Comments
MOLDOVA TO LOSE LESS CASES IN ECHR FOLLOWING PRECEDENT SET BY ASITO INSURANCE COMPANY
Interview given to the economic correspondent of the Infotag news agency, Sergiu Balaban, by the representative in court of insured people who lost their funds, lawyer Pavel Chifariuca.
I.: Mr Chifariuca, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has recently decided to withdraw a request by a Moldovan plaintiff regarding the failure of the ASITO insurance company to fulfil the 1994 agreement on pension payments. The ECHR explained its decision by the fact that the insured party has already been awarded 900 euros in compensation as additional payment to pension, 2 thousand euros in moral compensation and 800 euros in expenses. At the same time, the agreement has been left in force. How many similar agreements have been submitted to the ECHR for examination?
P.C.: Currently, about seven similar cases involving ASITO are waiting to be examined by the European Court, while another 120 cases are at different stages of examination. Overall, about 100 thousand people have signed agreements with ASITO. At least, we have all the necessary information as regards 46,500 clients.
I.: How much money has already been paid for disputed agreements?
P.C.: So far, the government has paid 39 thousand euros on suits against ASITO, including moral compensation. Overall, about 20 cases sent previously to the ECHR have been reexamined. Part of the money was paid under the conciliation procedure, therefore, these sums may not be found in court reports.
ASITO stopped payments back in 1999 on the ground that the National Bank of Moldova had changed the base rate, while in 2001 a Chisinau court took a decision in favour of the insurance company. In 2004, the decision was backed by the Supreme Justice Court, after which ASITO lodged cases against plaintiffs with the aim of cancelling the agreements. Then, on the advise of the ECHR, and later following prosecution decision the case was re-examined in favour of pensioners.
I.: But why is the compensation paid by the government rather than by the company?
P.C.: As plaintiffs pointed in their suits and as the ECHR said in its verdicts, ASITO has signed a “secret” agreement with the government under which the insurance company should withdraw its case against the government from the European Court, while the government should help ASITO solve the problems with pensioners. Moreover, the government has long ago allocated 50 million lei to ASITO to pay insurance policies. Of that sum, only 4 million lei was spent on destination and nobody knows where the remaining sum is. The Audit Chamber studied the case and even a criminal investigation was launched but then the case silently “died”. Therefore, now the money is paid to plaintiffs by the government. Maybe the situation will change and ASITO will be forced to return the money. Such a proposal, regarding five cases, has been recently put forward by the Justice Ministry but the fate of this initiative is not known yet.
I.: Yet, why have the government and ASITO decided to meet the requests of the insured people?
P.C.: The ECHR has advised the Moldovan government and ASITO to reach a mutual agreement, saying that a precedent has already been set when insured parties won, which means that the verdict in all the other cases will be the same.
Currently, ASITO has also changed its stance. It does not put resistance anymore, working with every applicant and explaining them the difficult situation faced by the country in general and the company in particular. The company is still trying to cancel the “out-of-date” agreements on various conditions. Thus, the amount of funds returned to insured parties may exceed the initial sums paid by them to the insurance company from five to 25 times.
I.: So, should former and current insured people ask the company to abide by their promises?
P.C.: If previously ASITO responded to such requests with a categorical “no”, then now, after losing cases in the ECHR, it says “yes, but let’s reach an agreement”. Even before the ECHR took its first decision on ASITO, the company managed to change or disrupt contracts with about 10 thousand insured parties, part of which seek to change their decision now, claiming that they were misinformed. But such applicants do not believe that a decision could be taken in their favor as they consider that there are no grounds for this. Our next step is to help them.
