Observation of the early parliamentary elections in Moldova (28 November 2010)
Election observation report
| Doc. 12476
| 24 January 2011
- Author(s):
- Ad hoc Committee of the Bureau
- Rapporteur :
- Mr Indrek SAAR,
Estonia, SOC
- Thesaurus
1 Introduction
1. Further to the invitation from the Chairperson of
the Central Electoral Commission (CEC) of Moldova dated 29 September
2010, the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly agreed, at its meeting
on 4 October 2010, to set up a 30-member ad hoc committee to observe
the early parliamentary elections scheduled for 28 November 2010.
The Bureau also authorised a pre-electoral visit by a delegation
of five members of the ad hoc committee – one from each political
group. On 8 October 2010, the Bureau appointed Mr Indrek Saar (Estonia,
SOC) chair of the ad hoc committee.
2. In accordance with Article 15 of the co-operation agreement
signed on 4 October 2004 between the Parliamentary Assembly and
the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission),
an expert from the Venice Commission was invited to join the ad hoc
committee as an adviser.
3. Based on the proposals from the Assembly’s political groups,
the ad hoc committee was composed as follows:
- Indrek SAAR, Head of delegation (Estonia, SOC)
- Group of the European People’s Party (EPP/CD):
- Viorel Riceard BADEA, Romania
- Andres HERKEL*, Estonia
- Denis JACQUAT, France
- Václav KUBATA, Czech Republic
- Marietta de POURBAIX-LUNDIN, Sweden
- Maria STAVROSITU, Romania
- Egidijius VAREIKIS, Lithuania
- Piotr WACH, Poland
- Socialist Group (SOC):
- Maryvonne
BLONDIN, France
- Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN , Norway
- Titus CORLATEAN, Romania
- Andreas GROSS, Switzerland
- Tadeusz IWIŃSKI, Poland
- Indrek SAAR*, Estonia
- Doris STUMP, Switzerland
- Dana VÁHALOVÁ, Czech Republic
- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE):
- Kerstin LUNDGREN, Sweden
- Jørgen POULSEN*, Denmark
- Ana Adriana SÃFTOIU, Romania
- Chiora TAKTAKISHVILI, Georgia
- European Democrat Group (EDG):
- Igor CHERNYSHENKO, Russian Federation
- Christopher CHOPE, United Kingdom
- Jana FISHEROVÁ, Czech Republic
- Tuğrul TÜRKEŞ, Turkey
- Unified European Left Group (UEL):
- Andrej HUNKO, Germany
- Sergey SOBKO, Russian Federation
- Venice Commission
- Secretariat:
- Chemavon
CHAHBAZIAN, Deputy Head of Secretariat, Interparliamentary Co-operation
and Election Observation Unit
- Franck DAESCHLER, Interparliamentary Co-operation and
Election Observation Unit
- Daniele GASTL, Interparliamentary Co-operation and Election
Observation Unit
- Anne GODFREY, Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly
- Gaël MARTIN-MICALEF, Electoral Projects Officer, Elections
and Referendums Division, Venice Commission
*
Member of the pre-electoral delegation
4. The ad hoc committee was part of the international
election observation mission (IEOM), which also included observers
from the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE, the European Parliament
and the election observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR).
5. With regard to the operation of the IEOM in Moldova, the ad hoc
committee would underline that it was up to each parliamentary institution
within the IEOM to ensure the political and geographical balance
of its election observation delegation in accordance with its own
internal procedures. The delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Council of Europe comprised 26 members, representing the
five political groups in the Assembly and 14 Council of Europe member
states; the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly delegation comprised 35
members representing 14 countries; and the European Parliament delegation
comprised four members representing two countries and two political
groups – a Lithuanian MEP and three Romanian MEPs, including the
head of delegation. The Assembly's ad hoc committee notes that the
make-up of the European Parliament delegation didn’t facilitate
the IEOM’s work, in particular the process of negotiating the text
of the joint declaration.
