The adoption by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, in its first reading, of Draft Law No. 104 of 1 April 2026 has sparked intense debate within the country and drawn strong criticism from international institutions. While the bill is presented as a tool to combat drug trafficking, in practice it proposes a significant expansion of punitive measures targeting not only people who use drugs, but also healthcare professionals, social workers, and educators.
The visit of the Eastern Europe and Central Asia Commission on Drug Policy (ECECACD), led by former Polish President Aleksander Kwaśniewski, together with mass protests outside Parliament in Chișinău, demonstrate that the issue has moved far beyond a domestic legal dispute and evolved into a broader political and social crisis.
At the heart of the controversy is the bill’s replacement of evidence-based public health approaches with punitive mechanisms that risk undermining trust in state institutions. By imposing a legal obligation on doctors, teachers, and social workers to report individuals based on mere suspicion of drug use, the proposed legislation effectively turns systems of care and support into instruments of police surveillance.
Faced with the threat of criminal liability, professional sanctions, loss of licenses, and substantial fines, professionals may become reluctant to engage openly with clients and patients. At the same time, people who use drugs are likely to retreat further from healthcare and social services, avoiding contact with institutions that could expose them to prosecution.
Rather than reducing drug use, the bill risks dismantling rehabilitation and support systems, increasing the spread of hidden epidemics such as HIV and viral hepatitis, and further criminalizing vulnerable populations for the possession of even small quantities of drugs.
The significance of this issue for Moldova today is strategic for three key reasons:
A Threat to European Integration
As highlighted by the Office of the People’s Advocate (Ombudsman) and international experts, the punitive provisions contained in the bill are inconsistent with European Union standards, which prioritize human rights, public health, and social inclusion. The adoption of such measures could complicate Moldova’s path toward closer alignment with the EU.
Undermining Social Security and Public Health
Attempts to address drug dependence through intimidation, surveillance, and harsher penalties have repeatedly proven ineffective around the world. Draft Law No. 104 places fundamental rights at risk, including medical confidentiality and access to healthcare services.
A Test of Democratic Maturity
The willingness of Moldova’s authorities to listen to civil society, affected communities, and independent experts will determine whether the country is capable of engaging in meaningful democratic dialogue or whether it will resort to punitive populism as a response to complex social challenges.
Expert Perspectives
To fully understand the risks posed by Draft Law No. 104, it is essential to hear from those who work daily to protect the rights and health of vulnerable populations.
An Inside Perspective: Expert Assessment and Risks of Discrimination
Vitaly Rabinchuk, Chair of the Eurasian Network of People Who Use Drugs (ENPUD) and Chair of the Public Association Puls Comunitar, believes that the proposed measures could reverse years of progress achieved through public health programs in Moldova.
“This bill further entrenches a punitive approach and will make life significantly more dangerous for people with drug dependence. Instead of extending a helping hand, the state is proposing police raids, expanding criminal liability for personal drug use, and introducing broad surveillance mechanisms. The most cynical aspect of the initiative is the transformation of doctors and social workers into agents of control. When seeking medical help can effectively become a pathway to prison because professionals are required to report suspected drug use, trust is destroyed entirely. Communities will be pushed underground, severing their last remaining connections to healthcare and social services.”
Institutional Discrimination and Human Rights Violations
According to experts, the initiative conflicts with fundamental international standards because it:
- Criminalizes a health condition: the law punishes individuals for living with drug dependence, a recognized medical condition, rather than for causing harm to others.
- Undermines the right to confidentiality: medical secrecy and personal data protection are effectively sacrificed in favor of enforcement measures.
- Creates legal inequality: the bill singles out one group of citizens, limiting their safe access to treatment and essential social services.
According to Vitaly Rabinchuk, the consequences of adopting the bill would extend far beyond people who use drugs and would affect Moldovan society as a whole:
- Collapse of healthcare engagement: fear of arrest would discourage people from seeking treatment until it is too late. Harm reduction and rehabilitation programs would lose participants.
- Rising epidemics and preventable deaths: a sharp increase in fatal overdoses and the spread of HIV and viral hepatitis would be likely as access to sterile injecting equipment becomes more limited in underground settings.
