Representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, state authorities collaborating with the judicial officers, representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the UIHJ and the Minister of justice were invited to the Congress. However, the Minister of justice was not in attendance.
The congress was opened by the Roman Talmaci, president of the National Union of the Judicial Officers of Moldova (UNEJ). The UIHJ was represented by Adrian Stoica, Secretary of the board. Mr Talmaci presented the annual report on UNEJ activity and made analysis of the most important and pending problems, faced by the enforcement officers.
Some of them are:
• Failure by the competent state authorities to create, within one year, the fair tax regime for the judicial officers. At the moment general tax regime, applicable for natural persons, is imposed to the judicial officers that doesn't involve deductions of some costs and expenses, as well as deductions for their employees;
• Implementation of some legal norms, that lead to deficiencies in enforcement officers activity and infringe the separation of power principle (for instance, modifications brought to the structure of the Disciplinary commission, where the majority and control over it is hold by the Ministry of Justice representatives: 5 of 9 members are from the Ministry of Justice and only 2 are judicial officer's representatives; approval by the Government of the Republic of Moldova of a new law, providing that enforcement officers actions, whereas the state is the debtor, should be preliminary discussed with the State Fiscal Inspectorate, while failure to do so will lead to disciplinary sanction applied on the judicial officer; creation of privileges for state authorities; possibility of suspension of the enforcement officer's activity whether the Minister of justice unilaterally considers that the latter infringes the law).
• Refusal to furnish information requested by the judicial officer, made by some state authorities or failure to attach, free of charge, the vehicle, subject to attachment based on the judicial officer's decision;
• Creation of the vicious judicial practice of resignation of the enforcement costs, incurred by the judicial officers, on the motive that the latter fail to show the direct connection between the actions performed and costs incurred.
