A radical proposal for overcoming the health crisis in Moldova, which is probably the most difficult one so far, was formulated two days ago. On March 13, President Maia Sandu requested to declare a state of emergency all over Moldova for a two-week period. It seems that this proposal was rejected from the start by a part of the political forces on which the implementation of this proposal depends. The two sides’ arguments for and against, the reasons that generate the given positions and the effects caused by the declaring or non-declaring of the state of emergency were discussed by the participants in IPN’s public debate “State of emergency: for and against, health, economic and political aspects”.
Igor Boțan, the standing expert of IPN’s project, said the Republic of Moldova has well-defined legislation on the introduction of the state of emergency or the state of public health emergency. There are about 15-20 relevant normative documents, including laws, Government decisions and orders. As regards the President’s request to declare a state of emergency, this is done by adopting a special Parliament decision. A year ago, on March 17, such a Parliament decision was preceded by a Government decision by which the executive asked to declare a state of emergency. The declaring of a state of emergency means the government is taken over by a special commission led by the Prime Minister. This is called the Commission for Exceptional Situations, being the body empowered to manage the state of affairs on Moldova’s territory.
“It is very important to understand that the decisions of this Commission are executory for the managers of the central and local public authorities, business entities, public institutions and the citizens. The main task of this commission is to make orders on the imposition of population protection measures. The specific things that should be understood by the people is that if such a state is declared, the Commission for Exceptional Situations imposes or relaxes the restrictions and the working regime of the institutions and enterprises so as to reduce the impact of calamities. What is important is that this commission can approve specific measures in justice, can suspend the education process, can order a halt in public activities, etc.” explained Igor Boțan.
According to the expert, the Commission for Exceptional Situations works on the platform of the Ministry of Home Affairs, while the Single Command Center is its managing body. The President can join in as a coordinator with civil protection powers. The Supreme Security Council can formulate recommendations on this platform. During the state of emergency, the power is in the hands of the Premier, the Government, ministries, the prosecutor general, the managers of the Security and Intelligence Service, the National Anticorruption Center and others.
Vadim Pistrinciuc, executive director of the Institute for Strategic Initiatives and Policies, said that two sets of actions were presented in the meeting of the Supreme Security Council. One of the sets refers to the measures to fight infection with COVID-19, while the second to the compensatory measures that should be taken by the Government if a partial state of emergency is applied in the case of businesses. “In general, the measures to fight the pandemic are not popular –wearing of masks, the ban on attending recreational facilities, etc. Is the declaring of a state of emergency now necessary? I think this question should be better answered by the specialists. As far as we can see, judging by the estimates presented in the public sphere by WHO specialists and our health experts, the high death rate during this wave is evident. The age of the infected ones and of those with serious symptoms who need to be hospitalized is going younger,” stated Vadim Pistrinciuc.
According to him, if the situation is regarded from the angel of the losses of human lives, the declaring of the state of emergency is a justified measure. “The people forget the daily cases reported by the authorities and the first obligation, given these great loses, of the Supreme Security Council is to protect the life and integrity of the citizens. These figures and signals from the health system are desperate and the capacities are close to the limit. Some of the experts anticipate 100 deaths associated with the novel coronavirus a day can be witnessed,” he stated.
Vadim Pistrinciuc noted the measures are not popular, but must be more efficiently implemented, not sporadically as now. “Until harsh isolation and quarantine measures are introduced, the control measures and active constraints should be applied efficiently so that they are obeyed exactly. Therefore, the responsible authorities should be given powers to impose penalties for non-observance. The harsher isolation measures will not produce effects if there are no methods of imposing these measures, of monitoring their observance and of punishing their ignoring!” stated the expert.
“Expert-Grup” executive director Adrian Lupușor said the qualified decisions of experts are absent in the created situation. It seems that the generals in a war keep silent or speak at half voices. From what is discussed or done in other countries, it’s clear that the Republic of Moldova needs a lockdown. Even if everyone knows that the economic costs of the quarantine are high, priority should be given to the saving of human lives. Rather harsh measures are now needed to administratively restrict the inter-human contacts. The people should stay at home and should move their economic, domestic and social activities to the online environment. Evidently, the homes should be left only in emergencies and by obeying all the sanitary requirements.
According to the expert, a lockdown is necessary and this should be supplemented by compensatory measures for the population and business entities. More active communication with the population is needed. The mayors and other opinion leaders should be mobilized so as to explain to the people the need of a lockdown. The economic costs of a lockdown will rise to billions of lei, but such a measure will save lives.
Adrian Lupușor noted the costs in the absence of a lockdown following the worsening of the pandemic situation should be assessed. If the situation worsens, the economic costs will definitely be more severe and will last longer than in the case of a lockdown announced for a definite period of time. “After such actions, the economy recovers and a compensatory growth is witnessed. In the post-lockdown period, the wish to invest, to travel, to consume increases. I expect a very rapid economic growth if this lockdown is consistent and is imposed not only for a two-week period. It should last longer so as to prevent the spread of the infection,” said the director of “Expert-Grup”.
The public debate titled “State of emergency: for and against, health, economic and political aspects” is the 178th installment of the project “Developing Political Culture through Public Debates” that is implemented by IPN with the assistance of the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
