My name is Andrei Plop and I am from Moldova . I graduated from the Faculty of International Relations (ULIM) , I studied at the Romanian - American University, the Faculty of Law. Also, I graduated from the Faculty of International Relations a master student of the SNSPA,. I was nominated to take part in the parliament elections in 2009( RM). If i had to describe myself in three words, they would be passionate about learning, hard working and ambitious.
Training of elites at the most prestigious schools of the world together with the democratization and economic reforms in a state may lead to the creation of the basis for a viable state. Current realities require improvement of the methods, instruments, and strategies available for my country. They are necessary for facing challenges and risks and for establishing clear and precise lines of action in the following spheres: political-administrative, social, educational, research, culture, national security and public order in the foreign policy. In this situation, people need a support and this can only come from leaders of society, particularly political leaders. They need to exhale the force that protects the vulnerable people and enables people with initiative to press the accelerator for maximizing profits. Reforms are needed to completely change the social order and institutions. It is known that as the people get older, they become more conservative. In contrast a youth easily adapts to new trends or political projects.
I am fully supporting and sharing ideas of democracy, freedom of thought and expression willing to devote my life and carrier to promote them around the world and particularly in my country. Gaining multicultural experience from my previous projects was incredible. Immersion in foreign environments provided me an important source of inspiration, enthusiasm and new friends. My dream is to live in a world with a multitude of cultures and languages; where people can live in freedom of thought and freedom of expression. I am really willing to make the sacrifices needed to make this change. Sincerely, Andrei Plop
07/04/2014–04/07/2014
International Parliamentary Internship Program, Warsaw (Poland)
07/2016–10/2016 One World Center (Denmark) EDUCATION AND TRAINING
09/2007–08/2010 Faculty of History and International Relations Free International University of Moldova, Chisinau (ULIM)
10/2013–08/2015 Department of International Relations and European Integration, Conflict Analysis and Resolution National School of Political Science and Public Administration, Bucharest (Romania)
10/2012–08/2016 Faculty of Law Romanian-American University, Bucharest (Romania)
▪ WSCFE: Encountering the Other - Community building and ecumenical leadership training in Central and Eastern Europe ( July 2013) ▪
JCI - Succes in Romania ( 2012-2013);A mentorship programme designed for students of Romanian origin, born abroad, who come to Romania to pursue their academic studies. ▪
Letter of Confirmation by Wolfgang Behrendt, Head of Delegation of the European Union to Moldova ▪
European Leadership Academy, AEGIS Consulting (Chisinau, Moldova, 2009- 2010);
▪ Foundation for reforms in justice, security and defense (Chisinau, Moldova, 2009-2010).
▪ Inter-university Student Conference at CID NATO, "Strategic Concept of NATO and its role in providing security in the Euro-Atlantic" ( Chisinau, Moldova - 2010) ;
▪ International Taekwon-do Championship ALTAIR (Chisinau, Moldova) - 2nd place;
▪ National Taekwon-do Championship (Chisinau, Moldova) - 2nd place;
▪ National Taekwon-do Championship (Chisinau, Moldova) - 3rd place.
|
Ministry of Administration and
Interior
Romanian Immigration Office
Asylum and Integration Directorate
Regional Center for Accommodation and
Procedures for Asylum Seekers in Bucharest
Personal Data Operator number 6052
File number 19208/2011
Bucharest, 09.01.2012
Decision
Number 1198900 / h / DO
there might be translation mistakes
Regarding the settlement in the ordinary procedure of
the asylum application number 119800 / c / DD of 30.11.2001, addressed to the
Romanian Immigration Office - The Directorate for Asylum and Integration
by Mr Plop Andrei, citizen of the Republic of Moldova, born on 28.09.1988, in
the Republic of Moldova (proven identity), with the last residence declared in
Bucharest, Vasile Stolnicul street, number 15, block 13, sector 2.
