See related documentsElection observation report
| Doc. 15356
| 30 August 2021
Observation of the early parliamentary elections in the Republic of Moldova (11 July 2021)
1. Introduction
1. On 28 April 2021, following
the failure of the parliament to give a vote of confidence to the
President’s two nominees for Prime Minister within the legal time
frame, President Maia Sandu dissolved the parliament and established
the snap parliamentary elections to be held on 11 July 2021.
2. On 30 April, the Chairperson of the Central Election Commission
(CEC) of the Republic of Moldova sent the Parliamentary Assembly
a letter of invitation to observe these early parliamentary elections.
3. At its meeting on 28 May 2021, the Bureau of the Assembly
decided to set up an ad hoc committee comprising 20 members (SOC-7;
EPP/CD-6; EC/DA-3; ALDE-3; UEL-1) and the two co-rapporteurs of
the Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by
Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee), which
was given the task of observing the early parliamentary elections
of 11 July 2021. The Bureau also authorised a pre-electoral mission
made up of seven members – one member of the ad hoc committee representing
each political group and the two co-rapporteurs of the Monitoring
Committee. The Bureau approved the composition of the ad hoc committee
(Appendix 1) and appointed Mr Stefan Schennach (Austria, SOC) as
its Chairperson.
4. In accordance with the co-operation agreement signed between
the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Commission for Democracy
through Law (Venice Commission), on 4 October 2004, representatives of
the Venice Commission were invited to join the ad hoc committee
as legal advisors.
5. In order to assess the organisation of the election campaign
and the political climate that prevailed in the run-up to the election,
the Bureau sent a pre-electoral delegation to the Republic of Moldova
on 10-11 June 2021. The election observation mission wishes to thank
Mr William Massolin, Head of the Council of Europe Office in the
Republic of Moldova, and his staff, the secretariat of the Moldovan
delegation to the Assembly and the Permanent Representation of the
Republic of Moldova to the Council of Europe for their excellent
co-operation and contribution to the preparation and organisation
of the pre-election visit.
6. At the end of its visit, the pre-electoral delegation noted
with concern the deeply polarised environment and the chronic political
instability, which had led to the calling of these snap elections.
With regard to the legal framework, the delegation praised the return
to the proportional representation from closed party lists but regretted
that several other recommendations made after the previous elections,
which could have remedied many of the recurring problems and systemic
weaknesses, still remained to be addressed. It expressed concern
over the lack of transparent implementation of criteria for opening
additional polling stations abroad and the incapacity of the CEC
to effectively control the funding of the campaigns of political
parties. The delegation also drew attention to a number of long-standing
problems which had still not been resolved. The statement published
by the pre-electoral delegation at the end of its mission is set
out in Appendix 2.
7. For the main observation mission in July, the ad hoc committee
of the Assembly (PACE delegation) was involved as part of the International
Election Observation Mission (IEOM), which also included delegations
from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Organization for Security
and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE PA), the European Parliament, and
the election observation mission of the Office for Democratic Institutions
and Human Rights of the OSCE (OSCE/ODIHR).
8. The ad hoc committee met from 8 to 12 July 2021 in Chișinău,
where it met the leaders and representatives of the parties running
for election, the chair of the CEC, the head of the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission and his staff, the Heads of the Council of Europe Office
in the Republic of Moldova, the OSCE mission in the Republic of
Moldova and the European Union delegation, as well as representatives
of civil society and the media. The programme of the ad hoc committee’s
meetings is set out in Appendix 3.
9. On the day of the election, the PACE delegation split into
12 teams to observe the election in the capital, Chișinău, and
the surrounding area, as well as in Comrat, Anenii Noi, Causeni,
Balti, etc.
10. The IEOM concluded that the early parliamentary elections
of 11 July 2021 had been well managed amidst an improved legal framework
and that voters were offered a wide choice of alternatives, but
concern over the impartiality of the election authorities undermined
trust while inadequate campaign finance rules left potential breaches
unaddressed. The legal basis forms a sound basis for democratic
elections to take place. However, further improvements are needed,
particularly to legislation dealing with complaints and appeals,
as well as campaign finance oversight. Candidates were able to campaign
actively despite pandemic-related restrictions. Election day itself
was calm and transparent, and the process was overwhelmingly found
to be positive despite isolated cases of overcrowding. The media
played an important role during the campaign period. Numerous television
debates broadcast nationwide allowed all parties to communicate
their policies as well as providing information to voters. However,
the bias of major media outlets due to their party affiliation weakened
media safeguards on political pluralism.
11. The PACE delegation underlined that serious work now lay ahead
to form a government able and willing to undertake the reforms that
Moldovans are asking for, particularly concerning the deeply rooted
corruption and the lack of independence of the judiciary. Democracy
could also only flourish with a comprehensive media reform that
provides clear rules on transparent media ownership and forms the
basis for balanced and informative journalism. The press statement
published by the IEOM at the end of the elections is set out in Appendix
4.
12. The PACE delegation wishes to thank the heads and members
of the parliamentary delegation of the OSCE-PA, the OSCE/ODIHR EOM
and the European Parliament for their excellent co-operation within
the IEOM. It also wishes to thank the Council of Europe Office in
Chișinău for its co-operation and support.
2. Political
context
13. It should be underlined that
the Republic of Moldova has signed and ratified the European Convention on
Human Rights (the Convention, ETS No. 5) and its Additional Protocol
(ETS No. 9), which enshrine several principles that are essential
for effective democracy, including the right to free elections (Article
3 of the Additional Protocol), freedom of expression, freedom of
assembly and association, and the prohibition of discrimination
(Articles 10, 11 and 14 of the Convention). This implies the full
implementation of decisions from the European Court of Human Rights
in this field.
14. Since 1994, the Assembly has observed all elections in the
Republic of Moldova, with the exception of the presidential election
of November 2020, which had to be cancelled because of the Covid-19
pandemic.
15. The previous parliamentary elections took place on 24 February
2019. The PACE delegation concluded that they had been competitive
and fundamental rights had generally been upheld. With regard to
the electoral law, the new electoral system reinforced certain concerns
expressed by the Venice Commission, in particular the fact that
electoral players in single-member constituencies were reportedly
subject to undue pressure or manipulation from wealthy local business
leaders. With regard to the voting of Moldovan citizens living in
the Transnistria region, the members of the PACE delegation noted
that on the day of the election, the transfer of voters had been
arranged by means of buses and that hundreds of voters had waited
in and around polling stations; in addition, there had been fewer
members of precinct election bureaus as compared with other polling
stations. While recognising the efforts of the Moldovan authorities
to organise the election and being aware of the complexity this
involves, the PACE delegation was nonetheless convinced that the
competent authorities should have created equal and transparent
conditions for all Moldovan citizens, so that citizens living in
the region of Transnistria could have express their wishes freely
and in appropriate humane and sanitary conditions. This could also
have made it possible to avoid any allegations of pressure on voters
and political speculation.