6. The ad hoc committee met in Chisinau from 26 to 29 November
2010. The programme of the meetings is set out in Appendix 1.
7. The IEOM met representatives of the main political parties
and independent candidates participating in the elections, the Chair
of the Central Electoral Commission, the head of the OSCE mission
in Moldova, the political adviser of the European Union Special
Representative, the head of the OSCE/ODIHR election observation
mission and his team and representatives of civil society and the
media.
8. On polling day, the ad hoc committee split up into 16 teams,
eight of which observed the voting in the capital and the surrounding
areas, and eight the voting in the following towns and regions:
Falesti, Balti, Gagauzia, Basarabeasca, Ohrei, Rezina, Taraclia,
Cimislia, Briceni-Edinet and Causeni-Stefan-Voda. As in the previous
elections, polling did not take place in Transnistria, which is
under the de facto control of the Tiraspol authorities.
9. The IEOM concluded that the 28 November 2010 early parliamentary
elections in Moldova “met most OSCE and Council of Europe commitments.
... the elections were administered in a transparent and impartial manner
and a diverse field of candidates provided voters with a genuine
choice. ... However, the introduction of a new mandate allocation
system – shortly before the elections and without public consultations –
was problematic. The quality of voter lists remained a weak point
and led to diminished public confidence. Further efforts are needed
to remedy remaining deficiencies and strengthen public confidence.”
The IEOM press release is set out in Appendix 2.
10. The ad hoc committee wishes to thank the OSCE/ODIHR election
observation mission, the Special Representative of the Secretary
General in Moldova and the staff of the Council of Europe office
in Chisinau for their co-operation and their logistical support.
2 Legal context after the failure of the
constitutional referendum
11. The early parliamentary elections in Moldova on 28 November
2010 were the third parliamentary elections since April 2009. The
parliament elected on 29 July 2009 was unable to elect the President
of Moldova: neither the ruling Alliance for European Integration
(AIE) nor the opposition Communist Party of Moldova (PCRM) was able
to secure a sufficient number of votes in parliament (61 out of
a total of 101) to elect a president.
12. The referendum on 5 September 2010 to amend the Constitution
to allow the direct election of the President failed because of
an inadequate voter turnout (30%, that is to say below the 33% required
for a valid referendum). The Assembly’s ad hoc committee was the
only European parliamentary body to observe the constitutional referendum
in Moldova. It concluded that the voting was calm and orderly. The
citizens who participated in the referendum were generally able
to make their choice freely. However, the delegation did regret
the low turnout and stressed that it was now up to the political
stakeholders, regardless of their political positions, to propose
solutions to make the functioning of institutions more stable in
the general interest of the country and to look beyond their personal
or political quarrels.
13. In its report, the ad hoc committee to observe the constitutional
referendum on 5 September drew the attention of the country’s main
political stakeholders to the factors which had probably had an
impact on the low voter turnout in the referendum:
- the referendum campaign coincided
with a spell of intensive activities in the agricultural sector
of an agrarian country;
- the referendum campaign was short;
- convinced that the positive results of the referendum
were in no doubt, some political leaders and potential candidates
for the presidential election took advantage of the referendum campaign
to conduct a presidential campaign;
- the lack of effective co-ordination between the different
political forces in favour of changing the voting method for the
presidential election;
- the campaign for a boycott conducted by the PCRM and its
allies.
14. In the conclusion of its report, the ad hoc committee to observe
the constitutional referendum on 5 September called upon the Moldovan
authorities to hold early parliamentary elections in 2010 as the
political players had undertaken to do, in order to guarantee all
the conditions required for all citizens of Moldova to freely express
their will.
15. On 29 September 2010, Mr M. Ghimpu, the Acting President of
Moldova, dissolved parliament and signed the decree calling early
parliamentary elections for 28 November 2010. Two political issues
were at stake in the parliamentary elections on 28 November: the
establishment of a 51-seat parliamentary majority and, subsequently,
the election by the newly elected parliament of the new President
of Moldova, for which a 61-member majority is required.
16. The conduct of parliamentary elections is mainly governed
by the Electoral Code and regulations issued by the CEC. On 10 March
2010, the Moldovan authorities requested the Venice Commission to
prepare an opinion on the proposed amendments to the Electoral Code.
