61
According to a 2025 study, ethnic minorities in Moldova continue to face challenges in accessing justice, primarily due to limited awareness of legal procedures, language barriers, systemic discrimination and socio-economic constraints (UNDP, 2025[8]). Evidence suggests that many individuals from minority communities lack sufficient knowledge of the justice system, with complex legal frameworks and limited availability of accessible information further compounding the issue. As a result, individuals often rely on civil society organisations for support in navigating legal processes. However, these organisations, in turn, lack the resources to meet demand.
A key obstacle to addressing these challenges is the absence of reliable, disaggregated data on legal needs and justice problems of ethnic minorities, whose native language is not Romanian. No specific needs survey has been conducted, and most available evidence comes from civil society organisations, donor-funded initiatives and qualitative interviews. This lack of data hinders the capacity of policymakers to design tailored responses and allocate resources effectively. The government recognises the need to address issues related to the functioning of languages and promotion of linguistic diversity by strengthening co‑operation with central and local public administration authorities, the Equality Council, Ombudsoffice, as well as ethnic organisations across the country, as illustrated in the latest National Programme for the Accession to the European Union (Government of the Republic of Moldova, 2025[10]).
As an ethnic minority mostly based in the south of the country, the population of Gagauzia, for instance, faces legal and justice challenges that are often under-represented in national assessments and overlooked in broader policy frameworks. Stakeholder interviews reveal that the majority of legal problems experienced by residents in Gagauzia relate to common, everyday justice issues, such as access to social benefits and pensions, land and property disputes, inheritance matters and neighbourhood conflicts.62 In rural and semi-rural parts of the region, land tenure issues are particularly prevalent, exacerbated by unclear documentation, low legal awareness and limited access to legal support.
Domestic violence was highlighted as a particularly serious and under-reported issue. Interviews suggest that stigma, lack of trust in formal services and the absence of culturally and linguistically appropriate support mechanisms hinder help-seeking, especially in rural communities. These factors disproportionately affect women and children whose access to safety and justice may be limited by both social norms and service gaps (CoE/GREVIO, 2023[47]).
Language-based barriers were also identified as recurring concerns, especially when legal capacity is low. Stakeholders shared that Gagauz residents face difficulties asserting their rights, accessing services outside the region and engaging with national institutions, where interactions occur in Romanian. For instance, in 2023, the Equality Council reported that over 15% of its access‑to‑justice‑related decisions involved language-based issues, many originating from Gagauzia (Equality Council, 2025[92]). This has discouraged some stakeholders from seeking help through official channels, especially when it comes to older individuals. Language barriers also affect legal aid. Many lawyers in Gagauzia, who are closest to the local population, do not speak Romanian, yet most legal aid training and materials are only available in the official language. This can limit the participation of local legal professionals in the national legal aid system and undermines the quality63 and availability of services for the local population (Machnyikova and Beschieru, 2021[93]).
While Romanian is the official language of the country and the government makes significant efforts to promote it through educational opportunities (including through bilingual and inter-cultural initiatives) and ensure citizen civic engagement,64 the presence of an autonomous territory with other official languages may require additional attention and measures to further strengthen equal access to justice (CoE, 2025[25]). While there is an ongoing commitment to facilitate the learning of Romanian by persons belonging to a national minority, this challenge may extend beyond language itself and the specific case of Gagauzia. This calls for investment in legal empowerment and a broader consideration of service delivery models, including at the local level.
England and Wales
In England and Wales, a dedicated Practice Direction ensures that both English and Welsh are treated equally in civil proceedings, in line with the Welsh Language Act 1993 and the Welsh Language (Wales) Measure 2011. This legal framework supports individuals’ right to use Welsh in court by embedding language considerations into every phase of judicial procedure if the case is somehow related to Wales: from initial case allocation through to hearings.
Courts in Wales are required to be notified if any party, witness or document may involve the Welsh language. The system provides Welsh-language court forms, access to translation services via the Welsh Language Unit and prioritises listing cases before Welsh-speaking judges where possible. Simultaneous interpretation facilities are used where needed. Witnesses and jurors may take oaths in either language and interpreters from an approved list are engaged to facilitate communication.
The process is further supported through mandatory disclosures about language use in procedural questionnaires and case management stages. A designated Liaison Judge for the Welsh language oversees implementation and resolves any procedural issues that arise.