16. Furthermore, the delegation noted with regret that certain
recurring problems had still been present during the election campaign,
including intimidation and isolated cases of violence against candidates, allegations
of threats against supporters of opposition parties, pressure on
public-sector employees to oblige them to attend election campaign
events during working hours, mass misuse of administrative resources, allegations
of vote buying, or the distribution of electoral gifts involving
charitable foundations associated with political parties.
17. Five parties and coalitions and three independent candidates
entered the 101-seat parliament:
- Socialist
Party (PSRM) – Zinaida Greceanii – 31,15% (39 seats, +10 seats)
- NOW Platform of DA and PAS (ACUM) – Maia Sandu & Andrei
Nastase – 26.84% (26 seats – new)
- Democratic Party of Moldova (PDM) – Vladimir Plahotniuc
– 23.62% (30 seats, +11 seats)
- SOR – Ilhan Shor – 8.32% (7 seats – new)
- Independent candidates (3 seats).
18. For the first time since independence, the Party of Communists
(PCRM) led by ex-President Voronin, failed to obtain any seats.
19. The results of the
24
February 2019 elections triggered a constitutional crisis. The Constitution
of the Republic of Moldova mandates that a government must be formed
within three months of official results of parliamentary elections
being proclaimed by the
Constitutional
Court.
20. On 8 June 2019 a
coalition
government led by
Maia Sandu was formed by the
Party
of Socialists (PSRM) and the
ACUM (NOW Platform of DA and PAS) alliance. However, the
Democratic
Party (PDM) petitioned the Supreme Court, claiming that the
government had not been formed in time. The Constitutional Court
interpreted the three-month deadline as 90 days, which meant the
deadline had been 7 June, and concluded that
snap elections should be held. The following day the Court suspended
President
Igor Dodon from exercising his presidential powers and duties for
failing to dissolve parliament, and appointed former Prime Minister
Pavel
Filip of the PDM as acting President. Filip subsequently issued
a decree calling for early elections for 6 September.
21. Igor Dodon and the PSRM–ACUM coalition called the process
illegal. After a week of dual government meetings, some protest,
and the international community mostly supporting the new government
coalition, Pavel Filip stepped down as prime minister on 14 June
but still called for new elections.
The Constitutional court repealed
the decision on 15 June effectively ending the crisis. Leader of
the Democratic Party Vladimir Plahotniuc fled the country the day
before.
22. However, the new government was subsequently ousted in a
motion
of no confidence in parliament on 12 November in a dispute over a draft
law assumed by the government to delegate a part of its plenary
powers to the prime minister to propose a “shortlist” with the candidates
for prosecutor general's position. A
new PSRM-PDM
government, headed by
Ion Chicu, was formed on 14 November 2019. The Democratic Party
left the coalition on 7 November 2020, during the
presidential
election, to allow the formation of a new government under the
new president. The Chicu cabinet remained in office as a minority
government, supported by the
Șor Party, with the PDM ministers replaced by independents.
23. On 15 November 2020, former prime minister and PAS (ACUM)
leader
Maia Sandu was elected president. Ion Chicu resigned as prime minister
on 23 December. President Sandu tried to appoint
Natalia Gavrilița to the position of
prime
minister twice in order to trigger early elections. The Constitutional
Court ruled on 23 February 2021 that the president should not have
nominated Gavrilița twice. She then nominated
Igor Grosu to the position on 16 March, who failed to get his government
approved due to a lack of a
quorum. The two failed attempts made early parliamentary elections
possible. However, on 31 March the parliament voted to impose a
60-day state of emergency to curb the Covid-19 pandemic, during
which a snap election could not be held. On 15 April the Constitutional
Court ruled in favour of dissolving parliament. On 28 April it declared
the state of emergency voted by the parliament on 31 March unconstitutional
as the decision of parliament which had instituted it had been adopted
in violation of the rules of procedure, having failed to establish
why exactly the executive need extended powers. On the same day,
President Maia Sandu signed the dissolution decree of the Parliament
and established the snap parliamentary elections to be held on 11
July 2021.
24. Parliamentary majorities in the Republic of Moldova have often
been unstable and volatile. In this regard, from 2016 onwards, the
co-rapporteurs of the Assembly’s Monitoring Committee have raised
concerns about the “political turnarounds” brought about by members
of parliament, which tend to drastically alter the parliamentary
majority. For instance, since the last parliamentary elections of
February 2019, some 30% of MPs had switched political factions at
least once, if not several times, which seriously put in question
the representativity of the Moldovan Parliament.
3. Legal framework
and electoral system
25. The legal framework for these
early elections is provided by the 1994 Constitution, the 1997 Electoral Code
(most recently amended in July
2020) and other relevant legislation, supplemented by the rules
laid down by the CEC, and is regarded by the IEOM as generally conducive
to the holding of democratic elections.
26. According to the Election Code, “(1) the Parliament shall
be elected for a four-year term by a universal, equal, direct, secret
and freely expressed suffrage. (2) Elections to Parliament shall
be conducted based on one national electoral district in which 101
deputies shall be elected.”
The minimum representation thresholds in
parliament are as follows: 5% for a political party; 7% for an electoral
block, 2% for an independent candidate.
27. Concerning the formula for mandate allocation, the Election
Code applies the d’Hondt formula and provides that “the Central
Electoral Commission shall assign the seats to candidates in line
with the order in which they have been recorded in the lists.”
28. Over the years, the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR have
issued many opinions on the various changes to the Election Code
of the Republic of Moldova as well as on the legislation on political parties.
29. The legal electoral framework underwent significant amendments
since the last parliamentary elections, in particular in 2019, including
the return from a mixed system, which had been introduced for the
2019 parliamentary elections, to a proportional electoral system;
the lowering of electoral thresholds for parties and blocs, the
repeal of a ban on donations from foreign incomes of Moldovan citizens;
the lowering of donation limits for individuals and legal entities;
the establishment of a campaign fund limit; and the re-introduction
of a campaign silence period.
30. Some other key aspects of the electoral framework were also
revised, including the lowering of thresholds for parties and blocs.