On December 28, 2011 the interview was conducted at the
headquarters of the Romanian Immigration Office - Asylum and Integration
Directorate - Regional Accommodation and Procedures Center for Asylum Seekers
Bucharest, by Dana Oprea - an official appointed pursuant to Article 48
paragraph 2 of Act No. 122/2006 with subsequent amendments and completions -
who interviewed the applicant after having been presented and explained the
rights and obligations provided by the Romanian law. The applicant did not want
to be assisted by a lawyer. The
applicant did not want to be assisted by an interpreter, the interview being
conducted in the Romanian language. The interview was recorded in writing,
being a final recitated to the applicant and confirmed by his signature. There were no objections to the way the interview
was conducted. Further details of the state of affairs refer to the content of
the file.
The Romanian Immigration Office - the Asylum and
Integration Directorate, by Dana Oprea - official designated pursuant to Article
48 (2) of Law No. 122/2006, with subsequent modifications and additions -
analyzing the reasons invoked by the applicant in the documents in the file of
the person concerned, report on its country of origin status.
Decide
Rejects
as unfounded the application
for refugee status.
No subsidiary protection is granted.
It obliges the person concerned to comply with the
provisions of Article 19 (j) of the Law No. 122/2006 on asylum in Romania, with
subsequent amendments and completions.
Motivation of the judgment
Following the interview, the examination of the
asylum application and the documents in the file shall be as follows:
In fact
A. Establishing Identity
The applicant stated that he is called the Andrei
Plop, born on 28.09.1988 in the city of Chisinau, Republic of Moldova,
citizen of the Republic of Moldova, identity with passport serial A number
2644954.
B. Result of the checks
Following the checks, it was found that Mr. Plop
Andrei (Proven identity) entered lawfully in Romania for the first time
on 23.11.20011 addressed an asylum
application to the Regional Accommodation and Procedures Center for Asylum
Seekers in Bucharest, citing that he is a member of the European Action
Movement Party and participated in the anti-communism protest from 07.04.2009.
On 05.12.2011 the questionnaire was filled in at the
headquarters of the Regional Accommodation and Procedures Center for Asylum
Solicitors Bucharest, the location of Tudor Gociu by Răzvan Brebeanu. The
questionnaire was completed in writing, being finally recited, and the
applicant confirmed by his signature.
C. Documents
The applicant submitted the following documents to the
personal file in support of his statements: airline tickets, a newspaper article,
a subpoena, response to petition issued by the Embassy of Romania in the Republic
of Moldova C 5332 / 08.07.2009, a nomination for candidate for the position of
deputy in the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, membership card of the
Political Social Movement European Action, the ordinance and the minutes of recognition
as accused, citation number
25-11-3M09-8481, a DVD where three documentaries are saved, identity card
series A number 2644954 issued by the Republic of Moldova on 03.10.2006, valid
until 03.10.2016.
D. Summary of the applicant's declarations
On 30 November 2011, Mr. Andrei Plop applied for
asylum, citing that he is a member of the European Action Movement Party and
participated in the anti-communist protest from 07.04.2009.
On 28.12.2011 the interview was conducted at the
headquarters of the Romanian Immigration Office - Asylum and Integration
Directorate - Regional Accommodation and Procedures Center for Asylum Seekers
Bucharest, by Dana Oprea - an official appointed pursuant to Article 48
paragraph 2 of Act No. 122/2006, as subsequently amended and supplemented - who
interviewed the applicant after having been presented and explained the rights
and obligations provided by the Romanian law. The applicant did not want to be
assisted by a lawyer. The applicant did not want to be assisted by an
interpreter, the interview being
conducted in
Romanian. The interview was recorded in writing, being finally
recitalized to the applicant and confirmed by his signature. There were no
objections to the way the interview was conducted.
On the occasion of the interview, the applicant stated
that he is called Andrew's Plop, born on 28.09.1988 in the city of Chisinau,
Republic of Moldova, citizen of the Republic of Moldova.
He has a passport whose release personally presented
himself, without problems from the authorities and with whom he spoke in
Ukraine, Romania, Belarus, Poland, Russia. He does not suffer from any chronic
disease. He did not perform the military service, although although it is
mandatory for 18-year-old boys, he was a student, thus being exempt.
