Author: Victor Pelin
“The intentions announced by the leader of the PSRM as to the deliberate thwarting of the effects deriving from the CC judgments should receive an appropriate riposte. In this regard, the pressure exerted by the responsible institutions and public opinion on the leader of the PSRM for his subversive actions aimed at the hidden federalization of the Republic of Moldova of May-June 2019 and the illegal financing of the PSRM should be resumed so that it even yields results…”
—
Remaining afloat
The Constitutional Court (CC) ascertained the circumstances that justify the dissolution of Parliament, which means the snap parliamentary elections are inevitable. The CC’s conclusion contributed to the total disorientation of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM) and its leader Igor Dodon. The last reached a dilemma – to provoke a rebellion or to comply with the CC’s decision and this way remove the artificial barriers to the holding of snap parliamentary elections. It is a difficult decision and therefore the leader of the PSRM prefers for now to refer to both of the invoked options. On the one hand, Igor Dodon speaks about the “usurpation of the state power through the agency of the Constitutional Court and Parliament is to pronounced, as it did in 2019”. On the other hand, he says the PSRM is ready for snap elections and only a dialogue with the political opponents – President Maia Sandu and the Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) – is needed for agreeing the details of the holding of snap elections.
The Socialist leader’s rhetoric about the usurpation of the state power by the CC judges is aimed at justifying a lost political competition. No one else than the leader of the PSRM Igor Dodon insisted on the Government’s resignation that is the fastest way to snap elections in 2021. Moreover, the leader of the PSRM made public his plan for defying the provisions of the Constitution and the CC’s case law ( min.28.05-31.22) in the eventuality of a parliamentary majority of the pro-European parties with representatives of bandits and mafia (see min. 07.00-15.21) being formed. Curiously, after Igor Dodon lost the presidential elections, President Maia Sandu followed almost exactly the action plan of the first. This was possible because Igor Dodon, not being good at doing calculations, made two unexpected gifts to President Maia Sandu:
- insisted on the resignation of the Chicu Government so as to cause snap elections;
- pushed the PSRM towards a coalition with representatives of the bandits and mafia (see min. 07.00-15.21) so as to thwart his own plan of inducing snap elections.
This way, it became evident that the whole political strategy of the PSRM was dependent on the outcome of the presidential elections – either the party’s leader won or lost the elections. By losing the presidential elections, Igor Dodon unbalanced the whole activity of the PSRM.
Involvement of foreign factor in chess game of PSRM’s leader
In connection with the aforementioned, the Socialist leader’s threat to the CC members and the invoking of the usurpation of the state power, as in June 2019, lacks any relevance. Moreover, this kind of threats only spoils the image of the PSRM. The political context of 2019 was very specific, being marked by the involvement of the foreign factor:
- first of all, the situation of 2019 was shaped mainly by the PSRM, which could call the Parliament sitting for structuring and forming the working bodies by a simple call of the oldest MP – Socialist Eduard Smirnov. It is yet not known why the PSRM hesitated then to call the sitting of the legislative body;
- the behavior of the Socialist parliamentary group was coordinated with the partners from Moscow. The visit made on April 16, 2019 by the whole parliamentary group of the PSRM to Moscow had a decisive impact on the behavior of the PSRM, including on the refusal to convoke the siting to agree the internal organization of Parliament. For instance, as Socialist MP Ștefan Gațcan didn’t go to Moscow as he was elected in March 2010, he had a dissident and hesitating behavior in parts;
- the secret negotiations of President Igor Dodon with the executive coordinator Vlad Plahotniuc concerning the federalization of the Republic of Moldova by the Kozak plan became known unexpectedly, showing the very subtle external involvement of the political circles from Moscow in the political situation in the Republic of Moldova;
- coordinator Vlad Plahotniuc’s refusal to sign the secret plan for the federalization of the Republic of Moldova caused a response reaction of Moscow that send Dmitry Kozak to Chisinau. After this visit, Igor Dodon changed his mind;
- Igor Dodon’s care for the financing of the PSRM was revealed and deserves to be investigated. Public opinion could see that if Vlad Plahotniuc had signed the secret plan for Moldova’s federalization, Igor Dodon would have obtained two sources of financing for the PSRM – from GAZPROM and from Plahotniuc, through the agency of Costea and Cornel.
