Ex-Prime Minister Ion Sturza considers the leaders of the ruling parties should hold the key states posts so that they bear responsibility before society and the phenomenon of appropriation of state property by circles that include the given leaders is stopped. In a message on a social networking site, Sturza avoids pronouncing on the Constitutional Court’s decision of 2013 by which the persons suspected of acts of corruption are banned from holding public posts. The IPN analysis “Secretaries general of … the Republic of Moldova or Programmed dualism” that was published on August 6, 2015 examines both of the viewpoints in an attempt to reveal the serious problems deriving from the uncertain status of the ruling alliances and of the leaders of the component parties, which is not appropriately regulated by the law.
“We should remember that the problem became more evident especially at the start of 2013, when the political crisis was at its height and when the Filat Government was dismissed by Parliament on suspicion of acts of corruption, while the Constitutional Court decided that the persons dismissed this way can no longer occupy key state posts. Such irrevocable decisions are not discussed, but are implemented. But such decisions can be also reviewed, if the essence of the problem and its effects are considered. The essence resides in the fact that a political decision voted in Parliament by the political opponents for political reasons was based on unproven accusations of criminal illegalities. For their part, these unproven assertions laid at the basis of the judicial decision of the Constitutional Court. By this procedure, the presumption of innocence was violated and a dangerous precedent was set, which interrupted the difficult, but normal course of things in the political process in Moldova,” says the author of the analysis Valeriu Vasilica.
An additional argument in favor of such a position derives from the lessons of another relevant case that happened in the same period. “In the same period, other political players voted for the dismissal of the President, and, apparently, also of the first Deputy Head of Parliament, because of the political rivalry in relation to the party that fielded them for the posts and that initiated/supported the dismissal of the Government. And this was a political decision based on political reasons, which, unlike the penal ones, must not be proven. In the political struggle, it is the number of votes gathered for one decision or another that counts the most. Surely, the ‘suspicions of corruption’ or other serious illegalities could be used as a pretext in this case too and nobody would bother or would be obliged to prove them.
“It’s strange that nobody has so far used this ‘cudgel’ in relation to the dismissal decisions based on political criteria or another kind of punishment at the level of village, communal, district or municipal councils, for example. But it is not certain that this precedent, set by the Constitutional Court, will not be widely used in the confrontation with the political opponents. And the last: it seems that exactly after that decision of the Constitutional Court, all the suspected or not suspected political leaders, decided that it is better to be in the ‘shadow’ than in the post. After that, the ‘shadow’ became a virtue and a general goal,” says the author.
According to him, it would be rational to lay down, within the legal adjustments concerning the ruling alliances and the relations of the party leaders with the state bodies, that the party leaders should occupy the key state posts. The argument that ‘it happens so in the whole world’ is not the only one and not the most important one. The informal leaders of the parties must also become the formal leaders of the state, especially in order to personally assume responsibility for the smooth running of things in the country and to also be held accountable for the wrong or criminal decisions that they take, by their personal signatures, not by the signatories of intermediaries.
Ex-Premier Ion Sturza also stated his position on the issue on a social networking site: “We had enough puppets and puppeteers in key posts. That’s enough! If not, the puppeteers should come onto the platform and should assume responsibility for the country! That’s enough! Some steal, while other must do reforms, maintain prices and pay salaries and pensions. That’s enough… Some pseudo-governors, prosecutors and judges live in exorbitant luxury surrounded by bodyguards and ’fairies’, while others can hardly make ends meet with their miserable salaries and pensions”.
The authors says that to confirm the above-mentioned theses, it is enough to admit that the ugliest things or the things that we suspect to be ugly happened in our country in periods after the ’driving away’ of the political leaders from the key posts, not before this, including the concession of the Chisinau International Airport, the ‘sale’ of Banca de Economii and its ‘restoration’ and, surely, what we call the ‘theft of the century’, with all its political, economic and social consequences.
“After the ‘driving away’ or ‘withdrawal’ of these, the leader from the Kremlin hasn’t met with any of the high-ranking leaders from our country and it is presumed that besides the many other reasons he has, he also does not want to have meeting with interlocutors without the right to a final decision. The most serious bans were imposed amid similar circumstances, but these weren’t overcome and it’s not known when and who could overcome them.
“The worsening of the relations between Moldova and the EU is related mainly to this phenomenon. The key reason is the worsening of the situation inside the country, but, as we agreed, such a state of affairs is generated mainly by the uncertain status of the formal and informal leaders of Moldova. The European leaders and bodies have lost confidence in the partners from Chisinau, some of whom have the right to decide without many responsibilities, while the others have partial rights and responsibilities. We can presume that the signing of the Association Agreement and of the agreement on the liberalization of the visa regime in 2014 was more due to inertia from the past period and the halt in the Moldova – EU relations in a number of areas is a proof of this,” says the analysis.
The author notes that several days after the investiture of the new Government, there were felt a number of serious signals that fuel the people’s hope for an improvement in the state of affairs. “These include the appointment of Valeriu Strelet as Prime Minister and the formation of the new Government and the addressing of the most painful issues, including the investigation into the stealing committed in the banking sector, the electricity and gas tariffs, the remedying of the financial situation and the hasty unblocking of the relations with the development partners, including the EU, and others. But given that we felt such a sensation earlier too, we will have to be attentive for a period, if not skeptical, until we can deduce the position of the main decision makers in this country, if we can deduce it,” says the author, returning to the need to create the legal framework that would govern the activity of the ruling alliances and their leaders.
Amid the suggestions of several active protest movements of the country, there are also other proposals for remedying the difficult situation in Moldova, including removing the current ruling parties and their leaders from power. “It is the right of society to protest and the obligation of society to protest, if it wants changes. But nobody fully explains the methods for achieving this goal and assumes responsibility for the possible destructive effects. The revolutions bring chaos and bring the wheel of history back to the initial point. In the previous elections, the ‘better’ parties and the leaders with ‘increased care for the people’ could not convince society to vote for them. There were mainly voted those who were voted until now. That’s why we should make effort to ensure first of all their legality so as to get rid of the long and programed duality,” says the author.
According to him, the aforementioned reasons have the goal of encouraging the political class to adjust the legal framework for implementing it during the next electoral cycle. “But, as we are not fully sure that this cycle will not start next year, this effort will have to be made simultaneously with the preparations for the future election of the President of the Republic of Moldova. In particular conditions, this could be a goal that deserves the attention of the protest movements,” says the IPN analysis “Secretaries general of … the Republic of Moldova or Programmed dualism”.
