“Those who speculate on account of citizens’ expectations, assuring them that Moldova has a future, should first show to them that they have at least a predictable behavior, without betrayals and financing from foreign and dubious sources. Only in such conditions is productive cooperation of the local branches with the party elites, for ensuring the future promised to Moldova by the politicians, possible…”
---

Effects of lack of internal party democracy

The political parties are preparing for snap elections. However, as usual, the voters do not know practically anything about the functioning mechanisms of internal party democracy, the internal processes of working out electoral platforms, criteria for forming electoral blocs and for compiling electoral lists. These things should be known by party members from local organizations. But there are clear signals that not even the party members in the Republic of Moldova know what the party leaders and their circles do. This situation is typical of practically all the registered parties.

The recent public statement of local councilors of Zastânca village of Soroca district, who were elected on the ticket of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM), is a pertinent example that characterizes the rupture between the party elite and the ordinary members of the party. So, before the snap parliamentary elections, five members of the local organization of the PSRM, representatives of the Zastânca local council, announced that they decided to leave the party as they are disappointed with:

• the absence of a competent administration of the PSRM, as the current administration is preoccupied with the satisfaction of personal interests and this makes the safeguarding of people’s interests impossible, causing political instability in the country;
• the party does not have a view and a concrete program for supporting the staff of the primary organizations and for solving citizens’ problems;
• the political developments show that the current administration of the PSRM is absolutely disoriented and no longer delivers on its promises, etc.

The objections invoked in the statement can be reduced to one conclusion – there is no internal party democracy in the PSRM, while the arbitrary decisions of the party elite only do damage to the party. In such circumstances, the members of the PSRM from Zastânca village considered it is justified for them to publically declare their disagreement with the incorrect and even contradictory policy pursed by the party elite. We can be sure that the situation in other political parties that hurry to run as contenders in the upcoming elections is not much better.

Value of critical attitudes

The example of the ex-members of the PSRM from Zastânca village should be regarded as one that is worth being followed by members of other parties, either of the right or of the left, pro-European or pro-Eurasian ones. Indeed, what’s the purpose of parties’ statutes and programs if their provisions are ignored by the party elites? Both the ordinary party members and the voters need the policies pursued by the representatives delegated to work in the state bodies at the national and local levels to be predictable. The observance of the statutory documents is the guarantee of predictability. If we image a discussion between ex-members of the PSRM, who left the party, and their leader Igor Dodon, we would see that the first would besiege the latter with very simple questions that are very appropriate before the snap parliamentary elections:

• who violated the oath of faith, betraying the party – the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova (PCRM) - in a critical period of time, when there was a real chance of causing snap parliamentary elections that the PCRM was likely to win according to opinion polls? 
• who made a decisive contribution to the extension of the government of the Alliance for European Integration (AEI) until 2017, voting in Nicolae Timofti President in 2012?
• who made a cornucopia of promises so as to gain office of President, but was unable to deliver at least several of them?  
• who acted in collusion with executive coordinator Vlad Palhotniuc, begging by  $700,000-800,000 a month for financing the PSRM? What did usually Costea transmit to Cornel and how often?
• why wasn’t the congress of the PSRM set for 2018 held? Who decided to put off the congress, violating the statutes, without informing the party members?   
• why wasn’t the decision to transform the PSRM from a party of the left into a party of the right, by abandoning the doctrine of democratic socialism and embracing the ideology of social conservatism, widely debated with the party members? Doesn’t the change of ideology involve the change of view about the whole sociopolitical life?          
• why does the PSRM mislead public opinion about the danger of the Republic of Moldova’s cooperation with NATO, if it ventured into the formation an electoral bloc with the party that laid the basis of practical cooperation with NATO? Etc. 

The general question is how would the leader of the PSRM answer these concrete questions put by the party members? He would probably tell them that what they failed to obtain in 2012 as a result of the betrayal of the PCRM and avoidance of snap elections can be eventually achieved at the snap elections of 2021. Paradoxically, despite the disqualifying behavior of the leader of the PSRM, he could be yet right. The truth is the behavior of the so-called pro-European and unionist parties is so disappointing that the eventual revenge for the loss of power in 2009 and of the presidential elections in 2020 could be witnessed in 2021. Namely for this reason, the members of the pro-European and unionist parties should express their interest in the activity of their vainglorious elites that are detached from reality.

Conclusions

The annual financing of political parties with public budget funds of tens of millions of lei should be conditional upon the ensuring of transparency in the adoption of decisions by the administration of parties. Ensuring of internal party democracy is the guarantee of predictability of policies pursued by party elites. It is revolting both for the ordinary members of parties and for their voters for the elites to pursue the own interests, violating the provisions of the statutory documents. In this regard, the migration of parties from one pole of the political spectrum to another, without debates and without consulting party members, is aberrant.

Those who speculate on account of citizens’ expectations, assuring them that Moldova has a future, should first show to them that they have at least a predictable behavior, without betrayals and financing from foreign and dubious sources. Only in such conditions is productive cooperation of the local branches with the party elites, for ensuring the future promised to Moldova by the politicians, possible.