The Venice Commission approved its opinion on 4 June 2010. It found
that the proposed amendments improved the Electoral Code and enhanced
the quality and integrity of the election process, taking account
of the earlier recommendations by the Venice Commission and the
Assembly concerning the reduction of electoral thresholds from 5%
to 4% for political parties and from 3% to 2% for independent candidates,
the formation of electoral blocs, lifting of the disqualification
from election to parliament imposed on Moldovan citizens also holding
the nationality of another country, and the introduction of a national
voters’ roll and the possibility of using supplementary voters’
rolls at the poll. The Venice Commission concluded that, if implemented
in good faith, the Electoral Code provided a sound basis for conducting
democratic elections.
17. Some amendments to the Code were submitted to parliament for
adoption after the publication of the Venice Commission’s opinion
on 4 June 2010. Accordingly, several amendments were made to the
Electoral Code on 18 June and 18 September 2010. In particular,
an amendment to Article 87 changed the system of mandate allocation
in parliamentary elections, triggering harsh criticism from the
PCRM. The party argued that, as this change was introduced less
than a year before the elections, it violated the Venice Commission’s
Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, which requires a minimum
period of one year between changes to electoral systems and the
holding of elections.
18. Before this amendment, the Electoral Code provided for the
D’Hondt mandate allocation formula, which favours parties with the
highest number of votes. This was replaced with a method which gives
a significant advantage to smaller parties and got the nickname
"Robin Hood system". According to the representatives of the PCRM,
the new calculation method resulting from the changes to the mandate
allocation system penalises their party: according to them, if on
28 November the PCRM obtained the same results as in the last parliamentary
elections on 29 July 2009, its number of seats would go down by
two or three.
19. The PCRM members of parliament appealed to the Constitutional
Court for the amendment to the Electoral Code concerning the allocation
of seats in parliament to be quashed on the grounds that it was unconstitutional.
In its decision of 18 November 2010, the Constitutional Court held
that it fell to parliament to determine the rules for allocating
parliamentary seats and dismissed the appeal.
20. Additional (mostly technical) amendments to the Electoral
Code were adopted on 18 September 2010, notably an amendment to
Article 84, which introduced the possibility for all students studying
in academic institutions outside their domiciles (registered places
of permanent residence) to vote at any polling station in the district
where they study. After presenting their students’ certificates
and identity cards, the students would be added to the supplementary
voters’ rolls. The CEC was not in favour of this change, as it introduces
both the possibility of duplication of voters on the voters’ rolls
and also a risk of double voting.
21. On 23 September 2010, the chairs of the three Moldovan non-governmental
organisations involved in the process of monitoring elections in
Moldova wrote to Mr Thorbjørn Jagland, Secretary General of the Council
of Europe, and Mr Gianni Buquicchio, President of the Venice Commission,
seeking their opinion on the amendments to the Moldovan Electoral
Code, in particular Article 87 concerning the change in the system for
allocating seats in parliamentary elections, which they believed
to violate the principles of the Venice Commission’s Code of Good
Practice in Electoral Matters.
22. In letters dated 5 and 7 October 2010 respectively, the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe and the President of the Venice
Commission replied, in particular, that, in accordance with the
procedures of the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice in Electoral
Matters, the fundamental elements of the electoral system should
not be changed less than a year before elections. However, they
added that “the later adoption of the amendments of the Electoral
Code does not appear as an obstacle to the holding of free and fair elections”.
3 Electoral administration
23. The early parliamentary elections in Moldova were
administered by a three-tier structure comprising the Central Electoral
Commission (CEC), district electoral councils (DECs) and Precinct
Electoral Bureaux (polling stations) (PEBs). The CEC is a permanent
body with nine members serving a five-year term of office. One member
is appointed by the President of the Republic and the other eight
are appointed by parliament in accordance with the proportion of
seats held by the majority and the opposition. If a member of the
CEC’s term expires during an election campaign, it is automatically
extended by 90 days. The CEC’s mandate expired on 11 November 2010,
but was extended to allow for the preparation of the early parliamentary
elections.
