This study analyzes current criminal law aspects regarding the involvement of artificial intelligence (hereinafter, as the case may be - AI) in the commission of the offense of determination or facilitation of suicide, regulated under Article 150 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova - Intentional determination or facilitation of suicide. The rapid technological evolution of AI systems, particularly emotional chatbots, has generated situations in which they have encouraged or facilitated suicidal acts, with multiple tragic cases documented internationally. The research analyzes the current extra-criminal framework of the Republic of Moldova that defines electronic communication networks and the applicable national criminal law normative framework, in the authors' conviction, for designating the subjects involved in this field of activity. Following the investigation, certain legislative gaps were identified, specifically regarding the absence of criminal liability of legal persons for the offense in question. The analysis undertaken demonstrates that, although artificial intelligence cannot be an active subject of the offense due to the lack of its own legal capacity, the manufacturers, developers, or users of AI systems can and must be subject to criminal liability. The conclusion is also motivated by the relevance of the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 on artificial intelligence, which establishes a catalog of expressly prohibited practices, the deliberate violation of which may constitute a manifestation of indirect intent in the commission of offenses. The research concludes with the formulation of proposals as lege ferenda.
The article analyzes the holders of the right to appeal in criminal proceedings, with a focus on the category provided by Article 401(1)(6) of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Moldova - namely, persons whose legitimate interests have been prejudiced by a measure or an act of the court. The study is based on an examination of legislation, legal doctrine, and judicial practice, in the context of guarantees related to access to justice and the right to a fair trial. The author highlights that the appeal is an ordinary legal remedy intended to ensure judicial review of first-instance decisions and the correction of judicial errors, its exercise being conditional upon the existence of legal standing. The main categories of holders of the right to appeal and the limits of their right to lodge an appeal are presented. Particular attention is given to the notion of "other persons", emphasizing that they must not be participants in the proceedings, and that the alleged prejudice must be direct and result from measures or acts of the court distinct from the merits of the case. The article concludes that this regulation broadens legal protection by allowing access to justice for persons indirectly affected by criminal proceedings.
As the central element of criminal proceedings, evidence has consistently been the focus of attention of academic scholars, the legislature, and, of course, the judicial authorities directly involved in resolving criminal cases. The manner in which criminal procedural evidence is regulated and applied in practice constitutes an indispensable condition for ensuring a fair trial - a process within which the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual are respected, without undermining its essential purpose, namely the protection of the individual, society, and the state against crime. The administration of evidence in criminal proceedings requires all the more a rigorous scientific analysis, given that the normative framework in this field is in continuous evolution, and identifying appropriate responses to current challenges becomes a constant necessity.
This article examines the right to repair in contracts for the sale of goods from the perspective of the regulatory framework applicable in the Republic of Moldova and the need to strengthen it. The analysis starts from the finding that, under domestic law, repair is regulated primarily as a contractual remedy in cases of non-conformity of the goods, without being recognized as an autonomous legal institution and without being supported by sufficiently clear positive obligations incumbent upon traders. At the same time, recent developments in European Union law reveal a significant shift in approach: repair is no longer regarded exclusively as an incident of the non-performance of the obligation of conformity, but also as a legal instrument for consumer protection, for keeping goods in use, and for preventing waste generation. On this basis, the study seeks to highlight the shortcomings of the current regulation in the Republic of Moldova and to formulate directions for strengthening the regulatory framework, with a view to ensuring effective consumer protection and bringing national law closer to current European standards.
This study examines the institution of "Espionage" from a dual perspective: conceptual and criminallaw related, having as normative references the provisions of Articles 337 and 338 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova. Taking into account the fact that espionage is included in both offence components, the legislator establishes certain essential differences between them. The main distinction between the two components lies in the special status of the perpetrator: according to Article 337 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova, espionage is committed by a citizen of the Republic of Moldova, while according to Article 338 of the Criminal Code, the act is committed by a foreign citizen or a stateless person. In the same context, this study aims to analyse the alternative normative modalities of the act of "Espionage", regulated in both offence components. For this purpose, the author highlights potential discrepancies in order to ensure a uniform application of criminal liability for these acts.