Switzerland
The Swiss Federal Constitution (art. 70) establishes four national languages – German, French, Italian and Romansh – guaranteeing language freedom, territoriality and active promotion, especially for Romansh and Italian minority areas. The Swiss Federal Law on Languages (since 2010) regulates use and promotion of languages, with special provisions to protect Romansh. Cantons have language autonomy but must respect traditional linguistic territories (e.g. Ticino enforces Italian; Graubünden recognises Italian, German and Romansh).
In officially multilingual cantons (e.g. Graubünden, Ticino), citizens can use their language in court and proceedings must be held in that language. In unilingual cantons, legal processes are typically in the canton’s official language (German, French or Italian). At the federal level, all official languages are usable; documents and rulings are issued in multiple languages to ensure equal access.
South Tyrol, Italy
South Tyrol is an autonomous province in northern Italy with a legally entrenched bilingual judiciary. Under the 1972 Autonomy Statute and subsequent decrees, both German and Italian enjoy full official status in all legal proceedings. Citizens may initiate and conduct judicial processes in either language and courts must ensure procedural parity, including translation of filings and dual-language judgments where needed. Court personnel are required to pass a bilingual proficiency exam, and official documents, hearings and decisions are available in both languages. Although Ladin is also officially recognised, it may only be used with interpretation and is not a full procedural language.
In practice, South Tyrol applies a “one case, one language” principle, with proceedings typically held in the language chosen by the initiating party. While this ensures clarity and administrative efficiency, bilingual cases, where parties use different languages, trigger full dual-language procedures, including parallel translations and bilingual verdicts. Challenges remain, including translation burdens, imbalances in language use (with Italian still dominant in some domains) and limitations in accessing higher courts, which operate only in Italian. Nevertheless, South Tyrol offers a robust and enforceable model of minority language rights in justice systems, combining territorial and personal language principles within a unified national legal framework.
Practices and use of non-official languages in courts
United States
In the United States, both state and immigration courts have comprehensive Language Access Programs to ensure fair trials for individuals with limited English proficiency. These programmes provide interpreters for any language, including non-official ones, such as Mixtec, Mam and other Indigenous languages from Latin America, as well as widely spoken immigrant languages like Spanish and Mandarin. The legal basis comes from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on national origin and courts have expanded interpreter services to civil, criminal and administrative proceedings. Successful implementation in states like California and New York includes large interpreter rosters and remote interpretation technology, which have significantly improved access to justice and reduced delays for linguistic minorities.
France
French is the sole official language under the Constitution and the Toubon Act, but courts must accommodate non-French speakers to uphold fair trial rights guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights. These accommodations are not based on language status but procedural fairness, ensuring defendants can understand and participate effectively. While not formalised in law beyond these obligations, the practice has been recognised as essential for compliance with international human rights standards.
Although the Roma community officially represents only 0.4% of Moldova’s population,65 it experiences disproportionate exclusion and complex, overlapping vulnerabilities (Ergo Network, 2023[101]; ACTED, 2023[102]). Census figures likely underestimate the true size of the Roma population as many individuals choose not to self-identify due to fear of discrimination. Depending on the source, estimates from Roma leaders range from 100 000‑250 000 (ACTED, 2023[102]; Equal Rights Trust, 2015[103]).
Roma communities have been explicitly recognised in national policy as facing systemic disadvantage. The Programme for the Support of the Roma Population 2022‑2025 identifies a “complex vulnerability profile” marked by low income, high unemployment, inadequate housing, limited educational attainment and barriers to accessing public services, including health, education, employment and justice. As a closed community, they rarely seek assistance from public services, even in need.66
A pressing, group-specific problem for Roma people is statelessness and the lack of personal documentation, which restrict access to essential services and justice (UNDP, 2025[8]). Without identity documents, Roma individuals may be unable to register for healthcare, enrol children in school or seek formal employment. It also limits access to dispute resolution mechanisms and contributes to invisibility in public systems, compounding their challenges (CPR, 2024[104]). Their common legal needs relate to property rights as they often lack documentation, leaving them at heightened risks of evictions and other property disputes (UNDP, 2025[8]). Entrenched socio‑economic disadvantage, combined with institutional mistrust and negative experiences with law enforcement, including profiling, further dissuade Roma individuals from seeking formal legal recourse (UNDP, 2025[8]; CoE, 2025[25])
Roma people rely on community-based services and NGO support to access justice, with a system of community mediators and paralegals operating within the community. For example, a 2022 survey found that in domestic violence cases in Roma communities, only 6% involved law enforcement. Nearly half were “solved internally” and 26% through a Roma community leader (ACTED, 2023[102]). These informal pathways are often preferred for their cultural relevance, accessibility and perceived neutrality, but need adequate safeguards and legal protections (UNDP, 2025[8]).