24. The CEC established 35 district electoral councils; the other
two usually established in Bender and on the left bank of the Dniester
(in Nistru) were not set up. Article 27 of the Electoral Code provides
that the DECs comprise seven to 11 members, at least three of whom
must have completed higher education in the field of law or public
administration. All participants in the parliamentary elections
had the right to nominate representatives to the CEC and DECs, in
a consultative capacity.
25. The polling stations had five to 11 members, three being appointed
by local councils and the remainder by parties represented in parliament,
with one from each party. A total of 1 962 polling stations were established
across the country and 75 abroad (in 30 countries). The chairs,
vice-chairs and secretaries of the various electoral bodies were
elected by their members by secret ballot.
26. Following a CEC decision, voters from the Transnistria region
were able to vote at any of 21 specially designated polling stations,
including three in Chisinau. They were added to the supplementary
voters’ rolls.
27. The CEC held regular meetings open to the public and the mass
media, which increased the transparency of the election process
and helped build trust. The CEC’s major challenge during the early elections
was the very large number of Moldovan citizens living in foreign
countries. According to various sources, they account for over 500 000
people out of a total of 2.6 million voters registered on the voters’
rolls. The government decided to open 75 polling stations in foreign
countries, compared with 33 during the previous parliamentary elections
on 29 July 2009. Some people the observers met drew attention to
the fact that the geographical distribution of these polling stations
in various foreign countries had been based on political considerations
and was not consistent with the number of Moldovan citizens living
in those countries. Preference was said to have been given to west
European countries, even though, according to the official data from
the Moldovan Bureau of Statistics, most Moldovan citizens living
abroad were in Russia, where only four of the 75 polling stations
abroad had been located.
28. The CEC took over 380 decisions and adopted (or amended) many
regulations, including on media coverage, organisation of polling
stations abroad and the complaints and appeals procedures, thereby providing
a sound basis for the election campaign and the elections.
29. During the campaign, the CEC adjudicated almost 70 complaints
from the participants in the parliamentary elections, mostly related
to illegal campaign material and abuse of state resources. The only penalty
which the CEC is entitled to impose in the event of breaches of
electoral law by participants is to issue warnings or refer complaints
to the courts and have registrations cancelled. During the election
campaign, the CEC confined itself to issuing warnings, which appear
to have been largely ignored by the participants concerned.
4 Registration of voters and political parties and
independent candidates
30. According to the CEC’s official figures, A total
of 2 645 923 voters were on the rolls for the early parliamentary
elections on 28 November 2010. A further 165 546 were on the supplementary
voters’ rolls, including 64 199 in foreign countries and 12 035
students. As in the previous elections, polling did not take place
in Transnistria, which has been outside the Moldovan Government’s
control in de facto terms since 1992.
31. The Moldovan electoral authorities take a very liberal approach
to drawing up electoral rolls, the aim being to enable as many citizens
as possible to vote. The following categories of voters may accordingly
be added to a supplementary or special voters’ roll:
- Voters who live on the territory
of a precinct where they are not on the ordinary voters’ roll, upon presentation
of a document confirming their place of residence;
- Voters with a voting certificate (for voting outside their
place of residence);
- Voters with no registered permanent or temporary place
of residence, who may vote in their last place of permanent residence;
- Persons under arrest or in custody pending final sentencing;
- Voters who on election day are in hospitals, health resorts
or rest homes located far from their place of domicile;
- Persons voting in their homes with mobile ballot boxes
who have applied in writing up to two weeks prior to polling day
and no later than 6 pm the day before polling. On polling day, applications
may also be submitted in writing until 3 pm upon the presentation
of a medical certificate.
32. A liberal approach of this kind seeks to make it easier for
Moldovan citizens to exercise their constitutional rights given
the economic conditions in the country. However, it is not backed
up by legal procedures for ensuring the accuracy of the voters’
rolls and avoiding risks of duplication, where particular groups
of voters such as students and people living abroad could easily
be on the ordinary and supplementary rolls at the same time. This
situation is not in line with Article 39 of the Electoral Code,
which requires voters to be registered only once and at only one
polling station. Moreover, the existence of several different electoral rolls
means it is not possible reliably to determine the exact number
of voters having voted or to calculate a reliable turnout rate.
