The reactions of some of the political groups that expressed their skepticism about the possibility of introducing the electronic voting system is related to the political conjuncture. The population’s skepticism about the authorities’ capacity to implement this system is a factor that can hamper the adoption of the electronic voting system. The second factor is the fact that particular political groups that oppose the amendment of the Electoral Code will exploit this skepticism for own purposes, Igor Munteanu, MP of the Party “Dignity and Truth Platform”, stated in IPN’s debate “Alternative voting methods: benefits and risks, pros and cons”.
He noted that these are the only factors that can hamper the legitimate process of amending and modernizing the electoral system. In 2015-2016, the Central Election Commission (CEC) was ready to work out solutions and to integrate the e-voting solutions into the Electoral Code and it enjoyed the support of the development partners. Particular technical documents were thought up, but the speed at which they moved to achieving this objective decreased after the composition of the CEC was changed. Now the composition of the CEC is to be changed again. “We tried to help them to test the system through a Parliament decision that would authorize the testing of the system at the local elections of this May. But the Parliament’s legal commission blocked this decision,” stated the MP, noting there is yet a strategy for developing information technology and this enables the CEC to test the new voting methods.
“Evidently, electronic voting can be more efficient than the establishment of polling stations all over the world. When we present the concept on paper, the people will be able to compare and we will be able to make a clear difference between manipulation, propaganda and clear arguments in favor of the change of the system. For the purpose, we need a better view among the groups that want this change. Three working subgroups were created for the purpose and they should be listened to,” stated Igor Munteanu.
The PPPDA MP noted the political preferences will dictate the next steps related to the alternative voting methods in Parliament, but the critical mass will be formed outside it.
“I don’t know if the current Parliament is able to adopt all the amendments to the Electoral Code that are being devised as the life of this Parliament could be rather short. At the same time, we should not lose any moment to change the attitude of civil society, the political class, the state institutions to this initiative. Electronic voting is now going through the inception process and a decision is imminent and inevitable. The Republic of Moldova is a state that implemented many innovative European norms. We must prove that we can also adjust the electronic system to the new tendencies,” noted Igor Munteanu.
The public debate “Alternative voting methods: benefits and risks, pros and cons” is the 182nd installment of IPN’s project “Developing Political Culture through Public Debates” that is implemented with support from the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
