The invalidation of the mayoral elections in Chisinau municipality by the ordinary court, which was upheld by the Appeals Court, is perceived differently by analysts. Some say the court acted correctly, while others consider the decisions are political in character. The opinions were formulated in the talk show “Key issue” on NTV Moldova channel, IPN reports.

Jurist Pavel Midrigan said there were two different cases. In one of them, the court examined the Party of Socialists’ claim after determining particular facts, while in the second case there was examined the legality of the mayoral elections. “The Chisinau District Electoral Council totaled all the electoral reports and asked to validate the elections and nothing more . Furthermore, the process should involve no one else than the Central Election Commission,” he stated.

Political analyst Vitalii Andrievski said the legislation clearly provides that electoral agitation on the election day is banned, but the legislation was not obeyed. “The court held that violations were committed and it does not matter who benefits from this,” he noted, adding that Andrei Nastase stands to gain in this situation as he is the winner who mobilizes the people in protests.

Journalist Valeriu Demidetskii said the conclusions of the courts of law can be described as political necessities. “I understand why they removed Andrei Nastate, but cannot understand why they didn’t do it in a more subtle way,” he stated.