33. The inaccuracies of the rolls remained one of the disturbing
questions of the early parliamentary elections on 28 November. The
voter registration system used gives the local authorities responsibility
for keeping the registers up to date, resulting in non-uniformity
of arrangements for carrying out this process. The CEC created a
national database for the electoral register to allow centralised
examination of the voters’ rolls and detection of multiple entries
and other possible errors in them. For that purpose, the local executive authorities
were asked to submit an electronic copy of their electoral rolls
to the CEC. In spite of this request, around 300 of the 2 037 electoral
rolls were not submitted to the CEC.
34. The changes to the Electoral Code in the section concerning
voter registration will come into force in 2011, before the local
elections. With these changes, the CEC will be responsible for the
operation and upkeep of the central voters’ register, but will apparently
not have any real possibility of modifying it or checking it; it will
be managed by the Ministry of information technologies and communications.
5 Election campaign and political context
35. For the early parliamentary elections of 28 November
2010, 20 political parties and 19 independent candidates were registered
by the CEC. The registration process was inclusive. Opinion polls
showed the following parties to have a chance of passing the 4%
threshold for representation in parliament: the Liberal Democratic
Party of Moldova (PLDM), the Liberal Party of Moldova (PLM), the
Communist Party of the Republic of Moldova (PCRM), the Democratic
Party of Moldova (PDM) and the Moldova Noastra Alliance (AMN). The
campaign was pluralist, but the campaign atmosphere, in contrast,
was tense as a result of political polarisation and accusations
mainly directed against those regarded as responsible for the political
and institutional crisis.
36. One development following the failure of the constitutional
referendum was that arguments and mutual accusations increased within
the Alliance for European Integration and signs of disintegration
very rapidly reappeared. Another change was that a gulf developed
between the political parties of the AIE, with the exception of
the Democratic Party, and the PCRM about the following subjects:
condemnation of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, commemoration of 28
June as the Day of Soviet Occupation, evaluation of the communist
legacy, relations with Romania and the Russian Federation, and the
status of the Russian language. All these questions, as well as
various events organised on the occasion of certain specific dates, such
as the march in Chişinău which had been announced on the occasion
of Romania's national holiday, divided Moldovan society.
37. The main political leaders levelled accusations at their opponents,
describing them as "pro-Romanian", "pro-Russian" or "pro-European".
The election campaign further deepened the divergence between the
main political parties on the key issues of the country's domestic
and foreign policy. For example, while the PLDM, PLM and AMN used
campaign slogans calling for the eradication of poverty, the protection
of citizens' rights, and the strengthening of state institutions,
the slogans of the PCRM and PDM on the other hand related to free education,
a free health service for all and increases in pay and pensions.
Similarly, where the country's foreign policy is concerned, the
PLDM, PLM and AMN were in favour of a strategic partnership with
Romania and integration into the Euro-Atlantic structures, whereas
the PCRM and PDM were in favour of pragmatic and strategic relations
with the Russian Federation.
38. A Parliamentary Assembly pre-electoral visit was made to Chişinău
on 26 and 27 October 2010 to assess the state of preparations and
the political climate as the early parliamentary elections of 28
November 2010 approached. The delegation comprised Mr Indrek Saar
(Estonia, SOC), Head of the delegation, Mr Jørgen Poulsen (Denmark,
ALDE) and Mr Andres Herkel (Estonia, EPP/CD). Unfortunately, no
members were available to represent the other political groups of
the Assembly within this delegation.
39. At the end of the pre-electoral visit, the delegation emphasised
the importance of the early parliamentary elections of 28 November
2010, the results of which should at last make it possible for properly
functioning state institutions in conformity with the Constitution
to be set up, and therefore enable the authorities' efforts to be
focused on solving citizens' urgent problems. It also concluded
that active participation by citizens in these elections, despite
a certain lassitude, could help to bring the country out of its
current political crisis.
40. A number of people expressed anxiety about the use of administrative
resources during the election campaign; for example, some local
authorities and university authorities did not always comply with
the principle of equal access for all participants to public places
in order to hold electoral meetings. Some cases were also noted
in which official cars had been used for the election campaign.
