Advocate reiterates that the general rule regarding the observance of the right to freedom and security presupposes the observance of the 72-hours term. Or, according to the provisions of Art.175, 1751 of the Enforcement Code of the Republic of Moldova, the execution of the preventive detention is ensured by penitentiaries, through the criminal prosecution isolators within the NAP. As required by international standards24, the People's Advocate considers that the preventive detention of persons suspected of committing the crime should be an exception rather than a rule. In separate cases, the preventive detention should be applied only in strictly necessary cases, as a measure of last resort, and should not be applied as a measure of punishment. In order to avoid the inappropriate application of the preventive detention, the widest possible range of alternatives should be available, less restrictive measures related to the behavior of the person suspected of committing the crime. Thus, the preventive detention must be an exception to the right to freedom and security, and be applied in cases where clear evidence is presented, accompanied by arguments, which would confirm with certainty the likelihood of committing the actions by the suspects. The arrest is an exceptional measure. As a result, the arrest may be ordered only in certain cases and only for certain reasons, which must be shown in a concrete and convincing manner in the decision of the body ordering it. In 2019, the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 5 of the ECHR by the Republic of Moldova in the cases of Ozdil and others, Gorea, Sirenco, Casu and Moscalciuc. In these cases, the European Court found problems with the arbitrary retention and detention of the applicants for extradition; granting insufficient compensation for illegal detention and in 3 cases insufficient reasoning for arrest25. The People's Advocate finds that the violation of the right to individual freedom and security of the person is caused by non-compliance with the existing legal framework and its improper application, due to which there are situations in which the legal term of 72 hours for the detention of persons is exceeded, and the application of the preventive detention does not register a significant decrease. 24 The rules for the application of the preventive detention, the deployment conditions and the measures to protect against abuse, are also to be found in the Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Rec (2006) 13 on research in the state of preventive detention; 25 https://crjm.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Nota-analitica-CtEDO-2019.pdf 17