Sergiu Ostaf, director of the Resource Center for Human Rights (CReDO), said the party-list proportional representation system used now in Moldova does not produce the effects that were projected in 1994, when this system was introduced. In the context of the proposals to change the electoral system discussed in Parliament, CReDO carried out a study to assess the systemic impact of the majority (uninominal) and mixt-member electoral systems.

In a news conference at IPN on May 10, Sergiu Ostaf said an electoral system exists to ensure the representativeness of the vote and mechanisms for making those who were elected responsible before the people. If the Republic of Moldova after 25 years chooses to set the ensuring of proportional representation as an objective, the current electoral system needs to be substantially modified by reducing the election threshold for parliamentary elections. If it chooses to ensure the individual responsibility of the elected official, the majority system is the most suitable one. If it chooses to ensure a stable government able to promote reforms, two voting systems are possible in this case – the simple majority one and the majority one.

According to Sergiu Ostaf, the electoral system should prevent the radicalization of society by division according to political, linguistic and ethnical criteria and should cultivate confidence in the institution of choice and in public institutions and appropriate management of political corruption risks by setting concrete objectives of the electoral system.

Therefore, the CReDO director recommends a system similar to the compensatory mixed system, with a majority component – 51 constituencies where the winner would gain at least 30-35% of the vote to ensure the necessary legitimacy or 17 constituencies, by three winners in each, and the blocked party-list proportional component (50 MPs chosen based on the percentage gained in the majority component), by respecting the requirements concerning gender equality and minorities.