Surveys indicate alarmingly high levels of perceived and experienced discrimination. According to a 2020 study, Roma individuals reported discrimination in employment (48%), healthcare (41%), public services (31%) and education (27%) (CIVIS Centre, 2021[105]). Roma children face barriers to education, such as high absenteeism and dropout rates, linked to poverty, early marriage and discriminatory environments (CoE, 2025[25]; ACTED, 2023[102]). The low level of basic literacy was cited as a barrier for national service providers to effectively engage with the Roma community. Yet from 2015 to 2020, only nine complaints of ethnic discrimination were submitted to the Equality Council, pointing to under-reporting and mistrust in formal institutions.67 In 2024, only 9 of over 160 legal consultations provided to Roma clients by the NCSGLA were related to discrimination, reflecting both unmet needs and gaps in ethnicity-disaggregated data.
Roma women and girls are particularly affected by intersectional discrimination (UN Women/UNDP/OHCHR, 2014[106]). The National Programme to Prevent and Combat Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence 2023‑2027 highlights their increased vulnerability to violence, combined with a reduced likelihood of reporting due to stigma, marginalisation and institutional mistrust. Early and forced marriage remains a persistent issue, contributing to school dropout and broader social exclusion (UN Women/UNDP/OHCHR, 2014[106]).
At the systemic level, Roma face barriers to redress in cases of discrimination or hate crimes. Although Moldova’s legal framework includes provisions for aggravated hate offences, the European Commission and Council of Europe have flagged weak implementation, with many cases under-reported, inadequately investigated or dismissed (CoE, 2025[25]; European Commission, 2023[42]). Police training on hate crimes exists, but efforts are hampered by staff turnover and limited institutional continuity.
While there have been some advances, such as the deployment of Roma community mediators and targeted awareness campaigns, progress remains uneven. Justice sector institutions, including the Ministry of Justice and the judiciary, were not systematically involved in the design of the Roma Support Programme 2022‑2025, despite its references to legal empowerment and justice access.
Madrid, Spain
The Manual for Police Action on Racism, Xenophobia, and Other Forms of Intolerance, developed by the Municipal Police of Madrid as part of the Clara Project, was published in 2022. It aims to improve police responses to discrimination, particularly towards the Roma community, by providing practical guidance and theoretical insights. The manual was created with input from police officers and social entities, including the Fundación Secretariado Gitano, which contributed the section on anti‑gypsyism.
The manual is divided into a practical guide, focusing on identifying hate crimes and their motivations, and a theoretical section addressing the causes of intolerance and best practices for victim care. By combining these elements, the manual enhances police effectiveness in responding to hate crimes and supporting disadvantaged groups. This approach fosters better access to justice for those facing discrimination, ensuring more informed and sensitive police interventions.
Iași, Romania
The JUSTROM3 programme is a joint programme of the Council of Europe and European Commission aiming to improve the access to justice of Roma women in Bulgaria, Greece, Italy and Romania. In Romania, women were educated about the availability of legal consultations, tailored legal guides and innovative institutional tools. Fifty Roma women benefited from both in-person and online legal counselling, covering a wide range of legal issues.
The legal consultations provided crucial information on topics such as COVID-19 restrictions and fines, legal rights and responsibilities, access to free legal aid and guidance on family affairs like divorce, parental recognition and child custody. Additional support was offered on how to deal with debt collection harassment, obtain ID documents and understand the costs of legal and notarial acts. Six Roma women received support in cases of domestic violence and forced evictions. The counselling services were provided in collaboration with the Foundation for Mediation and Arbitration Chamber in Iași, with pro-bono representation from Iași Bar lawyers.
This initiative not only provided immediate legal support to Roma women, but helped build long-term legal awareness and empowerment, ensuring better access to justice and strengthening their legal rights within Romanian society.
← 1. UNDP Legal Needs Survey recognises that domestic violence and corruption tend to be underreported. People with a higher level of education may be able to better recognise the legal dimension of their problem.
← 2. Discussions during the OECD capacity-building workshop, September 2024.
← 3. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 4. There are varying levels of trust in the justice system. A recent UNDP study reveals that only 2.1% have a great deal of trust in the system, 9.1% have much trust in the system and around 40.5% reported having moderate trust.
← 5. The Union of Lawyers approved the recommended fees for lawyers (in EUR) in its decision no. 19-02/27.05.2022 available at https://uam.md/avocatii/informatii-utile-pentru-avocati/onorariul-recomandabil/.
