Bulgaria, no.50.963 / 99, § 128). The Court therefore ruled that Article 8 of the Convention had been violated. The Court reiterated that a person who is subject to a measure based on national security considerations should not be deprived of all guarantees against arbitrariness. The People's Advocate prepared in 2019 the thematic Report "Observing the rights of foreign citizens in state custody", presented publicly26 in December 2019. The Report aimed to identify gaps in the field of protection of aliens and submit proposals intended to help national public authorities to ensure the rights of aliens in state custody. Following the comprehensive analysis of the situation in the field, the Report contains several recommendations submitted to the competent public authorities. In particular, it is recommended to delete paragraph 4 of Article 63 of Law no. 200 of 2010 on the regime of aliens in the Republic of Moldova, for the total exclusion of the possibility of return or removal of aliens in territories where they risk being subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, regardless of the risk to national security and public order. It is also proposed to bring Law no. 200 of 2010 on the regime of aliens in the Republic of Moldova in accordance with the Administrative Code, as well as the completion of Law no. 200 of 2010 on the regime of aliens in the Republic of Moldova, with provisions, which would expressly order the release from public custody of aliens who have applied for asylum or the granting of stateless status. Given the jurisprudence of the ECtHR, including in the case of Ozdil and others v. the Republic of Moldova, the results of the mentioned thematic Report, the People's Advocate sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs27 a proposal to improve the provisions of paragraph (3) of Art.55, paragraph (2) of Art.56 and paragraph (4) of Art.63 of Law no.200 of 16.07.2010 on the regime of aliens in the Republic of Moldova. The People's Advocate considers that the mentioned provisions do not offer the foreigner minimum guarantees against the arbitrariness of the authorities. Or, the person concerned must benefit from an adversarial procedure in order to be able to present his/her point of view and to challenge the arguments of the authorities. Otherwise, it may affect the principle of equality of arms. 26 27 http://ombudsman.md/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Studiul_Situatia_str%C4%83inilor_FINAL.pdf Letter from January 20, 2020 no. 12-6 / 4; 19