April 2009 vandalism and camomile guessing, Info-Prim Neo analysis, REPEAT of May 17, 2010

One year after the April 2009 events, the investigations conducted into them did not produce many results, probably because they are based on guessing on camomile: “he loves me – he loves me not.” The special parliamentary commission of inquiry that presented its report ten days ago, through its members of the Alliance for European Integration reached the conclusion that there had been no coup attempt. At the same time, the Communist Opposition and its representatives in the commission reiterated the position that a coup was attempted in April last year. Yet, related assumptions have been made during a year. Neither of the parties argued their positions because they couldn't or did not want to answer the main questions as regards the organizers, the provokers and the persons who committed the acts of vandalism and devastated the Parliament Building and the Presidential Office. All the other actions taken in that period were either within normality and democracy (meetings, marches, protest declarations, etc.) or led to the appearance of 'heroes', for example the police officers and judges who were involved in the maltreatment of the protesters in the Great National Assembly Square and in police stations. It is true that the 'heroes' were identified despite the efforts made by the special parliamentary commission rather than as a result of its actions. For example, the Mayor of Chisinau Dorin Chirtoaca stated on a radio station, immediately after the report was presented, that the members of the parliamentary commission did not see the pictures taken by the video cameras placed on the Government Building, which show police officer maltreating protesters in Chisinau's central square, even if the chairman of the commission Vitalie Nagacevschi had them. For his part, Vitalie Nagacevschi said earlier on a TV channel that the high-ranking officers of the Ministry of the Interior, who were suspected of involvement in the maltreatment of the protesters, will not be suspended so as not to affect the investigation, because “they do not have other sources of livelihood” and because “they have to repay loans to banks”. But the former lawyer Nagacevschi, who presented numerous cases at the ECHR, knows very well that the given arguments cannot be rendered at the High Court. The identification and punishment of the organizers and instigators of the acts of vandalism and maltreatment that resulted in deaths and destruction is more than a goal. If their names are not revealed, the role and performance of the state organizations during the April events cannot be assessed. But the assessment is needed in order to formulate systemic guarantees (legislative, administrative, educational, etc.) that such events will not repeat in the future. One of the goals announced by the parliamentary commission of inquiry was to assess the performance of all the state institutions during the April 2009 protests. Undoubtedly, the state institutions had been involved in the preparation of the April events, including the police and secret services, and participated directly or indirectly in them. The parliamentary commission of inquiry was to establish clearly what role they played in the April events and if their actions were legal and professional. In an analysis published on April 15, 2009, as there was no other relevant information, Info-Prim Neo employed sound judgments about the possible involvement of the secret services in the organization of the April 7, 2009 events. The suppositions were based on the opinion that the then Opposition, which was weak and scattered, was incapable of taking so many people to the streets within such a short period of time” {“An inevitable question arises here: Who is capable of staging such events in a record period of time? There are several variants of answers to this question: 1. A party or a coalition of partiers that do not form part of the Opposition and are much better organized and disciplined, with significant human and financial resources, with well-planned techniques and tactics; 2. The state institutions, including the police and the secret services, which should permanently have infiltrated agents in all the areas and institutions, organizations and companies with a certain weight; 3. The third variant is a combination of the first and second variants; 4. The aliens. Mobilized by the Opposition or the power, it seems that the crowd was conducted by well-trained persons whose task was to incite the people to violence and acts of vandalism, whose effects were calculated long ago. (http://info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2009/04/15&ay=22704)} In a year, even if two commissions of inquiry investigated those events, one of which was set up by the Prosecutor General's Office, the civil society continues to make assumptions and possesses practically the same information as at the beginning. Surely, the secret services played a certain role in preparing the April events even if they did not organize them. The former head of the Security and Information Serviceman Artur Reshetnikov said trenchantly he possessed information that a coup was being staged. If he knew, why didn't he use the instruments he had to prevent it? In this connection, the Prosecutor General's Office announced that Artur Reshetnikov ordered destroying certain information about