Delimitation of Construction-Related Offences from Other Economic Crimes in the Republic of Moldova: Doctrinal and Juresprudential Criteria and Challenges of Legal Qualification

Abstract

Construction-related offences constitute a distinct category within the broader spectrum of economic criminality, distinguished by their technical complexity and the interplay between administrative, civil, and criminal liabilities. The primary aim of this study is to examine the delimitation of these offences from other economic crimes in the Republic of Moldova, specifically fraud, abuse of office, and negligence. The research utilizes a doctrinal and jurisprudential methodology, relying on a comprehensive analysis of the Moldovan Criminal Code, relevant legislative acts, scholarly writings, and case law. Data sources include published judicial decisions, expert reports, and academic commentaries addressing the classification and qualification of construction offences. The study identifies key doctrinal criteria such as the nature of the protected social value, the form of guilt, and the specific subject of the offence and assesses their practical application in judicial practice. Findings indicate that overlapping elements between construction offences and other economic crimes often create significant challenges in legal qualification, particularly when acts involve both technical violations and fraudulent or negligent behaviour. The research further highlights the ambiguity of certain legislative formulations, including broad references to ‘public interest’ or ‘damage,’ which contribute to inconsistent judicial interpretation. Overall, the study concludes that effective delimitation requires clearer legislative definitions, systematic judicial guidance, and enhanced technical expertise within the judiciary. By addressing these gaps, the legal system can ensure more consistent enforcement and protection of both public safety and patrimonial interests in the construction sector. UDC: 343.53:69(478); JEL: K14, K19, L74