V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The right to a fair trial is fundamental to democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights as it provides a mechanism for the protection of democratic values and other human rights, and guarantees procedural justice for individuals charged with the commission of criminal acts. Recent legislative reform in the Republic of Moldova has resulted in a progressive legal framework with the potential to ensure compliance with international fair trial standards. Provisions guaranteeing the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings are found in the Constitution; the Criminal Procedure Code; the Law on Judicial Organization; the Law on the Status of Judges; the Law on the Superior Council of Magistrates; the Law on StateGuaranteed Legal Aid; the Law on the Status and Organization of the Activity of Court Clerks; the Law Regarding the Authorization and Remuneration of Interpreters and Translators Engaged by the Superior Council of Magistrates, Ministry of Justice, Prosecutor����������� ’���������� s Office, Criminal Investigation Bodies, Courts, Notaries, Lawyers and Court Bailiffs; other legislation; and numerous decisions by the Superior Council of Magistrates. Where contradiction exists between national law and international human rights treaties to which Moldova is a party, international law prevails. The European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in particular, functions as an integral part of the national legal system and is to be applied directly. The jurisprudence of the European Court is binding on the courts of Moldova and takes priority over incompatible national legal provisions. Despite accomplishments in the improvement of fair trial standards during the implementation of the Trial Monitoring Programme in Moldova, a number of problems still require attention. In particular, the letter of the law provides standards which are not always adequately implemented in practice. Findings of the TMP lead to the overall conclusion that the legacy of the past continues to influence the Moldovan judiciary, negatively impacting compliance in fact with both international and national fair trial standards. One of the primary factors working against the optimum performance of judges and other officials is the tradition of the judiciary������������������������������������������������������ ’����������������������������������������������������� s subordination to, and dependence on, the political branches. The judiciary������������������������������������������������������������� ’������������������������������������������������������������ s lower ranking within the governmental system is evidenced by insufficient budget allocations resulting in inferior court physical infrastructures and ineffective operating systems. Courthouses in disrepair, insufficient space and equipment, excessive workloads, a low level of salaries and insufficient quality of human resources all negatively affect the performance of judges and other officials. These conditions must be addressed through capital and operating expenditures, support for the modification of operational frameworks, and the acquisition of new competencies and skills by officials to facilitate a decisive step toward the practical implementation of fair trial standards. The operational culture within the system of justice continues to be influenced by the prevailing attitude that the judiciary is an instrument to “fight criminality” rather than a neutral and objective arbiter. This attitude, coupled with a weak commitment to professional ethics encouraging a dignified and compassionate delivery of justice, often results in accusatorial bias that imperils a range of fair trial guarantees and undermines public trust in the institution of the court. Judges, in particular, should recognize that in the current 77