But Igor Dodon’s chess game was exposed by Plahotniuc, who refused to sign the secret federalization plan. Evidently, in such circumstances, the only way out of the critical situation in which Igor Dodon and the PSRM found themselves was to form a coalition with the ACUM Bloc for neutralizing Vlad Plahotniuc’s influence. These details are very important now that the leader of the PSRM unfoundedly says that the CC and President Maia Sandu are at the beck and call of Western political circles. The truth is that since 2014, when Igor Dodon supported the annexation of Crimea by Russia in exchange for the personal support of President Putin for the PSRM at the parliamentary elections, he has said that the foreign influence on the Republic of Moldova is a banality.
Difference between CC’s behavior CC in 2019 and at present
The invoking by the leader of the PSRM of the usurpation of the power by the CC for the reason that the Court ascertained the circumstances that justify the dissolution of Parliament is out of place. In 2019, there were many questions as to the CC’s decisions:
- adoption of a series of decisions favorable to Vlad Plahotniuc and the Democratic Party of Moldova (PDM), by eluding procedures. However, the CC decisions of June 2019 were based on the absence of the administrate bodies of the legislature, which weren’t even constituted due to the PSRM’s inaction;
- deliberate modification of the CC’s case law – annulment of the own decisions – for the reason that new circumstances appeared after June 14, 2019. Evidently, the new circumstances appeared immediately after Vlad Plahotniuc fled the country;
- the CC members voluntary tendered their resignation after they had to admit that circumstances that could not be envisioned when the troublesome decisions were adopted appeared after the executive coordinator fled the country.
Nothing of the aforementioned can be imputed to the current composition of the CC after its April 15, 2021 judgment. Moreover, in 2019, during a week, there had been real duality of power in the state, which was supported by protesting groups on one side and on the other side. The fleeing by Plahotniuc and Shor, the last being the supplier of paid protesters, helped solve the situation and return to constitutionality. Currently, Igor Dodon and the PSRM cannot claim that they have the capacity to organize a rebellion, as the Socialists leader asserts. For example, we remember the march to Chisinau after the law on the functioning of languages was declared unconstitutional. That event didn’t take place owing to the absence of support from the citizens. In this connection, Igor Dodon’s threats to the CC and the non-observance of the CC’s judgment can serve as a pretext for resuming the investigation of the special relations of the leader of the PSRM with Vlad Plahotnicu and the illegal financing of the PSRM.
Igor Dodon’s justice
The leader of the PSRM is yet right when he says that the organization of snap parliamentary elections should be preceded by consultations between President Maia Sandu and parliamentary parties. The socioeconomic and pandemic crises require such consultations. Therefore, President Maia Sandu would act correctly if she reaches a compromise with the parliamentary parties before signing the decree on the dissolution of Parliament and calling of snap elections.
The proper organization of snap elections implies correct, balanced decisions concerning the composition of the Central Election Commotion (CEC), which is to manage the electoral process, but whose mandate expires in June 2021; identification of financial resources for holding the elections; solving of problems concerning the electoral process in times of a pandemic, etc.
Conclusions
The Socialist leader’s lack of consistency unbalances the whole activity of the PSRM. Consequently, President Maia Sandu during four months in office managed to obtain the right to dissolve Parliament. Her predecessor Igor Dodon could not obtain the dissolution of Parliament throughout his four-year tenure. Firm this viewpoint, Maia Sandu’s consistency becomes conspicuous against Igor Dodon’s incapacity to deliver his electoral promises. Moreover, the leader of the PSRM appeared as a renegade after abandoning the declared goal of dissolving Parliament, which had been pursued for four years.
The political combinations of the leader of the PSRM are detrimental to the party’s image. The invoking of the usurpation of the state power by the CC following the formation of a parliamentary majority with the MPs affiliated to the fugitive usurper Vlad Plahotniuc and the main suspect in the bank fraud case Ilan Shor looks like an aberration of unimaginable proportions.
The intentions announced by the leader of the PSRM as to the deliberate thwarting of the effects deriving from the CC judgments should receive an appropriate riposte. In this regard, the pressure exerted by the responsible institutions and public opinion on the leader of the PSRM for his subversive actions aimed at the hidden federalization of the Republic of Moldova of May-June 2019 and the illegal financing of the PSRM should be resumed so that it even yields results.
Source: https://www.ipn.md/en/
Comments are closed.