← 6. Earnings and labour costs, available at https://statistica.gov.md/en/statistic_indicator_details/2.
← 7. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024; OECD inception interviews. Law No. 213/2023 establishes a unified legal framework for fees charged for judicial and administrative services. The law clarifies the distinction between state fees and a mandatory, generally non‑refundable stamp tax payable upon lodging applications in court, while also prescribing exemptions for public authorities, vulnerable persons and certain categories of cases related to fundamental rights (e.g. labour, social benefits, consumer and children’s rights).
← 8. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 9. Recent data highlight the gap between formal guarantees and actual justice outcomes. A 2025 UNDP study suggests that only a small share of legal problems in Moldova are resolved through formal court processes and that disadvantaged groups are even less likely to access these pathways. This underlines the importance of developing diversified and accessible justice services that respond to the needs of users and promote justice outcomes across all populations.
← 10. E.g. Moldova could further advance its access to justice framework by considering the ratification of Protocol No. 12 to the European Convention on Human Rights (on general anti-discrimination) and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.
← 11. A joint initiative of the Ministry of Education and Research, the General Police Inspectorate and PH International. The programme introduces an optional subject, Education for Legal Socialisation, for 8th‑ and 11th‑grade students (Management of the General Directorate for Education, Youth and Sport of the Municipality of Chisinau, Moldova, 2023[110]). Delivered using a co‑teaching model involving both teachers and police officers, the curriculum aims to familiarise students with the rule of law, civic responsibility and risk prevention. Since its initial pilot in 22 schools, the programme has expanded significantly, reaching over 100 schools by the 2023-2024 academic year.
← 12. In 2023, it conducted 167 training and information activities covering diverse human rights topics, including whistleblower protection, anti-torture measures, patients’ rights, children’s rights and violence prevention, across urban and rural regions, such as Bălți, Comrat, Cahul and Varnița. Territorial offices also engage in tailored outreach: for example, the Comrat office integrates children’s rights education into recreation camps, combining awareness-raising with community-based support in a meaningful and engaging way. The Ombudsoffice has also led mobile outreach initiatives, such as a “human rights caravan” focused on migrants’ rights.
← 13. Response to the OECD questionnaire.
← 14. A person who enjoys high esteem in the local community, as a rule, with incomplete legal education or complete higher education, who does not practice as a lawyer and who, after special training, is qualified to provide primary legal assistance to members of the community from the funds intended for the provision of state-guaranteed legal assistance, according to a regulation on the status and qualification of paralegals (Law No.198/2007).
← 15. From 15 paralegals to approximately 130 by 2024.
← 16. Specialised paralegals are drawn from marginalised groups, such as sex workers, detainees or people who use drugs.
← 17. 49 of whom were in active posts, against an identified need of 82. GIZ, Updated Report on the Mapping of Densely Populated Roma Communities in the Republic of Moldova (GIZ, 2021[111]).
← 18. For example, La Strada Moldova operates national hotlines for survivors of domestic violence, human trafficking and online child sexual abuse, often serving as the first point of contact for women in need (Human Rights Guide, n.d.[114]).
← 19. Under Law No. 198/2007 on State-Guaranteed Legal Aid, as amended by Law No. 298/2022, Article 19(11), entitles victims of domestic or sexual violence to qualified legal aid, regardless of income, while Article 28(11) obliges legal aid offices to appoint a duty lawyer in emergency cases involving such violence.
← 20. In 2023, eligibility thresholds were revised, replacing the “subsistence minimum” with the national minimum wage, broadening coverage for low-income applicants. In May 2025, the parliament broadened the eligibility criteria for legal aid, allowing individuals earning up to 30% above the minimum wage to receive partial aid. The new law also applies to mediation services and stipulates a contribution of 30% of the service’s cost from the recipient, while the remaining 70% is covered by the state.
← 21. OECD mission to Comrat, 12 September 2024.
← 22. OECD inception phase interviews.
← 23. From 1 702 in 2023 to 2 600 in 2024.