As far as the reasons for leaving the country of
origin, said he first came to Romania in January or February 2009 at a
conference of the Association of Cultural History organized by the Social
Action Policy Movement. He stayed for 5 days. On 28.09.2010 he left Moldova
to Belarus, he stayed for 4 days and then went to Poland. There he asked
for asylum and stayed in a camp for a month and a half in the city of Biala
Podlaska. In total he spent 9 months in Poland. He was the only one in the
Republic of Moldova. He made a request to the director of the social department explaining that he was blackmailed
by Chechens and wanted the transfer to another city. He was given a reply
stating that the department was not dealing with the relationship between
asylum seekers. Because it was delayed and was not answered in a shorter
time, was not helped by the Polish authorities, decided to leave for Germany. Then
he went to Germany and asked for asylum there, stayed for about a month. He
was jailed, then returned to Poland. He was forced to stay in a closed center
for two months, and he had to stay three more. He gave up the asylum
application in Poland, stayed for another month, then returned through the
International Organization for Migration, in Belarus on 10.11.2011,
because he could not return to the Republic of Moldova. The second time he came
to Romania on 29.11.2011 in Belarus. He did not stay in Belarus because
there are communists there, and in his home country he is considered organizer
of protests against the Communists.
Asked what problems he had in the Republic of Moldova,
he replied that from 2005 to 2006 he was a sympathizer of the Christian
Democratic People's Party.
From 2006 to 2008 he was vice-president of the New
Generation Youth Organization of the Christian Democratic People's Party.
In 2007 he ran for the position of local
councilor in Pascani. On 23.11.2008 he became a member of the European Action
Movement. He was elected president of the youth organization also in 2008. On
April 5, 2009, he was nominated for the position of deputy in the Parliament of
the Republic of Moldova by the Social Action-Political Action Movement. On
07.04.2009 there were protests that he attended, but he was not an organizer. There
were about 30,000 students in the National Assembly Square, in front of the
presidency. Fire on Communist banners, stoned to the cops. He found a police
station. There were some filming, and he was caught with the station in his
hand, having protesters around him, considering himself to be the organizer. He
was blamed by both the ruling communist party and the opposition. On 03.03.2009
he had a press conference and officially
declared that a group of members of the Christian Democratic People's Party
will move to the European Action Movement. Anatol Matasaru is a very active
character in protests against the police and he also participated in this
protest, and the station he found gave it to him. After the protest in front of
the presidency, some protesters took the flag of the Republic of Moldova and
went to the Interior Ministry, it was a group of 10 people, including Anatol
Matasaru. Then he went to the Government, and from there he went home, but
there were other protests. In the evening he went to relatives in the northern
part of the country. He left because he knew there would be arrests. At eight
o'clock he left, and police arrived at 22:00. They presented themselves as colleagues,
they were civilians. The problem was he never went home with colleagues from
college and they had no way to know where I live. His parents told them he was
not home, After which the two policemen presented the police cards, they
searched the house, told their parents that they wanted to help and call them
when I return home. They called home, but the parents told them I was in
Ukraine. To relatives, I spent about three months, from 07.04.2009 to June
2009, but no more than two weeks for each cousin. Asked if he had any
problems with the authorities during these three months, he said he was in a
bus station and saw a policeman heading for him. Then he took out a Bible and
asked him if he did not want to know the truth about Jesus Christ, and he
annoyed him and told him to leave.
When he returned to the University in September 2009,
the Dean told him that he had been searched for by the SIS police (Information
and Security Service). They were interested in what group I am. There were many
arrested that night and were beaten, even killed by three police officers in
police stations. Students who participated in those protests made an
organization, April 7, and they said about 700 people were arrested. He
returned home in June 2009. Because of the deaths of those three people, the
opposition made complaints and researches were made by commissions from the
European Union, and the students who were imprisoned were released. In July
2009 he was summoned to the Prosecutor's Office he went with his lawyer. He
was informed that he was charged with organizing protests, mass disorder. They
were doing well with him because he was assisted by a lawyer, but also because
many police officers were being investigated. They were brought to the
evidence, a film, some statements.