- Criminalization and prison overcrowding: instead of receiving healthcare, thousands of people could end up behind bars. Isolation and marginalization would only deepen their vulnerability and increase exposure to criminal environments.
“This law will not reduce drug use. Instead, it will lead to a serious deterioration in public health, higher levels of crime, and a profound erosion of trust in state institutions,” the expert concludes.
A Risk to Moldova’s European Path: How the Bill Moves the Country Away from EU Standards
Anna Dovbakh, Executive Director of the Eurasian Harm Reduction Association (EHRA), warns that the adoption of this legislation would deal a serious blow to Moldova’s European aspirations.
“Even before this latest legislative initiative, our experts had identified a significant need for drug policy reform in Moldova. However, if adopted in its current form, this bill would create enormous obstacles to meeting key EU requirements. First and foremost, it directly undermines strict European standards on personal data protection under the GDPR by depriving citizens of their right to confidentiality. It would restrict access to healthcare services and lead to serious human rights violations. For Moldova’s European integration ambitions, this would represent a major setback. This legislative initiative is not a step toward the European Union—it is ten steps backward.”
Key Areas of Non-Compliance with European Standards
According to EHRA’s analysis and recommendations, Draft Law No. 104 undermines Moldova’s roadmap toward EU membership in several critical areas:
Violation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
The obligation imposed on doctors, teachers, and social workers to report individuals based on suspicion of drug use directly contradicts European standards on privacy, personal data protection, and informed consent.
Ignoring the principle of therapeutic justice.
EU countries increasingly promote alternatives to punishment for non-violent drug-related offences. Rather than reforming compulsory narcological registration systems and expanding voluntary treatment options, Moldova’s proposed legislation broadens criminal liability and lowers thresholds for what constitutes “small quantities” of drugs.
Institutional failure.
While the EU encourages the establishment of fully functioning National Drug Observatories and Early Warning Systems on New Psychoactive Substances to improve evidence-based policymaking, Moldova’s focus is shifting toward enforcement operations and punitive interventions.
Threats to sustainable financing.
Instead of ensuring stable public funding for harm reduction services—including opioid agonist therapy, needle and syringe programmes, and naloxone distribution—which are recognised across Europe as essential public health interventions, the state risks destroying trust in these services among vulnerable populations, including women and people living in rural areas.
Rather than aligning with European institutions and standards on human rights protection, Draft Law No. 104 risks isolating Moldova by preserving outdated punitive approaches that are incompatible with the values and policy frameworks of the European Union.
Political Context and the Advocacy Timeline
Olena Kucheruk, Executive Secretary of the Eastern Europe and Central Asia Commission on Drug Policy (ECECACD)
To understand how such a restrictive bill advanced through its first parliamentary reading so rapidly, it is important to examine Moldova’s domestic political environment.
Over the past year, public anxiety around drug use has been deliberately amplified. The debate was triggered by two high-profile cases involving children from influential families who experienced drug-related problems. The narrative of “protecting children” quickly became a powerful political tool, embraced by both media outlets and politicians.
In response to growing public pressure, the country’s leadership instructed authorities to take urgent action. Draft Law No. 104 became the most comprehensive measure the government was able to prepare in a short period of time. The proposal was presented as the only decisive and effective response to the issue, which helps explain why Parliament approved it unanimously and with remarkable speed in its first reading.
“Our visit took place at a critically important and strategically timely moment. We were able to meet with representatives at every level of government, including the President’s Office, the Cabinet of Ministers, members of Parliament, and relevant state institutions. A particularly important meeting was held with the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the body directly responsible for drafting the bill under instructions from the country’s leadership.
For the authors of the legislation, it came as a genuine surprise that their proposal contained such serious flaws and, frankly speaking, such problematic provisions. They were sincerely surprised by the arguments we presented.
The same was true for members of Parliament. During a civil society protest outside Parliament, we succeeded in bringing lawmakers to a public press conference where they had to respond directly to concerns raised by experts and communities. Faced with these arguments, members of Parliament publicly committed to holding additional consultations. The first results followed immediately: ten representatives of affected communities and civil society organisations were invited to Parliament for detailed discussions of all concerns raised.”
At present, the primary focus of advocacy efforts remains the provisions contained in Draft Law No. 104 itself. The requirement that healthcare professionals, teachers, and social workers report any actual or suspected drug use to law enforcement constitutes a serious violation of human rights principles.
