Communicated on 4 June 2019

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 13451/15 Tatiana TRISTAN against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 4 March 2015

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the applicant ’ s conviction of a crime with which she could allegedly no longer be charged after the relevant criminal law provision had been amended. It raises issues under Articles 6 and 7 of the Convention.

QUESTION tO THE PARTIES

Has there been a violation of Article 6 and/or 7 of the Convention in the present case? In particular, could the applicant be convicted of the crime provided under Section 328(3 )( b) of the Moldovan Criminal Code and was the notion of a “person with public dignity powers” (“ persoană cu func ț ie de demnitate publică ” ) applied extensively to her detriment (see, for instance, S.W. v. United Kingdom , no. 20166/92, § 95, 22 November 1995 and Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no. 21906/04, § 138, ECHR 2008)? Did the law relied on to convict the applicant satisfy the “quality of the law” requirements of accessibility and foreseeability (see Kafkaris , cited above, § 140)?