the April 2009 events. If this is true, what did those documents contain? Were they among the secret documents that the former Minister of the Interior Gheorghe Papuc did not return? Minister of Justice Alexandru Tanase gave clear indications that the parliamentary commission should have taken account of. “There were several hundred instigators. Many people saw the instigators and remember how they were dressed and how they were destroying everything around... It is not easy to prove the guilt of several hundred specially trained persons who were directed by professionals,” the minister stated for Info-Prim Neo {(http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&x=&ay=29969)} . Can the purpose of the investigations be formulated more clearly? Earlier, the press reported that persons from the criminal underworld were among the instigators of the acts of vandalism in April last year, including about 150 prisoners. If this is true, was it difficult to identify those who could bring these persons to the central square? Despite its status and powers, the parliamentary commission of inquiry could not cast much light on those events and did not provide guarantees that the April events will never repeat. We do not think that the modest results achieved by the commission are due to its limited capacities and resources, including financial and human. “You should not expect startling revelations,” Vitalie Nagacevschi said long before the finalization of the report. There can be other reasons that are known only by a narrow circle of people. This circle can be as narrow as not to include the caretaker President or the Mayor of Chisinau, who lead the Liberal Party that forms part of the government coalition. They often tried to make the two commissions say more than they know about the April 2009 events by their actions, but they most probably do not have other instruments for achieving their goals. As there is no other information, the society continues to make suppositions: An [optimistic version] cannot be formulated because the available information is insufficient and not credible. [Semi-optimistic version:] After going through the most serious sociopolitical crisis that happened after the Nistru war, as the April 2009 events are described, the Moldovan political class became more mature. The government coalition and the Opposition are careful not to take steps that can lead to their mutual destruction. The ruling parties avoid saying everything they know about the former government, while the current Opposition avoids saying what they know about the former Opposition. The optimistic and credible side of the version is that such an approach can be supported by Moldova's international partners that have their own understanding of political reconciliation in Moldova. “The aim of this investigation should not be witch hunting and not be used for narrow purposes of political propaganda, but for the purposes of the political class to come together to avoid such dramatic clashes that occurred and that ultimately also resulted in a loss of life,” EU Special Representative for Moldova Kalman Mizsei told Info-Prim Neo in an interview. {(http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2010/03/01&ay=29134)}. “The commission... should be very considerate in its analysis and be led by the general purpose of political reconciliation. What I find good is that two such consummate party warriors as Mr. Nagachevschi and Mr. Mishin {Vadim Misin, Communist lawmaker and a member of the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the April events – IPN} have visibly found common sense and common language in the way they are managing the process,” the European official said. If things stand like this, in the future we may have a system of guarantees against similar conflicts, worked out concertedly by the entire political class, even if we do not find out many details about the real organizers and instigators of the April events. [Pessimistic version:] The former rivals during the April events, the Communists Party and the government coalition, possibly not the entire coalition, reached a tacit agreement not to reveal certain things and not to touch the main players on both of the sides. This version is relevant if the assertions that the former government and the former Opposition had their people in the central square, but lost control of the situation are true. In this case, we can expect neither identification of the organizers nor grantees that similar events will never happen. [Pessimistic-pessimistic version:] Before, during and after the April 2009 events, the situation in Moldova has been controlled by aliens, masons, heads of the criminal underworld, while the Moldovan politicians play the game “the power” and then the game “the Opposition”. I urge those who will consider the last two versions “shocking” and “very shocking” to provide other explanations and answer the questions that were not answered by the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the April events, so that they could be taken into account during the next electoral campaign for the legislative elections by the whole society. [Valeriu Vasilica, Info-Prim Neo] [P.S.] Even if a part of the suppositions formulated a year ago can be partly or fully left out, this analysis shows that most of the questions put by the society immediately after the April events remained unanswered. [V.V., IPN]