The overall 40% gender quota for candidate lists, first applied
in the 2019 parliamentary elections, was strengthened by introducing
a placement requirement that at least 4 out of every 10 candidates
on the lists must be of the same gender, which is a previous OSCE/ODIHR
and Venice Commission recommendation. A minimum turnout requirement
of one-third of registered voters was also re-introduced.
31. Nonetheless, other recommendations to improve the legal framework
remain outstanding. The IEOM deemed that further improvements are
needed in particular to the legal framework on the complaints and appeals
process and campaign finance oversight.
4. Election administration
32. The parliamentary elections
were administered by a revised three-level system of election commissions: The
Central Electoral Commission (CEC), 37 District Electoral Councils
(DECs), and 2 150 Precinct Electoral Bureaus (PEBs); completed by
150 polling stations abroad.
33. The CEC is a permanent body composed of nine members: one
member is appointed by the President of the Republic of Moldova,
the other 8 members by the parliament, taking into account the proportional representation
of the majority and of the opposition in parliament. The CEC composition
has to be approved by a parliament decision by a majority of the
votes.
34. 34. The CEC members are appointed for a five-year term of
office. The chairperson, the deputy chairperson and the secretary
of the CEC are elected amongst the CEC members with the majority
votes of all its members.
35. The DECs and PEBs are established for each election. The Election
Code provides that DECs will consist of an odd number of members,
at least 7 and not more than 11. At least three of them must have completed
higher legal education or public administration education. PEBs
are managed by 5 to 11 members; three of them being nominated by
local councils and the remainder by parties represented in the parliament, one
from each party. Each polling station includes between 30 and 3 000
voters.
36. Most IEOM interlocutors expressed confidence in the capacity
of the CEC to deliver on its mandate professionally in an open and
transparent manner, in keeping with the deadlines. However, some
interlocutors voiced apprehensions over the election administration’s
ability to maintain its impartiality with regard to establishing
polling stations abroad and for voters residing on left bank of
the Nistru river (Transnistria) and its decision not to prohibit
the potential transportation of voters on election day. The IEOM
noted that while women were well-represented in the election administration,
the CEC was composed entirely of men.
37. On 3 June, the National Extraordinary Commission for Public
Health adopted Covid-19 prevention measures for the electoral period
and the CEC distributed the necessary equipment and materials to
the PEBs. While the budget requested by the CEC for these elections
was only partly granted by the government before the elections,
this did not appear to affect the overall operation of the election
administration.
38. Voting abroad and notably the lack of transparent implementation
of criteria for opening additional polling stations became a major
campaign issue, which raised tensions within the CEC and beyond.
The Assembly’s pre-electoral delegation recalled in its statement
that the role of the CEC was to ensure the right of all citizens to
participate effectively in the elections. The number and the location
of polling stations must be in proportion to that of the voters
living in different countries.
39. On 5 June, the CEC decided to establish 139 polling stations
abroad
, which
was followed by public protests and statements from the government
and civil society, criticizing the low number of polling stations
and the CEC’s application of the legal criteria. On 8 June, the
CEC revised its decision and increased the number of polling stations
abroad to 146. Following legal challenges by seven political parties,
the Chișinău Court of Appeal annulled the CEC’s decision of 8
June, ordering it to revise the number of polling stations abroad,
taking into account the ministry for Foreign Affairs and European
Integration opinion. Subsequently, on 23 June the CEC increased
the number of polling stations to 150
.
40. The CEC initially decided to set up polling stations in Bender
and Corjova, localities in the Transnistria region. However, on
15 June, the CEC repealed its decision following discussions within
the Joint Control Commission and warnings of the Moldovan Police
Inspectorate that the electoral process could be jeopardised at
the polling stations in Bender and Corjova.
41. From 22 May, the CEC and its Centre for Continuous Electoral
Training conducted extensive online and in-person training for all
DECs and started training for PEB members on 16 June. The voter
information campaign organised by the centre addressing issues such
as accessibility of polling for voters with disabilities, vote-buying,
and epidemiological measures. The campaign includes podcasts, videos,
and social media posts in the state language and Russian, with sign
language interpretation.
5. Voter lists and
candidate registration
42. Every citizen who is 18 or
older by election day is eligible to vote, except those deprived
of the right to vote by a court decision.
The
voters’ lists are centralised through the State Register of Voters.
The registration is passive. Voters can check their data on the
voter lists online or at polling stations during a period of 20 days.
They can request corrections on the voter list to the CEC or the
PEC till the day before the election day at the latest. On election
day, voters omitted from the voter list who can prove their residence
within the boundaries of the considered precinct, as well as voters
from Transnistria, students and those with absentee voting certificates,
can be added to a supplementary voter list.
43. As of 21 June, 3 282 288 voters were included in voter lists.
According to the CEC, some 237 300 voters were registered without
domicile or residence and some 258 600 voters reside in Transnistria.
There is no register
for voters abroad and PS are established on the basis of turnout
from the last election, the pre-registration of voters and ministry
for Foreign Affairs and European Integration data.
44. No concerns were expressed with regard to the accuracy of
the voter register. The legal framework ensures the transparency
and accessibility of voter lists, with public display of voter lists
at the PEBs as well as availability of the lists in a searchable
and downloadable format online. Voters had sufficient opportunity
to request corrections of their details and submit complaints on
inaccuracies in voter lists to the PEBs until the day before election
day. The only long-standing problem regarding the lists is that
the law does not provide for an automatic removal of data on deceased
people from the voter register.
45. According to the Election Code, any citizen of the Republic
of Moldova eligible to vote can stand for elections.
He
or she cannot be a member of the military personnel, a prisoner
or a person with criminal records. The nomination period lasts from
60 to 30 days before the election day.
46. Candidates are required to present a list of documents in-person
for registration, which includes among others: protocols of meetings
held by the political party central or territorial body, by other
socio-political organisations, or by the electoral bloc to nominate
the candidate; for independent candidates, signatures collecting
lists with a sufficient number of signatures in support of such
candidates; candidate’s biographical data; candidate’s statement
accepting to run for the position he/she was nominated for; candidate’s
statement of wealth and personal interests for the last two years
preceding the year of elections as per the Law on disclosure of
wealth and private interests; declaration of personal responsibility
on non-existence of legal/judicial constraints to stand as candidate
or to hold a public office, non-existence of acts of final findings regarding
the disclosure of wealth and private interests, incompatibility
statuses and seizure of unjustified wealth, acts that are not prescribed,
etc.
