Parliament said it accepted most of the recommendations formulated by the Venice Commission concerning the electoral system change, but there were actually half measures, considers programs director of “Promo-LEX” Association Pavel Postica. In an interview for Radio Free Europe, the expert said the Commission’s opinion is actually consultative in character and it is Parliament that is entitled to amend Moldova’s legislation, but this will be a shame for the legislature, the Government and the whole country, IPN reports.
“For example, the Venice Commission recommended ensuring the existence of a broad consensus in society on the electoral system change. Here, Parliament said that it implemented this recommendation of the Venice Commission by ensuring major political consensus as the electoral system was modified by a significant majority of votes in Parliament. So, political consensus existed indeed, but there was no social consensus. This social consensus could have been achieved by a referendum, as many recommended, including participants in the public discussions staged in Parliament,” said the expert.
Pavel Postica noted that the legislative body didn’t hold a referendum on the approval of this law to achieve this national consensus and obstacles seem to be placed now to holding such a plebiscite. If such a referendum failed, it would mean that those politicians who voted in Parliament for introducing the mixed system were right.
As to the national commission for establishing single-member constituencies, the expert said the Venice Commission also formulated recommendations in this regard. “We ascertained that five of the seven recommendations that were fully implemented by Parliament were put into practice incorrectly and most of them refer namely to this commission, which should have been independent,” he noted.
According to Pavel Postica, the fact that most of the purely technical recommendations were neglected and that the multiple recommendations of the previous national and international election observation missions addressed to the Constitutional Court weren’t put into practice by Parliament actually shows that there is no will to adjust the legal framework.
Speaking about the visit to Chisinau paid by a joint delegation of the Venice Commission and the OSCE, the expert said this wasn’t asked by the national authorities. The opinion was requested by the international partners. In Moldova’s history, it is for the second time that the international partners ask for a Venice Commission appraisal of Moldova’s legislation. The mission will produce an opinion that the national authorities should take into account.