At the end of July were the anticipated
elections. An alliance of European integration has formed, the Communists have
lost their choices, have not obtained a majority. He continued his studies, he gave
the arrears. On 04.05.2010 he was again summoned by the General Prosecutor's
Office as a witness at the events of 07.04.2009. Then he was told that it would
be good to make false statements against Anatol Matasaru and Anataol Peterencu
- this being the presidency of the European Action Movement. He refused, told
them everything he knew about the events. On 05.09.2010 a referendum was held -
organized by the Integration Alliance for the European Union - in which the
presidencies were chosen directly by the people. The Communists wanted to
boycott the referendum, advised the world not to vote. The required number of
participants has not been formed, so the retirement has not been achieved. Then
he was again summoned by Sergiu Rosu - the prosecutor of the Criminal
Investigation Section on Extraordinary Causes of the General Prosecutor's
Office - around 15.09.2010 and he was told again that if he did not give those
statements as they wanted, it was envisaged that drug trafficking files or
other criminal acts would be made. He did not have a lawyer because he thought
he was quoted as a witness. He told them he would not give false testimony, and they threatened him again
to make criminal files. Then he left home. On 28.09.1988 he left the country in
Belarus and did not return to Moldova.
He does not know if there were other people called to
make false statements against Anatol Matasaru and Anatol Petrencu. As for the
reasons why he asked for Romania's protection, he said he feared persecution in
the Republic of Moldova, he risked being jailed. When he went to Belarus, he
bought a Moscow-Casablanca ticket with transit through London. The idea was to
seek asylum in the UK. But the ticket was not released, because another person
before him said the same story he wanted to say, that he is going to Casablanca
to get married. He then went to the Embassy of Romania in Minsk and said he
wanted to come to Romania from Saint Andrew (30.11.2011). He obtained a
three-day tourist visa. Also, when he was returned from Poland, he was banned
from entering the Shengen area for a period of 5 years and therefore chose
Romania, he knew the Romanian language and was illegal in Belarus.
He is an atheist, is not part of an ethnic trib / clan
/ grp. He is a member of the European Action Movement since 2008, participated
in the protest on 07.04.2009. The Christian Democratic People's Party
collaborated with the Communists. The European Action Movement was a newly
formed party and attracted many young people, and therefore chose to move from
PPCD to the Euopean Action Movement. The latter has as a embelma a key. The
party's emblem was 12 stars and wrote MAE the presidency was Anatol Pebtrencu,
then Vaceslav Untila. In 2011 he was included in the Liberal Party, headed by
Mihai Ghimpu. The European Action Movement is struggling to integrate into the
European Union and join NATO, but also to eliminate Communists from power. He
was president of the Youth Organization and vice-president of the main
structure, the Criuleni branch and subordinated to Secretary General Mariana
Taranu. Organizes meetings with members, propaganda, has subordinate territorial
organizations.
He was never detained, arrested or convicted, never
received an arrest warrant. He can not return to the Republic of Moldova because
he will be arrested, he would have been caught by the country, so he can not
move to another area to get rid of the problems.
If he obtains a form of protection in Romania, Mr.
Plop Andrei wants to follow the courses of the Faculty of Law. Asked whether he
has anything to say yet, he explained that he had written a petition to Traian
Basescu, which he submitted to the Embassy of Romania from the Republic of
Moldova, requesting asylum on 24.04.09. He received an answer on 30.07.2009, in
which he was told that he must be in Romania to seek asylum. In 2010, he was
recommended to obtain a visa to enter Romania, but because it took too long, he
chose to leave for Belarus. No other reasons were raised in support of asylum
applications. Regarding other details of the state of affairs, reference is made
to the content of the file.