47. The CEC registered 23 electoral contenders for the forthcoming
elections, including two electoral blocs, twenty political parties
and one independent candidate:
|
Building Europe at Home
PACE
|
Joint Action Party –
Civic Congress
|
Electoral Bloc Renato
Usatii
|
|
Shor Political Party
|
Action and Solidarity
Party
|
Electoral Bloc of Communists
and Socialists
|
|
Movement of Professionals “Speranţa
– Надежда” (Hope)
|
Democratic Party of
Moldova
|
Dignity and Truth Platform
|
|
National Unity Party
|
Democracy at Home Party
|
Political Party WE
|
|
Party of Development
and Consolidation of Moldova
|
Alliance for Union of
Romanians
|
Green Ecologist Party
|
|
Party of Law and Justice
|
People’s Power
|
Party of Regions of
Moldova
|
|
Party Patriots of Moldova
|
Party of Change
|
New Historical Option
Party (Partidul Politic Noua Opţiune Istorică)
|
|
Working People’s Party
|
Veaceslav Valico (independent candidate)
|
|
48. The Assembly delegation noted
that whereas all registered lists complied with the legal gender
quota and placement requirements (47% of the 17 991 registered candidates
were women) and eight parties had nominated more women than men,
only four lists were led by women and the number of women in the
top three positions remained insignificant.
6. Election campaign,
financing and the media coverage
49. In accordance with the law,
contestants could start campaigning after registration by the CEC,
with the campaign silence period beginning on 10 July, the day before
election day. It is prohibited to campaign for election prior to
candidate registration, which runs counter to international standards
on freedom of expression (including Article 10 of the Convention).
The law guarantees the freedom to campaign, with some limitations on
the use of colours, sounds, symbols and images in campaign materials.
Contestants have guarantees of campaigning on an equal basis and
with equal opportunities, and candidates enjoy certain legal protections. Candidates
holding certain high-level public positions must step down from
their posts. The law prohibits the misuse of public resources and
vote-buying is subject to criminal sanction.
50. The OSCE/ODIHR observed that contestants were able to campaign
effectively despite a number of pandemic-related restrictions, and
they were visible throughout most of the country. Most campaigning
was conducted through traditional and online media, social networks,
leafleting, campaign stands in public areas, door-to-door canvassing,
gatherings and billboard advertisements. In general, men were more
visible than women as speakers at campaign events. Further, there
was an observable absence of messages targeting women and national
minority groups during the campaigns.
51. The election campaign predominantly focused on tackling corruption,
post-pandemic economic recovery, the need to reform the justice
sector, regional development, education, decentralisation and social protection.
The PACE delegation was informed by different interlocutors that
the public discourse during the campaign was dominated by mutual
accusations over corruption. Numerous people with whom the PACE delegation
members spoke mentioned citizens’ lack of trust in State institutions,
largely linked to the corruption scandals. A large proportion of
the public remains convinced that corruption is widespread in the
country and that the judicial system is not sufficiently independent.
The country’s geopolitical orientation remained subject of discussion,
even if it did not dominate the campaign. Unification of the Republic
of Moldova with Romania is a key policy objective for the Alliance
for Union of Romanians (AUR) and National Unity Party (PUN).
52. Various interlocutors informed the PACE delegation of persisting
long-standing concerns, in particular cases of intimidation and
hate speech, particularly against women candidates and minority
groups; cases of misuse of administrative resources; allegations
of vote-buying intentions and concerns over possible large-scale
organised transportation of voters on election day. The delegation
deplored such practices in the election campaign and asked the relevant
authorities to take all necessary measures to eliminate them.
53. In the run-up to the election day, OSCE/ODIHR observers noted
that, at times, campaign rhetoric involved sharp criticism, personal
insults and intolerant language that had intensified at the end
of the campaign period, but they did not observe any instances that
would clearly have constituted incitement to discrimination, hostility
or violence under international standards. During the pre-election
period, OSCE/ODIHR had received several allegations of pressure
on mayors by law-enforcement and public-integrity agencies. On 16
June, the President called on political parties and State agencies
not to put pressure on mayors. OSCE/ODIHR had also received credible
allegations that civil servants, public sector workers and other
citizens had been pressured to attend campaign events. The mutual
promotion of the Şor Party and the more than 30 Merişor shops, that
are affiliated with this party, enforced a concern of the use of
economic incentives to create political loyalty to the party. The
IEOM recalled in its preliminary findings that any offering of inducements
to voters is against international standards as it erodes public
confidence in the integrity of elections.
54. Campaign finance is regulated by the Election Code and the
Laws on Political Parties. The Election Code stipulates that “expenditures
incurred for preparing and holding elections shall be covered from
the State budget”
and represent up to 0.2% of the State budget.
Half is distributed to parties in proportion to their performance
in parliamentary elections and the other half proportionally based
on their results in the last local elections. Parties and campaigns
are also financed through contestants’ own funds and donations.
Funding from
foreign enterprises, institutions, organisations or individuals
is prohibited.
Although the legal provisions regarding the
funding of election campaigns and political parties have been improved,
and reports on parties’ election spending were generally provided
in accordance with the requirements, many interlocutors were convinced
that significant financial resources could still have been raised
for electoral purposes and potential third-party donations and foreign
funding remained an issue throughout the campaign period. For example,
on 18 June, the Security and Intelligence Service requested the
CEC to take action to address suspected foreign support of the AUR
party’s campaign.
55. Contestants are obliged to submit financial reports every
week starting from the official launch of the campaign and a final
report for the entire campaign not later than two days before election
day. The CEC is responsible for campaign finance oversight and has
to publish weekly financial reports from contestants on its website
within 48 hours. The CEC may impose sanctions or request other competent
bodies to do so.
The CEC however admitted its incapacity to
effectively control the funding of the campaigns of political parties,
inter alia due to disguised funding
through concealed advertisements, manipulated opinion polls and
fake donations
.
56. The Election Code and the Audiovisual Code establish the framework
for media conduct during the election campaign. Broadcasters are
obliged to cover elections in an accurate, balanced and impartial
manner. Each contestant is entitled to respectively five minutes
of free airtime on each national television and ten minutes on radio
channels. Contestants are entitled to participate in debates that
national broadcasters are obliged to organise free of charge. Additional
paid airtime can be purchased up to two minutes a day per broadcaster.
57. The media environment in Moldova is diverse and includes 56
licensed TV stations and 62 radio stations, while the circulation
of print media is decreasing. There was no reported undue interference
into Internet freedom or online media outlets, contributing to independent
reporting and a plurality of news. At the same time the PACE delegation
was deeply concerned about the limited media pluralism due to a
very high degree of affiliation of media with the main political
parties, and the obscure nature of the sources of their financing.
