In the article, the author shows that, in comparison with the definition of "human trafficking" provided by art.165 PC RM, the same definition stipulated at art.2 of Law nr.241/2005 is truncated and approximate. It is demonstrated that the sanctions, provided by par.(1) art.31 of Law nr.241/2005, is not a preventive type, but a punitive one. Also, the author comes up with arguments to support the idea that Law nr.241/2005 should have the status of an extra-penal completing law, and not to contain elements of a special penal law. It is revealed that the provisions of preventing and combating human beings trafficking stipulated in the corresponding international documents are not auto-executory and for direct application. The standards of international law in preventing and combating human beings trafficking must go through a transformation process in the national juridical system of Republic of Moldova, consisting in the adoption of appropriate juridical norms, including the penal ones. Similarly, it is concluded that there are some discrepancies of terminology type between the provisions of art.165 PC RM and article 2 of Law nr.241/2005, on the one hand, and art.3 of the Protocol of 15.11.2000 on prevention, repression and punishment of persons trafficking acts, especially women and children, on the other hand. In principle, art.5 of the Protocol allows such a deviation, subject to the fundamental concepts of the juridical system of the signatory state.