“Instead of dueling on propagandistic ground, the leader of the PSRM and President Maia Sandu should better find concertedly a solution for swiftly overcoming the governmental crisis by quickly triggering snap parliamentary elections or by voting in a government with full powers...”
---

Start of competition of elected Presidents

The leader of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM) Igor Dodon sometimes shows consistency. In only three weeks of the star of the presidential tenure of Maia Sandu, he launched a competition with her, compiling a list of her sins. In another about three weeks, the leader of the PSRM decided to supplement the list of sins, making it clear that he will do so periodically. This time the leader of the PSRM reproaches President Maia Sandu for the following:

• promotion of people from her company to posts;
• lack of real anticorruption actions;
• lack of magical solutions announced last year to the fight against COVID-19;
• lack of support promised to farmers, doctors and business entities;
• lack of additional assistance for pensioners and socially-deprived groups;
• lack of “European” pay raises;
• lack of jobs for young people to return home from abroad;
• making by President Maia Sandu of visits abroad instead of solving people’s problems, etc.

This way, the leader of the PSRM became involved in a propagandistic game. His goal is to persuade the citizens that 2020 was well managed and had an administration that handled the crises responsibly and efficiently and ensured more benefits for the Moldovans. In fact, the citizens should regret having preferred Maia Sandu to her predecessor as President. The propaganda is based also on exaggeration as it is known that the President’s powers in a parliamentary republic are reduced and the delivery of the electoral promises is impossible without the existence of a functional government supported by a parliamentary majority. In this case, the leader of the PSRM switches over emphases from the four-year period for fulfilling the promises to the period of 1.5 months since Maia Sandu took up her duties as President, with an outgoing Government and without a parliamentary majority. Normally, it would have been enough for the leader of the PSRM to reproach Maia Sandu for nominating a candidate for Prime Minister with a delay of over one month.

But the Socialist leader’s idea of keeping the presidential administration under scrutiny is rather useful and deserves to be supported on condition that the President’s activity is compared with the activity of her predecessor in similar intervals. This way society will be able to compare and judge who of the two Presidents who were elected directly by the citizens better fulfilled their constitutional duties.

Igor Dodon’s accomplishments during first two months in office

Seeing the Socialist leader’s demands towards President Maia Sandu, it’s fair to analyze what Igor Dodon did during the first two months in office. To ensure correctness, we should remember that Igor Dodon became President when the Republic of Moldova was internationally recognized as a captured state. The state capture was four years later confirmed by a Parliament decision. To be correct, we should analyze Igor Dodon’s accomplishments during the first two months of his tenure through the angle of the decrees he signed and other actions he took in accordance with his presidential duties. So, during the first two months of his tenure, December 24, 2016 – February 24, 2017, President Igor Dodon issued 64 presidential decrees, namely:

• 24 – on promulgation of laws;
• 10 – on appointment and dismissal of advisers and employees of the President’s Staff;
• 11 – on appointment of judges to administrative posts and at Appeals Court;
• 4    – on dismissal of judges;
• 4    – on initiation of negotiations, delegation of powers or signing of international documents;
• 3    – on conferring of state awards;
• 2    – on Cabinet reshuffles;
• 1    – on withdrawal of nationality (of Traian Băsescu);
• 2    – on amendment and annulment of presidential decrees;
• 1    – on conferring of qualification levels;
• 1    – on discharge from military service and placing in reserve;
• 1    – on naming and modification of composition of commissions and councils working under the President.       

Of the 64 decrees, 45 were documents to accept and endorse the activity of other institutions, such as Parliament, Superior Council of Magistracy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, etc. In this connection, given Igor Dodon’s announced priority,zero tolerance of corruption, the President could have been demanding towards the candidates for judges who were promoted to administrative posts at institutions of the captured state. So, only 19 of the decrees adopted during the first two months of his tenure somehow showed President Igor Dodon’s will – to name and discharge own advisers; to confer state awards; to withdraw the nationality of the ex-President of Romania Traian Băsescu; to amend and annul presidential decrees; to constitute commissions under the President and to name their members.

If we refer to the political actions taken by Igor Dodon during the first two months of his tenure, we can note the following:

• first meeting with a foreign high-ranking official – Dmitry Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, on the very day of his installation;
• first meeting with a foreign diplomat residing in the Republic of Moldova – Russia’s Ambassador Farit Mukhatmeshin, immediately after the meeting with Rogozin. During the first two months of his term in office, President Dodon had individual meetings with 14 ambassadors, meeting twice with the ambassadors of Russia, the U.S. and the EU. He also had group meetings with ambassadors of EU and CIS member states;
• first visit abroad was paid to Moscow, being followed by a visit to Brussels and another one to Teheran. The latter was rather a touristic visit and centered allegedly on energy projects and commercial exchanges;
• first meeting with a regional or district leader was with Irina Vlah – the governor of Gagauzia. During the first two months of his tenure, he had two such meetings, both with Irina Vlah, probably because Igor Dodon in Gagauzia was voted by approximately 99% of the electors there;
• first meeting on priority issues was devoted to Transnistria and in only several days President Dodon met with the Transnistrian leader Vadim Krasnoselsky;  
• first signed bill was the one to annul the obligation for the citizens to repay the billions stolen from the banking sector;
• first meeting of the Supreme Security Council centered on the bank theft. President Dodon asked for information and for the correspondence concerning the actions taken by  the SSC, NBM, the Government, the PGO, the SIS, the NAC to prevent and stop the stealing of money from the financial-banking sector starting with 2011;
• fist challenge filed by President Dodon referred to the election of Eduard Harunjen as Prosecutor General;
• first meeting in trilateral format: President-Premier-Parliament Speaker was held on February 21, 2017;  
• he created the historical expertise commission whose first meeting centered on the significance of the great historical events for strengthening the Republic of Moldova’s statehood. He also constituted the Civil Society Council by the model of Russia;
• he took part in the Moldovan-Russian business forum so as to stimulate the commercial relations and to attract investment. It should be noted that trade with Russia in 2016 was of $776 million, remaining almost the same in 2020.    

These were the most important accomplishments of President Igor Dodon during the first two months of his presidential tenure. Anyone can judge the real effects of these actions and activities and see if his demands towards President Maia Sandu during her first 1.5 months in office are justified.  

Maia Sandu’s accomplishments during 1.5 months in office  

By the same model, President Maia Sandu during the first one month and a half of her tenure – December 24, 2020 – February 11, 2021, adopted 27 decrees, namely:

• 0    – on promulgation of laws;
• 12 – on appointment and dismissal of advisers and employees of the President’s Staff;
• 0    – on appointment of judges to administrative posts and at Appeals Court;
• 1    – on dismissal of judges;
• 2    – on signing of documents concerning international relations;
• 2    – on conferring of state awards;
• 2    – on Cabinet reshuffles (appointment of acting PM, nomination of candidate for PM);
• 0    – on withdrawal of nationality;
• 2    – on amendment and annulment of presidential decrees;
• 1    – on conferring of qualification levels;
• 1    – on discharge from military service and placing in reserve;
• 2    – on naming and modification of composition of commissions and councils working under the President;
• 2    – on appointment and dismissal of managers of the State Guard and Protection Service.         

We can see that the number of decrees by which President Maia Sandu constituted the President’s Staff and showed her political will is comparable with the number of decrees signed by her predecessor for the purpose. If we refer to the political actions taken by Maia Sandu during the first one month and a half of her tenure, we can note the following:

• first meeting with a foreign high-ranking official was that with the President of Romania Klaus Iohannis, which ended with an agreement on the provision of substantial assistance to the Republic of Moldova in different areas;
• first meetings with ambassadors residing in the Republic of Moldova was that with the ambassadors of the EU and the U.S. and with the WHO Representative, eight meetings in total;
• first visit abroad – to Ukraine, after which visits were paid to Brussels and Paris, three in in total;
• met with protesting farmers, assuring them of support, persuading them to stop protesting; 
• took part in the ceremony to detach the National Army contingent to the KFOR mission in Kosovo; 
• met with the Special Representative of the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office to discuss the Transnistrian settlement process;
• convoked the first meeting of the Supreme Security Council in the new composition and set the main tasks related to national security, primarily to corruption fighting;  
• requested the Constitutional Court to pronounce on the constitutionality of provisions of Law No. 136/2017 concerning the Government, as regards the functioning of the outgoing Government;
• convoked decisions makers from institutions responsible for assisting the citizens and the economic sector during the crisis and the pandemic;
• discussed the problem of vaccination with the WHO Representative in Moldova, with the authorities adopting the National COVID-19 Immunization Plan. It should be noted here that the number of infections with COVID-19 in January, which was the first month in office of Maia Sandu, was of about 15,000, as opposed to 31,000 infections during the last month of Igor Dodon’s tenure;  
• the first meetings on key problems were held on December 26, 2020 with the managers of the Security and Intelligence Service (SIS), National Bank of Moldova (NBM), Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO), followed by the meetings of January 6, 2021 with the managers of the National Integrity Authority (NIA) and the National Anticorruption Center (NAC); 
• first meetings with regional and district leaders or with mayors was held in Hâncești, then in Strășeni, the visits being followed by the signing of the agreement on the establishment and development of the partnership with the Congress of Local Authorities of Moldova.

We can thus see that the attitude of the leader of the PSRM to the activity of President Maia Sandu is exaggeratedly pretentious if we compare it with his own activity during the first two months of his tenure as President.

Conclusions

The leader of the PSRM Igor Dodon did a favor to President Maia Sandu when he subject her to a propagandistic attack. The Socialist leader’s approach warned Maia Sandu that she is under permanent scrutiny. Knowing the very modest accomplishments of Igor Dodon during his four-year term in office, President Maia Sandu will have to work out a strategy for combating the propagandistic attacks on her activity.

Instead of dueling on propagandistic ground, the leader of the PSRM and President Maia Sandu should better find concertedly a solution for swiftly overcoming the governmental crisis by quickly triggering snap parliamentary elections or by voting in a government with full powers.