For example, former PDM leader Vladimir Plahotniuc is widely believed
to be the beneficial owner of Prime TV, Publika TV, Canal2 and Canal3;
PSRM leader Igor Dodon – of Primul in Moldova and NTV; Ilan Șor
– of TV6. This party affiliation of major media outlets influences
the agenda of public debate and undermines the watchdog role of
the media. Besides, it raises doubts as to the fairness of the campaign
as the advertising media are controlled by these political parties.
Independent news production and investigative journalism need mostly
to rely on international funding.
58. The Audiovisual Coordination Council informed the Parliamentary
pre-electoral delegation that equality of access to the media for
parties and candidates was guaranteed by law. However, the delegation
was informed of cases of pressure, threats and verbal and physical
attacks against independent journalists. OSCE/ODIHR observers also
reported significant issues with access to public information, which
particularly hampered investigative reporting. The Audiovisual Council
itself issued two public warnings to the 10 TV channel for biased
coverage and disregarding provisions for viewers with special needs.
The same broadcaster was fined for not publishing its rules on campaign
coverage. All in all, during the campaign, some 48 debates were
held, providing a fair opportunity for the contesting parties to
present their platforms and debate with each other.
59. The OSCE/ODIHR media monitoring
revealed that public Moldova 1 was
rather balanced in its coverage of the major contestants’ campaigns
by providing 8, 15, 22 and 10% of news coverage to AUR, BeCS, PAS and
PPDA respectively. Other contestants received less than 5% coverage.
Prime TV devoted to AUR, BeCS, BeRU, PAS, PPDA and SOR 13, 11, 7,
19, 23 and 13% respectively. The tone on both TV stations was predominantly
neutral or positive. NTV displayed an explicit bias in favor of
BeCS and against PAS in both the amount of coverage and tone by
devoting 41% to BeCS and 24% to PAS; 70% of the BeCS coverage was
in a positive tone, while 69% of the coverage devoted to PAS was
in a negative tone. Both Jurnal TV and PRO TV showed favor of PAS.
On Jurnal TV 14% of coverage was devoted PAS, comparing to 12% to
BeCS; 31% of the BeCS coverage was in negative tone, while 35% of
PAS coverage in positive tone. PRO TV devoted 15 and 18% of coverage
to BeCS and PAS respectively, while BeCS was covered in 37% negatively
and PAS in 19% positively.
7. Election day
60. On election day the PACE delegation
split into 12 teams and observed the voting process in a number of
polling stations in Chișinău and its surroundings, as well as
in and around Comrat, Anenii Noi, Causeni and Balti. The PACE teams
assessed the exercise as one of the most positive observations based
on the respective experiences of the members of the mission.
61. In the polling stations observed, polling day was peaceful
and orderly, which was much appreciated by the observers, given
the polarised campaign atmosphere before the election day. The Assembly
observers noted no tension or campaign elements around the polling
stations, and no confusion, tension, excessive overcrowding, or
mass transportation of voters by buses observed in the polling stations
for voters from the Transnistria region, even in the difficult circumstances
where the polling station had been informed of its opening on the
eve of the election day. Some instances of transportation of voters
to polling stations were observed by other members of the IEOM and
allegations of vote-buying, especially targeting voters residing
in Transnistria, were made by some political actors during the day.
62. All PACE teams reported that international observers were
well received. There were representatives of the main parties in
all observed polling stations and the NGO Promo Lex had representatives
in about half of them. The accessibility of polling stations for
people with disabilities was noted by all PACE teams as the most recurrent
problem, though one that was to some extent offset by the use of
mobile voting.
63. Based on the OSCE/ODIHR statistics, the IEOM assessed opening
positively in all but one of the 114 polling stations observed.
Established procedures were generally followed, even if 15 of the
polling stations observed opened with slight delays.
64. Voting was assessed positively in 99% of the 1 253 polling
stations observed. The voter identification and electronic verification
was efficient, with only few isolated technical issues. The layout
of polling stations was adequate to conduct polling in 97% of observations.
However, overcrowding was reported in 5% of observations, resulting
from limited space inside polling stations and, at times, poor queue
control. Group voting was noted in 2% of cases. On some occasions
observers reported that video cameras were not focused on the ballot
box and covered a wider area within polling stations. Although ballot
secrecy was not compromised, people who voted could be identified
in the footage potentially exposing voters to undue influence.
65. IEOM observers noted that only around a third of polling stations
(32%) were accessible for independent access by people with disabilities
inconsistent with international standards.
66. The counts were also positively evaluated in all but 4 of
the 100 observations. The negative assessments related primarily
to the PEB’s omitting procedural steps, such as not establishing
the number of issued ballots by counting the signatures in the voter
lists (11 cases) and not counting the total number of ballots found
in stationary ballot box before separating them by the contestant
(22 cases). In one third of the observed counts the validity of
contested ballots was not decided by a vote of PEB members.
67. The CEC announced a voter turnout of 48.4%. The CEC started
posting preliminary election results live on its website, one hour
after the closing of the polls, thus contributing to the transparency.
68. Regarding health measures, they were generally observed but
as the day progressed, the members of the polling stations no longer
or no longer wore the mask correctly. Voters' temperatures were
routinely recorded, and a mask was provided when the voter was not
wearing one.
69. On election day, the CEC registered seven election-day-related
complaints, including two complaints on campaigning on election
day, one complaint regarding organised transportation of Transnistrian
voters and three complaints related to irregularities in voting
procedures. The last three complaints on voting irregularities were
forwarded to the DECs for their consideration and the others – to
the police.
70. The CEC announced the results on 12 July, which were recognised
by the Constitutional Court on 23 July:
|
PAS, led by Igor Grosu
|
774 753 votes, 52.80%,
63 seats (+48)
|
|
PECS, led by Vladimir
Voronin and Igor Dodon
|
398 675 votes, 27.17%,
32 seats (-3)
|
|
ȘOR, led by Ilan Șor
|
84 187 votes, 5.74%,
6 seats (-1)
|
|
Total number of registered
voters:
|
3 052 603
|
|
Total number of votes
cast:
|
1 480 965 (48,51%)
|
|
Total number of votes
cast abroad
|
212 434
|
|
Valid notes:
|
1 467 216
|
|
Invalid/blank votes:
|
13 749
|
8. Conclusions and recommendations
71. The PACE delegation compliment
the citizens of the Republic of Moldova on these elections, which
ran smoothly and peacefully despite the deep polarisation and negative
campaigning that preceded election day. As part of the IEOM, it
nevertheless shares the concerns about the impartiality of the election
authorities and their capacity to handle election disputes.
