“As long as the Transnistrian dispute hasn’t been resolved, the Republic of Moldova cannot introduce a uninominal voting system. At the same time, the bill proposed by the Democratic Party is based on unconstitutional provisions, while by uninominal voting the Republic of Moldova will switch over to the Soviet electoral system because the imperative mandate in combination with the uninominal system is applied in Communist countries or countries with one party, such as North Korea or Cuba”. “Not the PDM is the author of the changes made to the electoral system. The initiative comes from the people of the Republic of Moldova, while the PDM only registered the bill in Parliament and this is the wish of those who want a change”. Contradictory opinions on the issue were stated in the international conference “Replacement of the electoral system: Pros and Cons” that was held in Chisinau last weekend, IPN reports.
According to Igor Botan, executive director of the Association for Participatory Democracy ADEPT, who spoke within the panel discussion “Replacement of the electoral system: Advantages and Dangers”, the Democratic Party, which proposed the bill and says that constituencies in Transnistria will be set up, but elections will not be held there and suggests that the territory from the left bank of the Nistru should not be called occupied, forget about the Constitutional Court’s decision by which that territory was declared occupied. “Those from the PDM should decide whether this territory is occupied or not and what effects this can have on elections. Don’t forget that the Republic of Moldova was twice convicted by the ECHR for not ensuring the human rights on the left side of the Nistru. This system is inopportune as long as the conflict is not settled,” stated the political analyst.
He also referred to the thesis that the current proportional representation system is corrupt and should be thus changed in favor of the uninominal one. Igor Botan said that after analyzing the corruption perception index in 2016 and the voting systems of countries, he established that the first 25 most non-corrupt states are the Scandinavian ones and they all have proportional electoral systems. “The uninominal system exists only in the European area, in the presidential states, and this system implies the presidential system of government. The Moldovans should be thus asked if they want a presidential system,” said the expert.
Sorin Ionita, director of the Bucharest-based Expert Forum Association, noted that Romania also had a uninominal voting system that was used during only two political cycles and in the period the country had the most expensive elections and the most uncontrolled money in politics. In the Republic of Moldova, they believe that this system can entrust the task of cleaning parties to the people, but all the instruments in this regard are possessed by party leaders. “It wasn’t proven that Moldova witnesses parliamentary instability that generates governmental instability as these are two things that make the two voting systems, proportional and uninominal, different. The uninominal system is slightly more expensive and this was proven. It attracts to politics money that is harder to be controlled. For its part, the proportional system can produce fragmented Parliaments, but I didn’t see such deficiencies in the Republic of Moldova,” he stated.
According to Sorin Ionita, the reformation of parties, building of the rule of law and decentralization of administration should be the final goals in Moldova, but this will not be done by changing the electoral system.
PDM deputy chairman Sergiu Sarbu said not the Democratic Party is the author of the initiative to modify the electoral system. This is the wish of the Moldovan people, while the PDM only registered the bill in Parliament. The given debates on the uninominal voting system are the most transparent and broadest discussions held ever in Moldova. “I don’t think there is another bill that is so widely discussed by society. I don’t think the members of political parties that put up resistance oppose changes. We do not promote the replacement of the system. We only inform about the advantages of this change,” he stated.
The international conference “Replacement of the electoral system: Pros and Cons” was organized by the Kondrad-Adenauer Stiftung and Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung Moldova in partnership with the Association for Participatory Democracy ADEPT and the Institute for Development and Social Initiative “Viitorul”.