In
law
In view of the legal situation of the facts presented
by the applicant, the provisions of the Romanian Constitution and the
provisions of Law 122/2006 on asylum in Romania, with subsequent amendments and
completions, were taken into account.
Analyzing these provisions results from the provisions
of Law No. 122/2006 on asylum in Romania, with subsequent amendments and
completions to the status and regime of refugees signed by Romania, as well as
in accordance with the general internal and international provisions on
fundamental human rights.
1. The analysis of the asylum application in terms of
its inclusion in the elements of the refugee status definition.
1.A. Analysis of the refugee definition element,
"outside of the country of origin"
The applicant is a citizen of the Republic of Moldova
and on 30.11.2011 personally applied for asylum in Romania.
1.B. Analysis of the elements "acts of
persecution / agents of persecution / persecution"
"Persecution" means an action that is
sufficiently serious in itself or by repeating the facts in order to expose the
applicant to dangers likely to harm his or her life, bodily integrity or
freedom or to obviously prevent him from living in his country of origin, and
is based on one or more of the following reasons: race, nationality, religion,
membership of a social group or public opinion, whether the reasons are real or
attributed to the person concerned by the persecuting agent.
1.B.i. Analysis of acts of persecution
The reason for submitting a request by the applicant
is that he would have been looking for the authorities, being considered one of
the organizers of the protests of 07.04.2009.
1.B.ii. Analysis of the Persecution Agents
Taking into account Article 11 of the Government
Decision No. 1251/2006 for the approval of the methodological norms for the
application of the Law no. 122/2006 on asylum in Romania, the subsequent
acquisitions and additions, it was noted that in the present case the applicant
invoked state persecution agents, respectively the authorities of the Republic
of Moldova.
1.B.iii. Analysis of the link between the invoked acts
and one or more of the criteria set out in the refugee definition.
Asked during the interview, the applicant tried to
present evidence that the persecution was caused by one of the limiting reasons
listed in Article 23 paragraph (1) of the Law No. 122/2006, on asylum in
Romania, with the subsequent amendments and completions, that is, politics.
He presented a lot of details about the political
situation in the Republic of Moldova, the political parties and the
demonstrations of 07.04.2009. He also exposed his situation in Poland as an
asylum seeker, but these issues are of no importance in his case analysis, from
the point of view of the asylum procedure in Romania.
Asked to explain what problems he had in the Republic
of Moldova, the alleged acts of persecution would be due to the fact that he
would be considered one of the organizers of the protests from 07.04.2009. But
it has to be taken into account that these protests took place against the
Communists, and now they are in opposition, the Alliance for European
Integration, which is made up of: the Liberal Democratic Party, the Democratic
Party and the Liberal Party - in which the European Action Movement was also
included. Thus, the party he was part of, being even a very important member,
is currently in power and seems unbelievable that he could persecute him
because he participated in those demonstrations.
Thus, from the analysis of the statements made during
the interview, it was not possible to establish, in the applicant's case, the
link between the acts allegedly acts of persecution and one of the reasons for
the persecution foreseen in the refugee definition.
1.C State protection / alternative to internal retreat
Regarding the level of protection of the authorities
and the alternative of the internal retreat, the following information from the
country of origin is mentioned;
In the context of impotmolating the truth about the
April 2009 events, political analysts argue that it is important that the
positions expressed by the heads of the Force Institutions be analyzed in the
light of the political algorithm through which they came into office. As soon
as the Alliance for European Integration was established, the General
Prosecutor's Office came to the Democratic Party, the Interior Minister of the
Liberal Democratic Party, and the head of the Information and Security Service
was returned to the Liberal Party. "(Deutsche Welle - April 7, 2009 - a
sabotaged and buried truth, April 15, 2011) [accessed June 1, 2011]
The fact that he had no problems with the authorities
because he was hidden from his relatives seems to be untrue,
in the context of the fact that he was a
significant figure of political life in the republic of Moldova. Moreover, it
is not plausible to declare that a Prosecutor within the General Prosecutor's
Office has been threatened, because he is also appointed by the country's leadership,
the leadership of the former Movement for European Action, the current Liberal
Party, whose party important was the applicant.