The delegation was informed by various political parties of attempts
to pressurise or intimidate political opponents and of other activities contrary
to the principles of the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters
issued by the Council of Europe's Venice Commission. The ad hoc
committee was informed by NGOs of a persistent practice during election events
of distributing gifts bearing the names of political leaders, food
and sundry items.
41. On 5 November, in reaction to complaints from certain political
parties about the problem of access to university buildings to hold
election meetings with students, the Ministry of Education signed
a decree restricting election events in universities to university
working hours and prohibiting school pupils' participation in election
events. On the subject of children's involvement in the election
campaign, Mrs Plamadeala, Ombudswoman for children's rights, issued
a statement calling for children's involvement in political activities to
be prohibited. Most of our discussion partners, with the exception
of the representatives of the PCRM, considered the likelihood of
electoral fraud on polling day to be very slim, but felt that election
campaigns should be fairer, in view of the problems noted.
42. On 18 September, the principal state prosecutor of Moldova
made an official request to parliament to lift the parliamentary
immunity of former President Voronin, so that investigations could
continue into the tragic events of 7 April 2009 and the role which
he had played in them. In this context, on 7 October 2010, the Assembly's
Unified European Left (UEL) group made a statement expressing regret
about this attempt to prevent its member from "free and fair participation
in the election campaign and the elections", also referring to the
matter of his immunity as a member of the Parliamentary Assembly.
On 12 October 2010, the Moldovan Parliament's Legal Affairs and
Immunities Committee refused to lift Mr Voronin’s parliamentary
immunity.
43. Another major theme of the election campaign, which gave rise
to speculation, was the participation of senior state officials
in the election campaign in their capacity as election candidates.
Article 13 of the Electoral Code prohibits participation in election
campaigns by ministers and their deputies, as well as by mayors
and their deputies and heads of districts and their deputies. They
have to suspend their paid activities during campaigns. This prohibition
does not extend to the Prime Minister and President. The Prime Minister complained
to the Constitutional Court, arguing that Article 13 of the Electoral
Code contravened Article 103 of the Constitution on the principle
of continuity of government powers, and that the functioning of
his government would be paralysed. On 9 November, the Constitutional
Court ruled that Article 13 of the Electoral Code was in line with
the Constitution. Nevertheless, the question of the continuity of
institutions, namely the effective functioning of the government
during an election campaign – within the meaning of Article 103
of the Constitution – in the event that members of the government
stand in parliamentary elections, remains, for the future, a challenge
in both the legal and the practical sphere.
44. The legislation on the funding of political parties and election
campaigns establishes legal foundations in this area for the conduct
of the election process. The Electoral Code requires participants
in parliamentary elections to submit to the CEC detailed fortnightly
reports on their expenditure relating to the election campaign, which
are published on the CEC's Internet site. The great majority of
election participants complied with this requirement. However, some
of those to whom we spoke told the ad hoc committee that the financing
of the election campaign was not transparent and that the rules
governing the funding of the election campaign were in fact obscure.
A non-governmental organisation which acts as a human rights resource
centre (CREDO) monitored the financing of the election campaign
in Moldova, showing that undeclared expenditure by the main political
parties was thought to be two or three times higher than the official
figures. Such a situation does not increase citizens' confidence
in the democratic election process.
45. The ad hoc committee was pleased to note that the network
of local non-partisan NGOs involved in observation of the elections
was fairly active in Moldova. The presence of such observers helps
to increase citizens' confidence in the democratic election process.
The Council of Europe, in the framework of its co-operation programmes,
including with the CEC, has implemented an action plan relating
to election observation. The ad hoc committee considers that such
action plans must continue to be developed, with a long-term vision
and in close co-operation with the European Union and the other
international partners present in Moldova.
6 Media environment
46. Media coverage of election campaigns is regulated
by the Electoral Code, the Broadcasting Code and the rules of the
CEC. Audiovisual media, including the public television channel
Moldova 1 and Radio Moldova, are the country's main sources of information,
especially in rural regions, as they cover virtually the whole country.
