The charges, centred on claims of unlawful state interference in religious life, come as a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) prepares to submit a formal representation to the European Commission, urging a thorough reassessment of Moldova’s accession bid.
The document, seen by EU Today, argues that Moldova’s treatment of religious minorities—specifically clergy and faithful linked to the Russian Orthodox Church—raises serious concerns about the country’s adherence to European values and human rights standards.
At the heart of the issue is a written submission filed during the 59th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council by the Lithuania-based NGO Žmogaus teisių apsauga (Protection of Human Rights). The submission, referenced as document A/HRC/59/NGO/115, accuses Moldovan authorities of engaging in a systematic campaign of intimidation and discrimination against the Moldovan Orthodox Church, which is canonically subordinate to the Moscow Patriarchate.
The allegations are stark. The NGO cites multiple incidents, including travel restrictions placed on senior clergy, confiscation of religious items, arbitrary fines, and what appear to be politically motivated attempts to reallocate Church property.
One particularly troubling case involves Archbishop Marchel of Bălți and Fălești, a senior cleric who has reportedly been barred from undertaking religious pilgrimages outside the country. The most recent incident occurred in April 2025, when Archbishop Marchel was prevented from departing Chișinău International Airport en route to Jerusalem for the annual Holy Fire ceremony—a central observance in the Orthodox Easter tradition.
According to eyewitness accounts and a public statement by the Russian Orthodox Church, no justification was provided for the restriction. The Church characterised the move as a “violation of basic religious liberties” and an act of “state repression dressed in administrative formality.” It further called on international bodies, including the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), to investigate what it described as a sustained attack on religious freedom in Moldova.
Other voices have echoed these concerns. Rev. Fr. Daniel Seyfemihael, an official of the Ethiopian Orthodox Patriarchate based in Jerusalem, issued a sharply worded statement denouncing the Moldovan government’s conduct. “Such uncivilised and illegal acts against a hierarch represent a deep moral failing and a clear breach of international standards,” he said. “The international community must not turn a blind eye to this erosion of dignity and spiritual integrity.”
His remarks, published on 21 April by the Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church, lend weight to growing concern among religious leaders worldwide.
The April incident is not isolated. According to the NGO’s dossier, Orthodox pilgrims returning from holy sites abroad have faced invasive searches at border crossings and have been subjected to administrative fines without transparent legal basis. There have also been reports of confiscated religious items and personal effects—acts that appear to fall outside the boundaries of standard customs enforcement.
While Moldovan officials have not commented publicly on the incidents, the cumulative pattern presented in the report paints a picture of a state apparatus increasingly willing to penalise religious institutions associated with geopolitical rivals. The Moldovan Orthodox Church, which retains broad support in rural areas and among Russian-speaking communities, is seen by many in government as politically problematic due to its historic ties to Moscow.
More alarmingly, legal proceedings are reportedly underway aimed at transferring ownership of various Church properties from the Moldovan Orthodox Church to the Metropolis of Bessarabia—an ecclesiastical body aligned with the Romanian Orthodox Church. Successive Moldovan governments have backed the Metropolis of Bessarabia as part of a wider strategy to strengthen the country’s Romanian identity and foster deeper ties with Bucharest and Brussels.
Critics warn that such moves not only represent state encroachment into religious affairs but also risk institutionalising discrimination under the guise of national realignment. “The danger here is that religious freedom is being sacrificed on the altar of geopolitical preference,” said a Brussels-based human rights analyst who spoke on condition of anonymity. “If Moldova is serious about joining the European Union, it must demonstrate that it can uphold fundamental rights for all its citizens—regardless of their spiritual allegiance.”
Indeed, both the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union enshrine the right to religious freedom and explicitly prohibit undue interference by the state. Moldova, as a candidate for EU membership, is expected to conform to these standards as part of its accession process.
Domestically, the Moldovan Constitution guarantees the freedom of belief and the separation of church and state, though it does accord a special historical role to Eastern Orthodoxy. That balance, however, appears increasingly fragile under the current administration, which has taken a decisively pro-Western stance and publicly distanced itself from organisations perceived as having Russian sympathies.
While concerns about Russian influence are understandable in light of regional tensions, observers say this does not absolve the Moldovan authorities from their human rights obligations. “No government has the right to weaponise administrative power against religious expression,” said a legal expert familiar with the UN submission. “Selective enforcement and property seizures are not justifiable under international law, regardless of political context.”
The European Commission, for its part, has so far refrained from commenting on the substance of the accusations. However, the upcoming representation from the MEP may compel a response. The document reportedly calls for an urgent review of Moldova’s compliance with the Copenhagen criteria—the foundational principles that guide EU enlargement and require candidate countries to maintain stable democratic institutions, rule of law, and respect for minority rights.
If the Commission decides to act on the representation, it could delay Moldova’s accession timetable or introduce new conditionalities. While such a move would be diplomatically sensitive, it would not be without precedent. Previous candidates, including Turkey and Serbia, have seen their paths to membership stalled over human rights and governance issues.
There is also a growing sense within the European Parliament that Moldova’s trajectory deserves closer scrutiny. Several MEPs from different political groups have recently voiced concern over the lack of media plurality and increasing centralisation of power in Chișinău. The religious rights issue may now serve as a flashpoint in a broader debate about Moldova’s democratic credentials.
For now, however, the faithful of the Moldovan Orthodox Church remain caught in the middle. With their leadership facing travel bans, their property under threat, and their community stigmatised, the fear is that Moldova is drifting toward a model in which religious liberty is contingent on state approval.
As the EU considers its next steps, the message from human rights groups is clear: a country cannot claim to embrace European values while denying fundamental freedoms at home.
Whether the Commission heeds that warning remains to be seen. But one thing is certain—Moldova’s aspirations to join the European family will be judged not only by its foreign policy alignment, but by its treatment of those who pray under a different cross.
Click here for more News & Current Affairs at EU Today
Post Views: 682