“The contrast invoked by the leader of the PSRM, who in 2014 benefited from the support of President Putin to become a political leader, should dissatisfy the latter and such dissatisfaction can be even more dangerous for the future of the PSRM that the formation of a coalition with the mafia and the bandits…”
Rehabilitation of putschists
After the Constitutional Court (CC), on the request of President Maia Sandu, on April 15, 2021 ascertained the circumstances that justify the dissolution of Parliament, conclusions could be drawn in the meantime. In the period, the Party of Socialists of the Republic Moldova (PSRM) was to take a series of actions announced by the party’s leader Igor Dodon. The latter stated his conviction that “the story of 2019 repeats, but now the usurper is Maia Sandu who used the CC”. Public opinion is still waiting for the concrete actions announced by the leader of the PSRM:
- giving of a vote of no confidence to three members of the Constitutional Court accompanied by their resignation;
- calling on the international partners to intervene and end the attempted coup so as to restore the rule of law in the Republic of Moldova.
By all appearances, the initiative of the leader of the PSRM will have the fate of many other initiatives and promises that haven’t been implemented and delivered ever. Indeed, before referring to the usurpation of power in 2019, the leader of the PSRM should explain to the citizens what the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the elucidation of the attempted constitutional putsch of the Democratic Party of the Republic of Moldova (PDM) through the agency of the Constitutional Court and the Prosecutor General’s Office determined. If he does not remember, we should remind him that the investigation of the parliamentary commission didn’t produce results. The causes of the failure of the parliamentary investigation can be imputed to the PSRM and its members:
- firstly, the chairman of the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the elucidation of the attempted constitutional putsch of 2019 had been led for two months by the member of the PSRM Vladimir Țurcan, who also headed the state commission for the elucidation of the events of April 7–8, 2009. It should be noted that both of the commissions for the investigation of resonant cases led by Vladimir Țurcan didn’t produce any result;
- secondly, shortly after the administration of the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the elucidation of the attempted constitutional putsch was replaced, the PSRM decided to constitute a parliamentary majority, which was formalized in several months, with the PDM, which it accused of attempted constitutional putsch. Evidently, the new coalition partners could not be treated as putschists who took part in the attempt to usurp the power. That’s why the parliamentary group of the PSRM and its members from the parliamentary commission of inquiry treated the new coalition partners with indulgence;
- thirdly, after the constitution of the PSRM&PDM majority, many of those covered by the investigation of the parliamentary commission, including former members of the Constitutional Court, through whose agency the attempted putsch allegedly occurred, simply refused to take part in hearings;
- finally, after the alleged putschists secured the protection of the PSRM, the parliamentary commission of inquiry actually completed its duties with the resignation of its chairman.
So, after the PSRM&PDM majority was constituted in November 2019, it turned out that the Declaration on the recognition of state capture in the Republic of Moldova is a banal political declaration without any impact on the realities that occurred after the leaders of the PDM and the Shor Party fled the country. In this connection, it was expected that the Prosecutor General’s Office would drop the case of usurpation of power, even if the Prosecutor General expressed a different opinion. However, after the constitution of the PSRM&PDM majority, it became clear that the ex-members of the CC, as the ex-prosecutor general, hurried to tender their resignation as they didn’t face any danger.
Rehabilitation of parliamentary groups of fugitives Plahotniuc and Shor
After the split of the PDM, the heterogeneous groups of this party emerged, including that affiliated to oligarch Vlad Plahotniuc, who is accused of illegal and anti-constitutional control over state institutions. There was also revealed the common, concerted interest of the parliamentary groups of Vlad Plahotniuc, who was the main beneficiary of the bank fraud, and of Ilan Shor, who helped commit the bank fraud. These groups even reorganized themselves as the parliamentary platform For Moldova (PPPM) so as to display their political force. Its members were labeled by the leader of the PSRM, when he dreamt of the second term in office as President, as the representatives of the interests of the mafia and bandits (min. 7.00-15.21): “... nothing can be done with this Parliament ... 16-17 MPs left their groups. They were bought and the snap parliamentary elections are therefore the only solution. Palhotniuc already has 23-24 MPs... He wants to come to power. Do you know how the bandits act usually? The bandits create problems and then come and offer to solve them. Now Shor, Candu, Planotniuc are trying to have discussions... Everyone realizes that this is the project of Plahotniuc... You should know that the principled, official position of the PSRM and President (Dodon) is – we will not have any discussions with the mafia and the bandits of Plahotniuc and Shor. I advise Maia Sandu and Andrei Năstase not to have relations with the mafia and the bandits... You should realize that you will not have a future if you establish ties with the bandits. I want you to know my position. I will do my best to trigger snap parliamentary elections. This is a principled approach. This Parliament should be cleaned and most of the citizens want this to be done... Immediately after the presidential elections, the first decree of the new Praising elected by the people should be on the dissolution of Parliament and organization of snap elections. I will do my utmost for this scenario to be implemented”.