← 24. Although overall use remains low, there has been a recent increase in both requests for and resolutions through mediation. In 2024, 2 600 cases were referred to the Mediation Council: 1 392 civil, 109 criminal, 1 019 commercial, 30 contravention, 31 family and 9 labour disputes, with 10 disputes relating to “other” domains. This represents an increase of almost 900 cases compared to 2023, when 1 702 cases were referred to the Mediation Council. This growth is particularly visible in civil disputes, which rose from 426 cases in 2023 to 1 392 in 2024. Conversely, commercial disputes, previously the dominant category, declined from 1 135 to 1 019 cases. These figures suggest both a broadening of mediation’s application and growing public and institutional awareness of its benefits across multiple legal domains. Although this marks an increase from previous years, the numbers still represent a small share of eligible cases. Judge-led mediation, implemented between 2018–2022 to reduce judicial workloads, was discontinued in April 2022 due to inefficiencies and case delays (Mediation Council, 2025[115]).
← 25. Courts are now required to inform parties of the option of mediation and may suspend proceedings to enable it. These provisions were aligned with other legal frameworks, including the Code of Civil Procedure, Civil Code, Family Code, Labour Code and State Tax Law. If successful, mediation outcomes can lead to a full or partial reimbursement of court fees. In 2024, 31 mediators were accredited to provide services under the legal aid framework.
← 26. Only one request for state-guaranteed mediation was registered and it was ultimately rejected, underscoring the nascent state of the system and the need for further demand-side development.
← 27. Under the new law, parties involved in certain types of civil, family and labour disputes will be required to attend at least one mandatory mediation session before bringing the case before a judge. The first session will be informational in nature, after which the parties may decide whether to continue with mediation or proceed directly to court. Mediation will be mandatory in civil disputes involving amounts of up to 50 times average national salaries, including cases related to debt recovery, damage compensation, division of property, defamation or misinformation, and enforcement of contracts, such as loans, donations, leases, rental agreements, banking, leasing, insurance, and insolvency procedures. In family law, mediation will be mandatory except in cases involving domestic violence. In labour disputes, it will apply to conflicts regarding the execution of contractual obligations. The cost of this initial session will be MDL 550, the equivalent of 10% of the national minimum wage. For parties who attempt mediation – even if no agreement is reached – the state court fee upon filing the case will be reduced by 25%.
← 28. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 29. In 2023, the Children’s Advocate received 203 complaints of which 126 were found admissible and reviewed. These included a mix of direct interventions, referrals to competent bodies and procedural guidance to help navigate the system.
← 30. In 2024, the Council registered 279 complaints, a modest increase from 261 in the previous year. Of the 290 cases reviewed, 270 led to formal decisions, with 53 identifying at least one form of discrimination.
← 31. Out of the 44 district courts merged within the court re‑organisation reform, 2 were specialised courts – commercial and military, and both closed as of 1 April 2017. This consolidation continued in 2024, reducing the number of district courts to 14 through the merger of Anenii Noi and Căușeni.
← 32. Leova courthouse moved to Hîncești District Court, Vulcănești courthouse moved to Cahul DC, Dondușeni courthouse moved to Drochia DC, Glodeni courthouse moved to Bălți DC.
← 33. The Centre Court of Appeal (Chișinău), the North Court of Appeal (Bălți) and the South Court of Appeal (Cahul and Comrat). Jurisdictional adjustments were also revised to balance workloads more evenly, for example, by transferring Orhei and Ungheni from the Centre to the North Court of Appeal.
← 34. Moldova population according to the National Bureau of Statistics as of 1 January 2024 is 2.4 million and territory of 33 483 m2, hence, a density of 72.4 inhabitants per km2. The European population is 744 million over a territory 10.53 million km2, hence, a density of 70.7 inhabitants per km2.
← 35. In 2023, 267 judicial positions of 359 in total at first instance courts were filled.
← 36. Similar proposals were made in the 2021 Evaluation Report on the Implementation of the Judicial Map, which recommended, for example, consolidating all courthouses of the Orhei District Court into a single central location (Human Dynamics, 2021[38]).
← 37. For example, Belgium, Canada, Finland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, and the United Kingdom preclude any form of substitutive decision making of the courts on administrative matters. In France, the claimant can request from any administrative court the issuing of injunctions for an administrative body to comply with the judicial ruling, but the judge cannot replace the administration in operationalising the implementation of the ruling.
← 38. E.g. The Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) has identified the need for intermediate compensation, pending the conclusion of criminal proceedings, as a barrier to timely redress.
← 39. The regulation of the psychology profession remains unsettled, with overlapping responsibilities between the Ministries of Education, Health and Social Protection. Although a draft law was under discussion in 2024, leadership and co‑ordination remain unclear.
← 40. According to the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO), in 2022 only three domestic violence survivors accessed these labour market programmes, underscoring the need for more systematic implementation and longer-term support. GREVIO further reported that, although the Criminal Procedure Code allows female victims to claim compensation through either criminal or civil proceedings, there is a data need on how often this occurs in practice.
