THE CRIME OF MONEY LAUNDERING IN THE CONTEXT OF THE EXTRATERRITORIAL REGIME PROVIDED FOR IN ART. 243 PARA. (4) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

ANDREI PÂNTEA
PhD, Associate Professor, “Ștefan cel Mare” Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Republic of Moldova
ORCID: 0000-0002-4865-421X
Email: andreipantea.posta@gmail.com

CRISTINA CEBAN
PhD, Associate Professor , Free International University of Moldova (ULIM), Republic of Moldova
ORCID: 0000-0002-4971-3496
Email: cristinaceban810@gmail.com

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24818/cike2025.94

Pages: 751–758

📄 Download PDF

Abstract

This paper examines money laundering with emphasis on the extraterritorial regime established by art. 243 para. (4) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova. Against the backdrop of intensifying cross-border financial crime, the national framework seeks to extend criminal jurisdiction to prevent impunity and strengthen anti-money laundering measures.

The study compares domestic provisions with international instruments, including Directive (EU) 2018/1673, the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, and the Council of Europe Warsaw Convention on laundering, confiscation, and terrorist financing. The objective is to assess whether the Moldovan regime adequately addresses transnational laundering schemes while ensuring compliance with international standards.

Methodologically, the research combines doctrinal and comparative analysis of UNCAC, the Warsaw Convention, and EU Directive 2018/1673 with a detailed review of art. 11 and 243 of the Moldovan Criminal Code. A case study further tests theory against practice.

Findings show broad alignment with UNCAC and the Warsaw Convention, and functional convergence with EU norms, despite Moldova’s non-member status. Nonetheless, gaps remain: uneven international assistance, uncertainties on predicate offences across jurisdictions, and risks of parallel proceedings. To mitigate such conflicts, the paper proposes a prioritization framework based on seriousness of effects, evidence location, and victim nationality. It also recommends clarifying legislative terms, enhancing asset recovery mechanisms, and integrating non bis in idem safeguards.

The study concludes that art. 243 para. (4) is a proportionate instrument against transnational laundering, provided it is supported by robust cooperation and uniform interpretation. The proposals advance practical guidance for applying extraterritorial jurisdiction and increasing coherence, predictability, and efficiency in Moldova’s anti-money laundering framework.

 

Keywords: money laundering, extraterritorial jurisdiction, financial crime, international cooperation, transnational organized crime, criminal law. JEL Classification: K14, K42, F55

JEL Classification: K14, K42, F55

References

    2. Council of Europe. (1984). Protocol No. 7 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Strasbourg, 22 November. Available at: https://www.coe.int[Accessed 1 September 2025].
    3. Council of Europe. (2005). Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds of Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (Warsaw Convention). Adopted in Warsaw, 16 May. Ratified by the Republic of Moldova through Law No. 44 of 27 March 2008. Published in Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova, No. 81–83, 22 April 2008.
    4. European Union. (2018). Directive (EU) 2018/1673 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2018 on combating money laundering by criminal law. Official Journal of the European Union, L 284, 12 November, pp. 22–30.
    5. Financial Action Task Force (FATF). (2023). International standards on combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism & proliferation. Available at: https://www.fatf-gafi.org[Accessed 29 September 2025].
    6. Financial Action Task Force (FATF). (2023). Standards on money laundering and international cooperation. Available at: https://www.fatf-gafi.org[Accessed 29 September 2025].
    7. Global Witness. (2015). Laundromats and Loopholes: How illicit financial flows escape detection. London: Global Witness.
    8. Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP). (2014). The Russian Laundromat Exposed. [online] Available at: https://www.occrp.org/en/laundromat[Accessed 19 September 2025].
    9. Pântea, A. and Ceban, C. (2022). Aspects regarding the application of the non bis in idemprinciple in the criminal practice of the CJEU. In: Materials of the International Symposium “Economic and legal aspects of digitalization in the context of globalization”, 4–5 March 2022, pp. 141–146. ISBN 978-9975-3527-3-4.
    10. Republic of Moldova. (2002). Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova No. 985 of 18 April 2002. Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova, No. 72–74, 14 April 2009, art. 195. Amended by Law No. 136 of 6 June 2024, Official Gazette, No. 245–246, 7 June 2024, art. 353 (in force 7 September 2024).
    11. Savu, A. (2018). General criminal law. General part. Bucharest: Universul Juridic.
    12. Service for the Prevention and Combating of Money Laundering (SPCSB). (2018). Annual report on activities to prevent and combat money laundering in the Republic of Moldova. Chisinau: SPCSBL.
    13. Transparency International. (2022). Anti-money laundering efforts in Eastern Europe. Available at: https://www.transparency.org[Accessed 29 September 2025].
    14. United Nations. (2003). United Nations Convention against Corruption, New York, 31 October. Available at: https://www.unodc.org[Accessed 1 September 2025].
    15. United Nations. (2004). United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention). Available at: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/organized-crime/intro/UNTOC.html[Accessed 29 September 2025].
    16. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). (2023). Money laundering and global challenges. Available at: https://www.unodc.org[Accessed 29 September 2025].

     

     

Scroll to Top