72. The legal electoral framework provides an adequate basis for
the conduct of democratic elections, if it is applied in good faith.
However, further improvements should be made into legislation dealing
with complaints and appeals, as well as campaign finance oversight.
73. With regard to the election campaign, the contestants were
able to campaign actively, except for in the Transnistria region,
despite some anti-covid restrictions in place and the fundamental
freedoms key to democratic elections were largely respected. The
voters had an ample choice of 20 parties, 2 electoral blocs and
1 individual candidate from among whom to select their preferences,
even if trust in the State authorities among the population remains
particularly low. The campaign focused predominantly on fighting
corruption, post-pandemic economic recovery, judicial reform, unemployment
and massive emigration/brain drain, and was mostly dominated by
mutual accusations over corruption.
74. The number and location of polling stations abroad remains
an issue that needs to be solved: competent authorities would need
to find a stable and systemic way to guarantee the right to vote
for its citizens worldwide, so as to enable Moldovans abroad to
carry out their democratic duty to vote without the undue sense
of political manipulation from different sides.
75. The voting in the polling stations observed by the PACE teams
was technically well organised, the members of polling stations
were co-operative with observers, and the voting process was transparent.
The delegation noted a few cases of non-compliance with voting procedures,
but they were non-intentional. A significant number of polling stations
were not accessible for people with physical disabilities. In some
polling stations there were queues because of the requirement to
respect social distancing.
76. Whereas in previous elections, there have been widespread
allegations of vote buying, controlled voting, or voter intimidation,
the PACE observers did not observe any of this on E-day.
77. The PACE delegation remains concerned about the bias of major
media outlets due to their party affiliation and underlines that
democracy can only flourish with a comprehensive media reform that
provides clear rules on transparent media ownership and forms the
basis for balanced and informative journalism.
78. The results of these early parliamentary elections appear
to validate the reasoning behind the political decision to dissolve
the parliament in April, the aim of which was to end the long-standing
tug-of-war between the various political forces and bring some steadiness
into the system. The Republic of Moldova has endured years of political
instability, corruption and scandals, which cannot be uprooted by
these early elections alone. However, these elections have changed
the legislative landscape: PAS has for the first time won an absolute majority
of seats on its own, and it is the first time since 1994 that neither
the PSRM nor PCRM have won the most votes or seats. Former PAS coalition
partner DA and the Democratic Party of Moldova (formerly connected
to oligarch Vladimir Plahotniuc, who fled the country in 2019) are
no longer represented in parliament for the first time in over a
decade. The new composition of the parliament will hopefully discourage the
long-criticised practice of “party hopping”.
79. The new elected parliament held its first session on 26 July.
On 29 July, Igor Grosu, the interim leader of PAS, was elected President
of Parliament. Natalia Gavrilița was appointed as Prime Minister-designate
the following day. On 6 August, the Natalia Gavrilița-led cabinet
of 13 minister was sworn into office with 61 votes, all from PAS.
The new government has announced that it will focus on reforming
the justice system, improving anti-corruption efforts, attracting
investment, creating high-paying jobs and raising pensions.
80. PACE and the Venice Commission are ready to continue the collaboration
with the Moldovan authorities to further improve the legal framework
and electoral practices in the country and to contribute to their implementation.
Appendix 1 – Composition of the ad hoc committee
(open)
Based on the proposals by the political groups
of the Assembly, the ad hoc committee was composed as follows:
Chairperson: Mr Stefan
Schennach, Austria
Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group
(SOC)
- Ms Marina BERLINGHIERI,
Italy
- Mr Antonio GUTIÉRREZ, Spain
- Mr Andi-Lucian CRISTEA, Romania
- Mr Stefan SCHENNACH, Austria
- Mr Christian PETRY, Germany
Group of the European People’s Party (EPP/CD)
- Mr Krzysztof TRUSKOLASKI,
Poland
- Mr Christian KLINGER, France
- Ms Laima Liucija ANDRIKIENĖ, Lithuania
- Ms Boriana ÅBERG, Sweden
- Mr Aleksander STOKKEBØ, Norway
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for
Europe (ALDE)
- Mr Jacques LE Nay, France
- Ms Diana STOICA, Romania
European Conservatives Group and Democratic
Alliance (EC/DA)
- Mr Alberto RIBOLLA,
Italy
- Ms Olena KHOMENKO, Ukraine
- Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ukraine
Group of the Unified European Left (UEL)
Co-rapporteurs AS/MON (ex officio)
- Mr Pierre-Alain FRIDEZ,
Switzerland
- Ms Inese LĪBIŅA-EGNERE, Latvia
Venice Commission
- Ms Katharina PABEL,
Austria, substitute member
Secretariat
- Ms Ivi-Triin ODRATS,
Administrator, Election Observation and Interparliamentary Cooperation
Division
- Mr Gaël MARTIN-MICALLEF, Legal advisor, Venice Commission
- Ms Anne GODFREY, Assistant, Election Observation and Interparliamentary
Cooperation Division
Appendix 2 – Statement of the pre-electoral
delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly
(open)
A pre-electoral delegation from the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) visited Chişinău on 10
and 11 June to assess the election campaign and the preparations
for the early parliamentary elections to be held on 11 July 2021.
The visit took place in a deeply polarised environment and
amid chronic political instability, which had led to the calling
of snap elections. The delegation regrets that, despite the apparent
political consensus on holding early polls, most political forces
appear to focus on confrontation, rumours and division rather than
trying to reunite society around key strategic issues. It nevertheless
salutes the fact that all major political forces have decided to
participate in this electoral process, which allows the Moldovan
people to make their choice from among a wide political spectrum
of parties and electoral blocs.
With regard to the legal framework, the Assembly’s pre-electoral
delegation welcomes the fact that, since the previous elections
in 2019, the Republic of Moldova has adopted changes to its Electoral
Code that have returned the country from a mixed electoral system
– which had led to criticism from the Venice Commission – to a system
of proportional representation from closed party lists. It regrets,
however, that several other recommendations made after the previous
elections, which could have remedied many of the recurring problems
and systemic weaknesses, still remain to be addressed.
The delegation was informed about a number of long-standing
concerns that persist, in particular cases of intimidation and hate
speech, including against women candidates and minority groups;
cases of misuse of administrative resources; allegations of vote
buying intentions and concerns over possible large-scale, organised
transportation of voters on election day; and a lack of effective
campaign finance oversight. The Assembly’s delegation deplores such
practices in the election campaign and asks the relevant authorities
to take all necessary measures to eliminate them.