These aspects lead us to appreciate that it is not
necessary to detail the protection provided by Moldovan authorities to the one
in question.
1.d. Analysis of the risk of future persecution (in
case of return)
We appreciate that if the applicant returns to his
home country, it is unlikely that there will be a risk of future persecution
against him, as long as he did not face problems from the Moldovan authorities
until his departure from the Republic of Moldova.
2. Analysis of the elements of well-founded fear of
being persecuted or exposed to a serious risk / establishing the credibility of
the solicited statements
As mentioned in the Handbook on Procedures and
Criteria for Determining the Refugee State - UNHCR, Geneva, 1992 - the
definition of the refugee and thus the notion of "well-founded fear of
being persecuted" implies the presence of a subjective element in the
person requesting such status. For this reason, the determination of the
refugee state will mainly consist , in assessing the solicited statements, and
in judging the situation in his / her home country. Analyzing the
"well-founded" phrase, it can be concluded that refugee status is not
determined simply by the mere existence of a person's mood, but also by the
objective situation on which he is based.
2.A regarding the subjective element
In analyzing the subjective element of "fear of
persecution" it was taken into account that, according to the applicant's
statements, his country of origin and the face of which the fear of persecution
invoked is Moldova. Analyzing the fear of persecution invoked by the solicited
person, from a subjective point of view, we appreciate that this is not
founded, because it can not be reasonably established that his continued stay
in his country of origin became intolerable for himself because of reasons invoked
in the definition, or become intolerable for the same reasons, if they return
there.
The applicant has alleged persecution on the part of
the authorities in the Republic of Moldova, because he is considered the
organizer of the protests that led to the removal of the Communists from the
power and bringing the Alliance for European Integration, the alliance of the
Liberal Party, the former movement of the European Action , whose youth
organizations would have been led by Mr. Andrei Plop. Thus, the claims invoked
by the applicant can not be regarded as plausible and credible.
Under these circumstances, we appreciate that from the
subjective point of view the fear of persecution of the applicant is
unintelligible, without a real foundation.
2.B. About the lens element
It is necessary to evaluate the statements made by the
interviewee, which can not be evaluated in abstract, but must be analyzed in
the context of concrete situations, with a knowledge of the conditions in the
country of origin, the latter being an element important in assessing the credibility
of the person concerned.Considering the information in the country of origin,
the following occurred: Starting from the regional political and economic
context, it can be said that 2010 was a relatively good one for the Republic of
Moldova. The government, even under interim conditions, has managed to halt the
decline and revive the country's economy. The most important success in 2010 is
the re-dimensioning of relations with the
European Union. In January 2010, the process of
negotiations on the new Association Agreement started and in March a strategic
document "Rethink Moldova" was adopted, which sets the development
priorities of the Republic of Moldova for 2011-2013, priorities to have solid
financial support from the EU. At the meetings of the RE-EU Cooperation
Council, the dialogue on the creation of a free trade area between Moldova and
the EU and the liberalization of the visa regime were officially launched.
Finally, special relations with the EU have opened new perspectives for Transnistrian
settlement.
The governance of the Alliance for European
Integration (AEI) has begun a series of reforms in line with the 2009-2013
Governance Program: "European Integration: Freedom, Democracy,
Welfare". But the provisional government and the politicization of the
public administration marked the concern of the AEI components for their own
electoral interests, to the detriment of a consolidated government. As a
result, a number of reforms announced in the governance program were suspended
until the political stability after the early parliamentary elections was
established. The most conclusive example in this respect is the field of
justice, where a number of reforms have begun, with laws on: law reform,
liberalization of the enforcement system, etc. However, the shortcomings set
out in the Parliament's Declaration on the State of Justice in the Republic of
Moldova [1] have not been removed at all.
