The business community’s influence in elections and, consequently, the exposure of elected MPs to influence on the part of business interests can be reduced by harsher penalties for voter corruption and by obliging electoral competitors to present integrity records. There are also other mechanisms that should be applied to prevent the non-transparent use of money and to put the election runners in the same conditions. The submitted proposals were discussed in debates on the draft law to change the electoral system that were staged by Parliament, IPN reports.
Democratic MP Sergiu Sarbu said there should be ensured the functionality of the newly created institutions, such as the National Integrity Authority and the Crime Assets Recovery Agency under the National Anticorruption Center, which have the instruments needed to identify any inference. “We are ready to come up with measures aimed at improving the fight against corruption and abuses and to also work intensely on the justice sector reform,” stated Sergiu Sarbu.
Ex-minister of defense Valeriu Plesca said the businesspeople bring value added to the state, but the presupposed fight against corruption is aimed at removing them from the active circuit. The businessmen should be present in this circuit.
Political analyst Roman Mihaes noted the introduction of the concept of integrity record in the legislation is essential if the goal is to fight corruption and to prevent persons with a blemished reputation from entering the Government and Parliament.
Political commentator Vitalie Catana said some of the recommendations to reduce the influence of businesses in elections are Leninist approaches, but Lenin based his approaches on classes. “If there are problems related to party and campaign funding, this is something else and these refer to procedures. I think that even if some things were recommended by the Venice Commission, we should filter these out using the requirements of legal science as the legislative process envisions this. If those from the Commission do not know these, we will remind them,” stated Vitalie Catana.
Valeriu Giletski, head of the European People’s Party parliamentary group, said there are also other mechanisms than those suggested by the authors of the bill to change the electoral system that can be used to ensure equity between electoral contenders.
Activist Sergiu Ungureanu said penalties for political cruising should be introduced as part of the measures that will be taken to remove the interference of businesses. “This is the biggest problem. This draft law was proposed by a party that entered Parliament with 19 MPs and now has 60 MPs. The integrity of this party should be a major reason for concern,” he noted.
During its plenary session on June 16, the Venice Commission adopted opinions that critically assess the draft law for Moldova’s electoral system for the election of Parliament. It raises “significant concerns”, including the risk that constituency members of parliament would be vulnerable to being influenced by business interests.
A number of civil society organizations that criticized the attempt to change the electoral system during protests refused to take part in the public debates on the introduction of the mixed-member electoral system or the uninominal voting system staged by Parliament. In a statement, these said that since the recommendations of the Venice Commission are not respected, any discussion on the proposal to change the electoral system is illogical. The opposition parties “Action and Solidarity” and “Platform Dignity and Truth” also announced they would not take part in the discussions.