A month into the election campaign, the political parties
and candidates have, overall, been able to campaign freely. The
CEC informed the delegation that the registration of parties and
candidates was inclusive. 17 parties and electoral blocs have been
registered to compete in these snap elections and two applications
are still pending.
The Assembly’s delegation shares the concern expressed by
most election stakeholders over the lack of transparent implementation
of criteria for opening additional polling stations abroad, which
has raised tensions with the CEC and which it observes is one of
the most disputed issues of the campaign. It recalls that the role of
the CEC is to ensure the right of all citizens to participate effectively
in the elections. The number and the location of polling stations
must be in proportion to that of the voters living in different
countries.
Another issue that gives cause for concern is the decision
by the CEC to set up polling stations in the Bender municipality
and the village of Corjova, which are beyond the effective control
of the constitutional authorities of the Republic of Moldova. Moldovan
citizens in the Transnistrian region have the right to vote, but
they should be able to exercise this right in locations where adequate
conditions of security exist, and where the access of national and
international observers can be ensured without compromising their
safety or creating dangerous precedents.
Many interlocutors highlighted the lack of public trust in
state institutions resulting from multiple corruption scandals and
the lack of independence of the judiciary. With regard to campaign
financing, while legal regulations on campaign and party finance
have generally improved and the parties’ election expenditure reports
are provided in due form, the CEC admitted its incapacity to effectively
control the funding of the campaigns of political parties, notably
due to disguised funding through concealed advertisements, manipulated
opinion polls and fake donations, inter alia.
The Audiovisual Co-ordinating Council informed the delegation
that equal access of parties and candidates is ensured according
to the legislation. However, the delegation appeals to the Council
to improve the transparency of its decision-making process. The
delegation remains concerned about the limited media pluralism due
to a very high degree of affiliation of media with the main political
parties, and the obscure nature of the sources of their financing.
This continuing monopolisation of media outlets raises doubts as
to the fairness of the campaign. The delegation asks the public
broadcaster in particular to ensure equal access and, most importantly,
well-balanced and fair coverage for all registered political parties
and candidates according to the legislation.
The PACE pre-electoral delegation regrets the lack of female
candidates in top positions of the party lists and calls on all
political forces to make enhanced efforts to achieve gender balance.
It recalls that the Assembly has observed all parliamentary
and presidential elections in the Republic of Moldova since 1994,
apart from the November 2020 presidential election, which could
not be observed because of the Covid-19 pandemic. The delegation
was informed that there was no significant increase in Covid cases
after the presidential election, which raises confidence in the
capacity of the Moldovan state authorities to provide adequate sanitary
conditions on election day. Nonetheless, many challenges arising
from the Covid-19 pandemic, notably economic and social challenges,
still remain to be addressed in the interest of the Moldovan people,
alongside the fight against corruption and efforts to improve the
independence of the judiciary.
The authorities of the Republic of Moldova stressed the importance
of objective observation of the coming elections; they assured the
Assembly’s pre-electoral delegation that all appropriate measures
will be taken to ensure equal conditions for all parties and candidates
participating in the elections.
The delegation held meetings with the President of the Republic
of Moldova, the Prime Minister ad interim, the Speaker of the Parliament,
the leaders of the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary political
parties participating in the elections or their representatives,
the Chairperson and members of the Central Election Committee, the
Chairperson of the Audiovisual Co-ordinating Council, the Chairperson
of the National Integrity Agency, representatives of civil society
and the media, and representatives of the international community.
The Parliamentary Assembly will send a 22-member delegation
to observe the early parliamentary elections on 11 July 2021.
Members of the delegation:
- Stefan Schennach (Austria,
SOC), Head of delegation
- Laima Liucija Andrikiene (Lithuania, EPP/CD)
- Jacques Le Nay (France, ALDE)
- Alberto Ribolla (Italy, EC/DA)
- Pierre-Alain Fridez (Switzerland, SOC), co-rapporteur
of the Monitoring Committee (ex officio)
Appendix 3 – Programme of the meetings of
the International Electoral Observation Mission, Chișinău, 8 to
12 July 2021
(open)
Thursday, 8 July 2021
09:45-10:00 Logistical briefing
10:00-10:15 Welcoming Remarks by the Heads of Parliamentary
Delegations
- Ditmir Bushati,
Special Co-ordinator and leader of the short-term OSCE observer mission
- Stefan Schennach, Head of the PACE Delegation
- David McAllister, Head of the European Parliament Delegation
- Pia Kauma, Head of the OSCE PA Delegation
10:15-10:35 Introduction on the country
- Claus Neukirch, Head of the
OSCE Mission to the Republic of Moldova
- William Massolin, Head of the Council of Europe Office
in the Republic of Moldova
- Ambassador Peter Michalko, Head of the European Union
Delegation to the Republic of Moldova
10:45 – 13:00 Information briefing of the OSCE/ODIHR Electoral
Observation Mission – Part I
- Welcome
and Overview of the EOM – Tamás Meszerics, Head of Mission
- Political Overview, Contestants and Campaign – Paul O’Grady,
Political Analyst
- Legal Framework and Electoral System, Electoral Disputes
– Marla Morry, Legal Analyst
- Election Administration, Voter Registration and Observers
– Rashad Shirinov, Election Analyst
- Media Landscape – Elma Šehalić, Media Analyst
- Safety and Security – Oleksandr Stetsenko, Security Expert
- Questions and Answers
Moderator: Vasil Vashchanka, Deputy Head of Election Observation
Mission, OSCE/ ODIHR
14:00-14:45 Panel on Election Administration and Legislation
- Dorin Cimil, President, Central
Election Commission
- Lilia Gutu, Chief of the General Department of Licensing,
Authorization and Monitoring, Audio-visual Council
- Tatiana Badan, President, Congress of Local Authorities
of Moldova
- Vasile Bolea, Member of Parliament, Chairperson of the
Legal Committee of the Parliament
Moderator: Mr. David McAllister, Head of European Union Delegation
15:00 – 16:15 Panel with Representatives of civil society
- Igor Botan, Executive Director,
Association for Participatory Democracy
- Nicolae Panfil, Director, Promo-Lex
- Alina Andronache, Partnership Centre for Development,
Gender representative
- Mihail Sirkeli, Piligrim-Demo
- Iulian Groza, IPRE / Mihai Mogildea, IPRE's delegate member
in the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections
Moderator: Pia Kauma, Head of OSCE PA Delegation
16:30 – 17:45 Media Panel
- Ecaterina
Mitin-Stratan, Director, TV Moldova 1
- Galina Vasilieva Newsmaker
- Valeriu Vasilica, Director, IPN press agency
- Ludmila Fruculita, NTV Moldova
- Petru Macovei, Executive Director, Association of Independent
