There is a lot of confusion about the February 24, 2019 elections. Even if the electoral legislation was modified, no improvements have been yet seen. The electoral process was personalized to the detriment of political parties, expert of the Institute for Development and Special Initiative “Viitorul” Ion Tăbârță stated in the talk show “15 minutes of economic realism”, IPN reports.
The exert said a part of the citizens know that the electoral system was replaced, but they don’t know why. Even if many know about electoral constituencies, they don’t know in what constituency they vote and who the candidates are. In villages things are simpler as the people know there where they should vote and the number of the constituency is thus less important. Things stand differently in the municipality of Chisinau, where many citizens don’t know what constituency they form part of, not mentioning the electoral contenders.
According to Ion Tăbârță, to amplify the confusion, the ruling party introduced the initiative to hold a consultative plebiscite. The first question is about the reduction in the number of MPs, while the second about the recalling of MPs. “We see that most of the political players ignore this referendum and the citizens do not perceive its essence and will definitely not be asked if they want to take part in the referendum or not at the polling place. They will be simply handed over the ballots,” stated the expert.
He noted that at the previous elections they discussed the electoral programs, ideology and economic programs and the dispute was between political parties, the politicians being representatives of parties. Now the situation is different and the parties became an annex of the political leaders who changed emphases in the political process. This is complete change of the logic of functioning of the political process. The shift of emphasis didn’t lead to the better functioning of state institutions. On the contrary, the impression that Moldova is considered a captive state amplified and the explanation is that the functionality of state institutions was subordinated to the interests of particular politicians.