2011 will probably be a very difficult year for
Moldova. If in 2010 the AEI had passed the resistance test against the PCRM's
retaliatory intention, then in 2011 it will have to pass the test of the
loyalty of its own components to the commitments set forth in the AEI
Reconstruction and Operation Agreement. The main challenges for the AEI will be
related to addressing the issue of the election of the head of state. There is
no doubt that safe procedures, in accordance with constitutional and legal
provisions, can be identified regarding the finalization of the election of the
head of state, leaving only the efforts of the AIE components to be
coordinated.
It is noteworthy that in the situation of the vicious
circle that has been created with regard to the election of the head of state
there are no expressly set deadlines, which leave wide scope for maneuver to
set favorable terms in order to successfully conclude the exercise.
The second major challenge for AEI is the local
elections in early summer. There is a risk that, in particular, the fight for
Chisinau City ,could dramatically undermine the AEI's cohesion.
That is why, in general, the introduction of political
stability could only be discussed after the constitution of the majority in the
district councils in July 2011. (Association for Participatory Democracy
<< ADEPT, Political Year 2010 [accessed 01 June 2011]
With regard to the youth organization of the European
Action Movement, no specific information was found about it, nor was it an
official website for research conducted in sources available on the Internet.
"Anatol Petrencu (born May 22, 1954 in Causeni,
Republic of Moldova) Politician and scientist of the Republic of Moldova. In
1990-1992 he was Dean of the Faculty of History of the State University of
Moldova, and between 1998 and 2006 he was president of the Association of
Historians from the Republic of Moldova. Between 2006 and 2010 he was
chairperson of the European Action Movement. Since October
2010 he is the director of the Institute of Social
History "ProMemoria" Vice-President of the Liberal Party. "
(Wikipedia) [accessed January 4, 2012]
"On the morning of January 29, 2009, Moldovan
Prosecutors' Day, Anatol Matasaru was detained in front of the Prosecutor
General's office in Chisinau, as he claimed a protest dressed in a pork suit
and used an audio system to produce similar noises a pig. He protested because
he would have been inappropriately treated by prosecutors as a result of a
plunger. In Plus, he challenges two criminal investigations against him, which
he considers based on evidence produced. "
"Anatol Matasaru was detained for five hours and
accused of not properly informing the mayor, non-observance of police orders,
opposition to arrest and insulting police and prosecutors. He said he was
hit by a police officer while in detention. "(Amnesty International)
[Accessed January 4, 2012]
All of this leads to the conclusion that, objectively,
the applicant's fear of persecution is unfounded, not having a real foundation.
2.C. Analysis of the cumulative fulfillment of the
conditions for giving the presumption of good faith
His statements were not considered plausible as to
whether he was persecuted by the authorities, given that the party whose very
important member was, is currently in power. Must, also took into account
the fact that the one in question chose the first time to apply for asylum in
Poland, although he would have had the opportunity to come directly to Romania.
Moreover, because the procedure was prolonged, he went to Germany illegally. It
was only when he realized that he could not get the protection of either
country, especially because he had been forbidden to enter Shengen for a period
of five years, then chose to come to Romania and ask for protection. In
addition, it should be noted that the applicant knew about the possibility of
such asylum in Romania as of 30.07.2009 when he submitted the petition to
Traian Basescu at the Embassy of Romania, receiving the answer that he must be
on the territory of Romania to lodge such a request. The applicant himself also
explained that in 2010 he was recommended to obtain a visa to enter Romania,
and yet he chose to go to Belaurs, then went to Poland and Germany.
In this regard, the UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and
Criteria for Determining the Refugee State under the 1951 Geneva Convention and
the 1967 New York Protocol, paragraph 62, p. 17, distinguishes between the
notion of migrant and refugee, respectively, "a migrant is a person who,
for reasons other than those contained in the definition, voluntarily leaves
the country with a view to establishing it elsewhere. He can move from the
desire of change or adventure, for familiar reasons or for other personal
reasons. "Therefore, a distinction must be made between these two
categories of people because, unlike immigrants, refugees do not choose to
leave their country of origin , but they are forced by certain circumstances to
do so. The key difference between "refugees" and "migrants"
is that they enjoy the protection of the state of origin, while the refugees do
not.
