During an August 12 meeting with E.U. experts in fighting corruption and money laundering, and recovering stolen assets, the new director of the National Anticorruption Center, Ruslan Flocea, admitted that the institution is unable to fight corruption. He claimed that the Anticorruption Center has no authority when it comes to investigating high-level corruption cases and asked for support from the European partners. 

“The main objective of the institution is to combat high-level corruption, to return the money stolen during the bank fraud and to restore people’s confidence in state institutions, but for this the Center needs more authority,” Flocea explained. 

To find out if the National Anticorruption Center can fight corruption, ZDG asks the experts. 

Valentin Dolganiuc, Political Analyst

Ruslan Flocea has washed his hands in front of his European partners, by stating that the Center lacks the authority. He knows that he will not do more than his predecessors, Bogdan Zumbreanu, Viorel Chetraru and others. The Socialist Party holds a majority in the Parliament and can make any changes to the law, and if Flocea sees things differently, why did he not go to Parliament with an initiative? From my point of view, President Dodon will use the Center as a tool to fight with his political and economic opponents, as Plahotniuc did before. 

Igor Dodon brings around 600,000 to 900,000 euros from Russia for the Socialist Party monthly. Do you think the Center will start a criminal case against Dodon? Or a criminal case on Russia financing Dodon’s 2016 presidential campaign? Or one on the bank fraud case, in which Dodon’s people is involved? Let’s not be under any illusions. With Dodon and Flocea everything will remain as it was.

Cristina Cojocaru-Țărnă, Lawyer 

In 2012, the Center for Combating Economic Crime and Corruption (CCCEC) was transformed into the National Anticorruption Center and since then its independence guarantees have been assured. The Center passed from Government control to public-parliamentary control, so it could also investigate corruption cases at the governmental level. This was one of the conditions imposed on the Republic of Moldova for liberalizing the visa regime. 

In 2013, the first high-level cases appeared, after which many discussions followed that these files would be political and then in 2015 the Center was passed back to the Government. After the Filat case, the institution is once again under parliamentary control. Until then, the Center had jurisdiction over all types of corruption offenses, regardless of the level and amount of fraud. 

In 2016, it sounds to me, the Prosecutor’s Office promoted another reform. Subsequently the exclusive authority of the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office was limited to certain categories of high-level persons. Technically, from that moment, the institution can no longer investigate high-level corruption cases. We did not have resonance files, as in Romania, because the Anticorruption Prosecutor’s Office does not have the operational capabilities and cannot accumulate much information to investigate high-level corruption cases.

Mr. Flocea is, in a way, right when he says that the Center has no authority over high-level corruption cases, although things could be fixed without changing the legislation, if the two institutions would agree to work hand-in-hand.

Sergiu Mocanu, Anti-Mafia Movement

I am not an expert in legislation, but I do not think that this Center lacks the mechanisms and tools to fight high-level corruption, as Flocea says. We all know Flocea’s problem – from the beginning he came directly from the Presidency, his appointment and the way he was appointed lack credibility. 

At the Anticorruption Center, Flocea will be a tool in the power’s hand. Flocea has no chance at fighting high-level corruption as long as he came into office under Dodon’s wing. So I do not know how citizens can regain the confidence in the Center.

Galina Bostan, Center for Analysis and Prevention of Corruption

Let’s face it, this topic has been discussed repeatedly, I would like to finally see the Center working. We have already created mass confusion, while discussing the Center’s lack of authority. Since its creation [in 2002] they have only one problem – lack of authority. In fact, they impede their own activity. When you do not want to do what you have to do, you invoke a lack of authority. And instead of working, you start changing the legislation again, asking for more authority. My opinion is that the National Anticorruption Center simply must begin to work.