Moldova, grouped among the poorest countries in Europe, continues to advance towards developing a stronger economy, reforming a cumbersome regulatory environment, cutting red tape, combating corruption, and adopting reforms aimed at improving the business climate. Still, although the government has been implementing a number of policies aimed at combating corruption and improving the business climate, companies continue to cite corruption as a significant constraint on their business operations in the country. Several sources suggest that the fact that corruption remains endemic in Moldova's state institutions illustrates that the anti-corruption initiatives adopted by the government are not effectively implemented.

Positive developments in relation to corruption and investment:

• In order to reduce red tape and the opportunities for corruption to occur, a number of steps have been undertaken. For instance, within business registration a 'one-window' approach has been implemented, which significantly reduces the number of documents and days necessary for business registration.
• In January 2009, a new Electronic Information System of the Licensing Chamber was established, which seeks to reduce bureaucratic barriers for private companies. Furthermore, a number of government Internet portals have been launched to make regulatory processes more transparent.
• In July 2011, the Moldovan parliament adopted a new national anti-corruption strategy, replacing the 2004 strategy. The new strategy envisages transparency of public money, including the political parties' finances, as well as reducing the executive's interference from prosecutors' and judges' work.

Risks of corruption:

• Moldova's pervasive corruption in the government's bureaucracy, the weak implementation of laws, and the cumbersome regulatory framework foster a business environment that remains among the most challenging in the region.
• The judicial system in Moldova remains weak, inefficient, and subject to political interference, and legal recourse does not guarantee citizens and companies an impartial ruling.
• Despite the passage of relevant anti-corruption legislation and the establishment of a special anti-corruption agency, the Centre for Combating Economic Crimes and Corruption (CCECC), the government continues to lack transparency and accountability and the CCECC often favours the government's interests over corruption investigations.
• Although the Law on Conflict of Interests of 2007 provided for the creation of an Ethics Commission responsible for handling conflict of interest issues among public officials, this entity was not created as of August 2011.