Press (on online press)
- Nadine Gogu, Director, Independent Journalist Centre of
Moldova
Moderator: Stefan Schennach, Head of PACE Delegation
Friday, 9 July 2021
09:00-11:00 Briefings with representatives of the
political parties
9:00 – 9:20 Electoral Bloc of the Communists and Socialists,
BECS (PSRM / PCRM), Hayk Vartanian
9:20 – 9:40 Party for Action and Solidarity (PAS), Igor Grosu
9:40 – 10:00 Dignity and Truth Platform Party (DTPP): Andrei
Nastase
10:00 – 10:20 Şor Party, Denis Ulanov
10:20 – 10:40 Electoral Bloc Renato Usatii, Ilian Casu
10:40 – 11:00 Democratic Party of Moldova (PDM), Pavel Filip
Moderator: Ditmir Bushati, Special Co-ordinator and leader
of the short-term OSCE observer mission
11:15-12:30 Observation Procedure – ODIHR Core Team – Part
2
- Briefing with OSCE/ ODIHR
LTO Co-ordinator, Carlo Pappalarado
- Briefing on election day procedures and observation forms,
Rashad Shirinov, Election Analyst, and Max Bader, Statistic Expert
- Briefing with OSCE PA Staff on Information sharing, communication,
and other modalities
Moderator: Vasil Vashchanka, Deputy Head of Election Observation
Mission, OSCE ODIHR
Saturday, 10 July 2021
17:00-18:00 PACE delegation meeting with drivers
and language assistants for election day
18:00 PCR testing for the PACE delegation
Sunday, 11 July 2021
07:00- 21:00 Observation in polling stations
Monday, 12 July 2021
08:00-09:00 Debriefing, in person, of PACE delegation
09:00 PCR testing for the PACE delegation
15:30 Press conference
Departure of members
Appendix 4 – Press release of the International
Election Observation Mission
(open)
Moldova’s early parliamentary elections
were competitive and well run despite the inadequate handling of
election disputes and campaign finance issues, international observers
say
CHIŞINĂU, 12 July 2021 – Moldova’s early parliamentary elections
were well managed amidst an improved legal framework and voters
were offered a wide choice of alternatives, but concerns over the
impartiality of the election authorities undermined trust while
inadequate campaign finance rules left potential breaches unaddressed,
international observers said in a statement today.
The joint observation mission from the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly
(OSCE PA), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), and
the European Parliament (EP) found that the legal framework forms
a sound basis for democratic elections to take place. However, further
improvements are needed, particularly to legislation dealing with
complaints and appeals, as well as campaign finance oversight.
"On top of some longstanding challenges,
Moldova has been through many crises in recent years, and these
early elections took place in the context of a broader political
cycle, characterized by instability and political deadlock," said
Ditmir Bushati, Special Co-ordinator and leader of the short-term
OSCE observer mission. "Today, a new process begins. We now look
forward to working closely with our colleagues in the new Moldovan
parliament to find solutions to the shortcomings we have identified
and deliver concrete results for the people of Moldova."
Election day itself was calm and transparent, and the process
was found to be overwhelmingly positive despite isolated cases of
overcrowding. The deeply polarized environment did not prevent substantial
campaign themes from being discussed, including the economy, the
fight against corruption, social and welfare issues, and judicial
reform. The media played an important role during the campaign period.
Numerous television debates broadcast nationwide allowed all parties
to communicate their policies as well as provided information to
voters. However, the bias of major media outlets due to their party
affiliation weakened media safeguards on political pluralism.
“We compliment the Moldovan people
on these elections, which ran smoothly and peacefully despite the deep
polarization and negative campaigning that preceded election day.
Serious work now lies ahead to form a government that is able and
willing to undertake the reforms that Moldovans are asking for, particularly
concerning the deeply-rooted corruption and the lack of independence
of the judiciary,” said Stefan Schennach, Head of the PACE delegation.
“Democracy will only flourish with a comprehensive media reform
that provides clear rules on transparent media ownership and forms
the basis for balanced and informative journalism.”
Candidates were able to campaign actively despite pandemic-related
restrictions. Observers also noted that while campaign finance rules
are in place to ensure the transparency of both campaign contributions
and expenditure, their enforcement is lax and investigations into
potential violations are inadequate. At the same time, the impartiality
of the judicial and election authorities was called into question
by their handling of electoral disputes.
“I am glad that Moldova could organize and run these important
elections efficiently and smoothly, as was clearly observed in polling
stations, despite the continued challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic,” said
Pia Kauma, Head of the OSCE PA Delegation. “However, when looking
at the electoral process as a whole, some shortcomings, including
on campaign finance oversight and election dispute resolution, need
to be addressed to enhance transparency and further reinforce trust
in the system.”
The campaign atmosphere was generally calm, and the fundamental
freedoms key to democratic elections were largely respected. Towards
the end of the campaign, the sharp criticism and personal insults
intensified, but did not tip over into incitement to hostility or
violence. Preparations were managed well, efficiently and transparently
by the election administration. At the same time, doubts over the
impartiality of the Central Election Commission (CEC) were a concern.
Trust in the CEC was undermined by decisions that appeared to be
lacking in neutrality, including on the number of polling stations
set up abroad as well as for Transnistrian voters.
“We have observed a vibrant campaign
in the run-up to this vote, and Moldova clearly has a sound basis to
hold democratic elections, both in terms of legislation and technical
preparation,” said Tamas Meszerics, Head of the ODIHR election observation
mission. “More is still needed though to ensure a process that is
fully in line with the democratic commitments the country has signed
up to, building trust with the people of Moldova in the long term.”
Voters could choose from a broad range of political alternatives.
In addition, extensive online training offered by the national election
authorities for all members of the local election administration
was interactive and efficient overall, while the national voter
information campaign was comprehensive and inclusive.
“We call on all stakeholders to
show political maturity and responsibility and give priority to
the country's interests. The result of this election should be a
starting point from which the new government should accelerate genuine
and ambitious reforms,” said David McAllister, Head of the EP delegation.
“We will follow post-electoral developments closely and we'll be
ready to support the people of Moldova in implementing all the necessary
reforms.”
The international election observation mission to Moldova’s
early parliamentary elections totalled 313 observers from 41 countries,
consisting of 221 ODIHR-deployed experts and long-term observers, 59 parliamentarians
and staff from the OSCE PA, 22 from PACE, and 11 from the EP.