Despite the aforementioned, on February 11, 2021, the PSRM constituted a parliamentary majority with the group of the mafia and the bandits, rehabilitating them and even ennobling them. This way, we see the dramatic involution of Igor Dodon, who only several months ago, when he held office of President and dreamt of a new tenure, was firm in his attitudes to the mafia and the bandits whose representatives were to be removed from Parliament through the agency of snap parliamentary elections. He warned his main political opoonents not to form a coalition with the mafia and the bandits as they risked not having a political future. But after he lost the presidential elections, the leader of the PSRM reached the conclusion that the formation of a parliamentary majority with the mafia and the bandits is the only way for his party to survive. So, each citizen, in particular each voter of the PSRM, can form a judgment about the principled, official position of the PSRM and of the President (Dodon).
These are the circumstances in which the actions of President Maia Sandu, who remained faithful to the commitments stipulated in the documents that were voted also by the PSRM, as regards state capture, investigation of the anti-constitutional putsch, clearing of the state institutions of corrupt elements etc., which are eventually tangible through the snap elections, were described by the PSRM, alongside the representatives of the mafia and the bandits, as attempt to usurp the power.
Instead of conclusions – PSRM “does not have a future”
The PSRM and its leader Igor Dodon rehabilitated in turn, through the agency of parliamentary coalitions, the main acolytes that took part in the billion theft – Plahotniuc and Shor. Initially, there were rehabilitated the putschists who got rid of the parliamentary commission of inquiry into the elucidation of the attempted constitutional putsch. Then, there were rehabilitated and even ennobled the unveiled representatives of the mafia and the bandits.
The Constitutional Court adopted a judgment on the dissolution of Parliament starting from the analysis and synthesis of the own case law. Even if there can be differing opinions about the CC’s decision, the Court has the right to adopt decisions that do not allow the perpetuation of interim governance. The Socialist leader’s changing position without principles on the dissolution of Parliament, on the one hand, and the intransigent position of President Maia Sandu, on the other hand, , presented a real danger of perpetuation of interim governance. President Maia Sandu announced her determination to prefer her dismissal than to name a government of the mafia and the bandits: “We do not have the right to allow the recapture of the state. The people are those who hold real power in the state and who can solve this situation. In snap elections or at a referendum, the people will decide their future and the future of the country”. On the other side, the leader of the PSRM exhibited his determination not to start the procedure for dismissing Maia Sandu in the eventuality she refused to name a government of the PSRM&Shor majority. Evidently, the dismissal procedure was doomed to failure. That’s why the CC’s decision on the dissolution of Parliament created the conditions needed for overcoming the governmental crisis and preventing its deterioration.
The accusations made by the PSRM and its leader against President Maia Sandu and the CC, concerning the usurpation of power, are aberrant. In fact, the attempt to usurp the uninvestigated usurped power can mean only an attempt to get rid of the usurpers by inviting the sovereign people to polls. Evidently, there are no guarantees that the PSRM and the representatives of the mafia and the bandits at the snap elections will not gain a majority of votes, but this eventual PSRM&Shor majority will be confirmed by the sovereign people who, as we know, deserve their fate if they have the possibility of freely electing the government.
The PSRM’s and its leader’s fear of snap parliamentary elections was explained by Igor Dodon – those who form an alliance with the mafia and the bandits do not have a political future. That’s why, so as to avoid snap elections, the PSRM invented all kinds of cheap stratagems. One of them is to seek the resignation of President Maia Sandu so that the snap parliamentary elections are held simultaneously with the presidential ones. This comes after they announced that they will avoid the constitutional dismissal procedure. This weird step by the leader of the PSRM is very unsuitable as it reveals the sharp contrast between the demand for President Maia Sandu to resign amid the PSRM’s pleading in favor of a coalition with the mafia and the bandits, and the events in Russia, where hundreds of thousands of citizens seek the resignation of President Putin, accusing him of creating an authoritarian, oligarchic regime, real kleptocracy in the richest country of the world. The contrast invoked by the leader of the PSRM, who in 2014 benefited from the support of President Putin to become a political leader, should dissatisfy the latter and such dissatisfaction can be even more dangerous for the future of the PSRM that the formation of a coalition with the mafia and the bandits