← 41. NGOs such as La Strada operate helplines offering psychosocial support to women and a national child helpline is implemented by the National Centre for Training, Assistance, Counselling and Education of Moldova (CNFACEM), with support from the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (CNFACEM, 2025[109]).
← 42. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 43. Among those, 59.6% turned to trusted individuals, often relatives or acquaintances in positions of power, while 63.1% sought guidance from institutions, primarily the police, local authorities and lawyers. Overall, institutional advice, particularly from police and lawyers, was perceived as more helpful than that received through personal networks.
← 44. Half of those who failed to resolve their dispute directly chose not to seek further help. Less than half of people who initially sought help from institutions ultimately resolved their legal issues through those channels. The largest share (37.5%) abandoned efforts to address their problems altogether.
← 45. Legal aid territorial offices are formally aligned with the appellate court structure.
← 46. OECD mission to Ungheni, November 2024.
← 47. These include: 1) Inter-agency working groups and platforms established under strategic reform initiatives, such as the Justice Reform Strategy (2022 2025), Anti-Corruption Platform, Advisory Council of the Government Agent to the European Court of Human Rights and the Council for the Co-ordination of Digitalisation in the Justice Sector. 2) Operational protocols between key institutions, for example, NLAC and the courts for state-guaranteed legal aid and between the Ombudsperson and social service providers. 3) Consultative platforms occasionally convened by the Ministry of Justice or the Superior Council of Magistracy, which provide space for dialogue with civil society and professional associations.
← 48. OECD fact-finding mission to Moldova in September 2024.
← 49. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 50. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024; Discussions during OECD capacity-building workshop, September 2024.
← 51. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 52. The list of persons entitled to unconditional, state-guaranteed legal aid (regardless of income) has been expanded to include victims of domestic and sexual violence.
← 53. Discussions during the OECD capacity-building workshop, September 2024.
← 54. Discussions during the OECD capacity-building workshop, September 2024.
← 55. Many children are still placed in institutional care, including in cases lacking formal referral or legal oversight, raising concerns about the effectiveness and accountability of existing mechanisms. While progress has been made in promoting family-based alternative care, such as guardianship arrangements, institutional placements continue to be widely used, particularly in emergencies. The development of services such as professional parental assistance and family-type homes has been slow, often hindered by limited local funding and co‑ordination. Existing social services, including family support and personal assistance, are insufficient to meet demand, pointing to the need for expanding the minimum package of services and improving the efficiency of funding mechanisms at the local level.
← 56. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 57. Discussions during the OECD capacity-building workshop, September 2024..
← 58. E.g. A 2021 study revealed that 18% of children aged 9 to 17 encountered unpleasant experiences online; 12% received sexually explicit messages in chats and 5% were asked to share images or videos of intimate body parts via messaging apps. Some children aged 9‑11 admitted to sending such materials themselves. The lack of knowledge and awareness regarding online sexual abuse has led to victim-blaming, intensifying the psychological effects of abuse and exacerbating feelings of guilt and shame. (La Strada Moldova, 2021[112]).
← 59. E.g. a 2023 study showed that around 21% of students in grades 5-12 are targets of bullying weekly and that 3 out of 100 students reported being cyberbullied at least once a month. (APSCF, 2023[113]).
← 60. E.g. EU standards on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children, and child pornography (Directive 2011/93), and procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings (Directive 2012/29). Ratification of the Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance and its Optional Protocol.
← 61. The Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia was created in 1994 as a compromise between the central government and Gagauz movements for independence. Today, it is a special territorial-administrative unit of Moldova, which include three rayons: Comrat, Ciadir-Lunga and Vulcaneşti. The official languages of Gagauzia are Romanian, Gagauz and Russian.
← 62. OECD fact-finding mission to Gagauzia, 12 September 2024.
← 63. OECD fact-finding mission to Gagauzia, 12 September 2024. Stakeholders reported missed appeal deadlines by legal aid lawyers.
← 64. For the constitutional republican referendum and presidential elections on 20 October 2024, the Commission printed ballots in five ethnic minority languages, including 3 900 in Gagauz (for ATU Gagauzia and Istanbul, Türkiye), https://rm.coe.int/6th-sr-moldova-en/1680b51635.
← 65. Preliminary results of the 2024 Population and Housing Census.
← 66. OECD fact-finding mission, September 2024.
← 67. Data provided in the National Programme to Support the Roma Population in the Republic of Moldova for the years 2022-2025.