There is no causal link between the arguments retained
during the interview for which the applicant does not want to return to his
home country and the purpose which led him to ask for the protection of the
Romanian state, also taking into account the fact that he failed to make clear
evidence of the elements of persecution.
In view of the above, we appreciate that the applicant
does not apply the provisions of Article 15 of Law No. 122/2006, with
subsequent amendments and completions, regarding the presumption of good faith.
From the analysis of the fundamental concept of fear
based on persecution, in terms of the two elements that make up it, the
subjective and objective element does not result in the existence of a real
basis of fear of a probability of persecution within the meaning of the legal
provisions on granting the state of refugee .
2.d. Conclusion
Taking into consideration the above mentioned, Mr.
Plop Andrei's request does not meet the conditions stipulated in article 23
paragraph (1) of the Law No. 122/2006, as amended, and the subsequent
completions, for granting refugee status.
3. Analysis of the asylum application from the point
of view of the elements of the definition of subsidiary protection.
A notable difference between the refugee state and the
subsidiary protection is that the latter is granted for cases that do not
qualify for the granting of refugee status and where there is a risk of life
injuries, and the risk of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment on grounds
other than those provided for in Article 23 of Law No. 122/2006, with
subsequent modifications and completions: race, religion, nationalism,
membership in a particular social group or political opinion. That is clearly
apparent from the wording of Article 26 (1)
3.A. Analysis of the serious risk of sentencing to
death or executing such a punishment
With regard to the provisions of Article 26 (2) (1) of
the applicant's statements, he does not appear to be in danger of being
convicted of the death penalty or the execution of such a penalty, because,
although he has asked, he did not refer to it.
3.B Analysis of the serious risk of torture, inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment
The lack of credibility of the claimant's statements
on general issues determines that there is no serious risk of being subjected
to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment if returned to the country of
origin.
With regard to paragraph 2, the applicant has not
provided any circumstantial evidence that there is a serious and present risk
of being subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment if he returns to
his / her country of origin.
3.C. Analyzing the serious risk of serious threats,
individual, to life or integrity, as a result of generalized violence in
situations of domestic or international armed conflict, if the applicant is
part of the civilian population.
At the same time, it is remembered that the state of
Moldova is not involved in an internal or international armed conflict in order
to analyze whether the applicant risks a serious, individual threat to his life
of integrity when he returns to his country of origin.
Internal armed conflict is defined in the
literature as a form of violence within a state, which has held a certain
degree of intent and a certain balance between the armed forces of the legal
and rebel governments, and which presuppose the existence of an organized civil
authority.
3.D.
Conclusion
Taking into consideration the above mentioned, Mr.
Plop Andrei's request does not meet the conditions stipulated in article 26 of
the Law no. 122/2006, with the subsequent amendments and completions, for the
granting of the sibidous protection.
The attached information on remedies is an integral
part of this judgment.
Dana
Oprea
Signature
|
PLOP ANDREI -Finalizarea Programului Internaţional de Stagii Parlamentare din Polonia.
Plop Andrei - I’m getting stronger step by step !
Diaspora este alaturi de JurnalTV! Cealalta Basarabie! - Plop Andrei!
Cealaltă Basarabie este despre moldovenii plecați și stabiliți peste hotare.! Talk show-ul este realizat de Leanca Grițcan!
Diaspora îl susţine pe Gheorghe Petic! Protest la concertul Șor, în Veneția!
Plop Andrei alaturi de liderii din opoziție la protestul din 7 aprilie 2009
Plop Andrei - Din ce cauza nu am revenit acasa de 9 ani! Sau de ce se teme Plahotniuc!
A plecat din țară după 7 aprilie! Andrei Plop nu a revenit în Republica #Moldova de 9 ani
Plop Andrei alaturi de liderii din opoziție la protestul din 7 aprilie 2009
Post a Comment