Such measures make effective support and assistance nearly impossible. Individuals who already have limited trust in state institutions are likely to stop seeking help altogether out of fear of being reported to the police. At the same time, the legislation introduces severe penalties for professionals who fail to report their patients, clients, or students.
Early Results and Growing International Pressure
According to Olena Kucheruk, the international advocacy effort has already produced tangible legal and diplomatic outcomes.
Independent Expert Opposition
The Parliamentary Health Committee has formally requested an expert review of the bill. To date, three independent experts affiliated with the Commission have submitted detailed assessments highlighting the risks associated with the proposed legislation. Their conclusions have already been forwarded to the relevant authorities.
Mobilisation of UN Institutions
The international mission also succeeded in mobilising several United Nations agencies. Following a series of consultations, the UN Resident Coordinator, UNAIDS, UNICEF, and the World Health Organization jointly prepared and submitted an official position to the Moldovan authorities expressing serious concerns regarding the punitive provisions contained in the bill.
Partnership with the Ombudsperson’s Office
The Office of the People’s Advocate (Ombudsperson), which shares many of the concerns raised by human rights advocates, has become actively involved in the process. Although its previous criticism of the legislation was largely ignored, an agreement has now been reached whereby experts will provide the Ombudsperson with a consolidated assessment of the bill’s risks, allowing the institution to submit these concerns to Parliament under its own mandate.
The Broader Agenda: Other Strategic Priorities Raised During the Visit
Beyond the urgent response to Draft Law No. 104, the international mission also engaged Moldovan authorities on a number of long-term structural reforms that have remained on the advocacy agenda for several years. Experts identified three priority areas.
Developing a National Drug Strategy
This area presents the most promising prospects for progress. Moldova is expected to adopt a National Drug Strategy this year, providing a long-awaited strategic framework for drug policy development.
The drafting process has been relatively transparent, involving a broad range of stakeholders and benefiting from the support of the Pompidou Group of the Council of Europe. Experts assess the risks in this area as relatively low and believe that the adoption of a balanced strategy could become another important milestone in Moldova’s reform process.
Abolishing the Narcological Registry and Revising “Small Quantity” Thresholds
This reform is considered a fundamental step toward the meaningful decriminalisation of people who use drugs.
During the visit, the Ministry of Health demonstrated a genuine interest in reviewing existing drug possession thresholds, giving experts reason for cautious optimism regarding future legislative changes. Revising these thresholds and moving away from compulsory narcological registration systems would represent a significant shift toward a more health-centred and rights-based approach.
Reforming the National Drug Commission
The governance structure of Moldova’s drug policy institutions remains another key concern.
The National Drug Commission was originally established under the Cabinet of Ministers but was later transferred under the authority of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Experts recommend returning the Commission to the Cabinet’s oversight in order to ensure greater independence, balance, and meaningful participation by the Ministry of Health and other civilian institutions.
As an alternative, Moldovan authorities have recently begun exploring the possibility of creating an independent national drugs agency modelled on the European Union Drugs Agency (EUDA). Experts view this option as a promising development that could strengthen evidence-based policymaking and institutional coordination.
What Needs to Happen Next?
According to Olena Kucheruk, Moldovan civil society must remain actively engaged and continue to shape the debate during the coming months.
The immediate priority is to further involve the Delegation of the European Union to Moldova and the Pompidou Group of the Council of Europe, both of which play an influential role in supporting policy reforms in the country.
“During our meetings with the EU Ambassador, we laid the groundwork for this dialogue. The next step is for local organisations to build on these contacts, engage both the EU Delegation and the Pompidou Group in ongoing discussions, and consistently reinforce the message that humane drug policy and the rejection of punitive approaches are not optional recommendations but fundamental expectations linked to Moldova’s European integration ambitions. Political pressure must not be allowed to weaken.”
The decisions taken during the upcoming parliamentary consultations will demonstrate whether Moldova is capable of maintaining a balance between national security concerns and the protection of fundamental human rights.
The outcome of this process will not only shape the future of drug policy in the country but will also serve as an important indicator of Moldova’s commitment to European values, democratic governance, and evidence-based public policy.