According to the rules on media coverage, the media have a duty
to ensure equal conditions for all election participants. Teleradio
Moldova, generally speaking, fulfilled its statutory obligations
by providing each election participant with 20 minutes of free airtime
on television and 45 minutes on the radio.
47. The ad hoc committee noted an improvement in media coverage
of the election campaign, including by Teleradio Moldova's public
broadcasting channels, which had in the past tended to favour the
parties in power – whatever their political colour – in their coverage,
something which the Assembly had constantly criticised.
48. However, some of our discussion partners emphasised that the
public channel Moldova 1, which is part of Teleradio Moldova, did
not manage to retain its neutrality and impartiality in its coverage
of election-related news. The PLDM and PLM enjoyed more coverage
that was neutral or positive; some 22% of news programmes were devoted
to government activities. Among the parliamentary parties, the PCRM
was the subject of the majority of the negative coverage.
49. The representatives of the opposition and of the private TV
channel NIT, which broadcasts nationally and is very close to the
PCRM, told the observers that the Moldovan authorities had used
pressure and intimidation against this channel, which had been forced
to leave the premises where it had been based for 11 years. The
premises were located in a public building in which the government
was said to want to house a public agency.
50. According to the explanations given by the government and
the members of the Alliance for European Integration, the TV channel
NIT manipulated public opinion during the election campaign. Furthermore,
the Audiovisual Co-ordinating Council said that it had received
a number of complaints against NIT relating to lack of pluralism
in the opinions expressed in its programmes. The ad hoc committee
was unable to check the accuracy of all the facts put forward by
the different parties. While welcoming the variety of opinions expressed through
the various media, the ad hoc committee considers that the news-reporting
environment could be far more calm, tolerant and non-partisan, and
should avoid becoming a means of propaganda for any political party.
51. As far as media coverage of the election campaign by private
TV channels which broadcast nationally is concerned, Prime TV and
2plus in particular provided coverage more in favour of the PDM.
Both channels have close connections with one of the richest businessmen
in Moldova, Mr Plakhotniuc, who had been added to the PDM list in
second place four days prior to the elections.
52. Generally speaking, the ad hoc committee noted that the media
had made efforts to provide coverage for all election participants,
ensuring that a variety of opinions was expressed, also in the print
media, and that access for opposition parties to public television
channels broadcasting nationally was easier.
7 Polling day and subsequent developments
53. The ballot was well organised and took place in a
peaceful and calm atmosphere. According to the international observers,
ballot procedures were complied with in accordance with the Electoral
Code at 98% of the polling stations visited. The polling stations
opened and closed punctually (from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.). None of the
teams reported a lack of any election material when the polling
stations opened. No unauthorised activity, campaign material or
presence was reported in the immediate vicinity of or inside the
polling stations visited. All the teams observed a very high turnout,
in urban and rural areas alike. The members of the ad hoc committee
were pleased to note active participation by young people in the
elections.
54. In the polling stations where the teams were present for the
counting of votes, this was conducted transparently and speedily,
and generally in conformity with the procedures. The members of
the ad hoc committee reported that counting was made difficult by
the size of the ballot paper, which was 94 cm long. Some members
of the delegation suggested technical changes to make the ballot
paper containing the names of 20 political parties and 20 independent
candidates easier to read. The members of the ad hoc committee also
drew attention to the problem of access to polling stations for
persons with reduced mobility, particularly in rural areas. The
opportunity to vote using mobile ballot boxes seems to be a solution
for elderly persons, especially in rural areas. Some polling stations
in villages were small and were therefore packed with voters.
55. Throughout the day, the members of the ad hoc committee observed
the presence of a large number of observers from the main political
parties participating in the elections, as well as national non-partisan observers.
No observer representing independent candidates was present at the
polling stations visited.
56. On 6 December 2010, the CEC validated the final results of
the early parliamentary elections of 28 November 2010. Turnout in
the elections was 63.35%, with 1 721 037 voters turning out, more
than in the previous elections of 29 July 2009 (58.77%). Four parties
passed the 4% threshold, namely the PCRM with 39.3%, giving it 42
seats, the PLDM with 29.4%, giving it 32 seats, the PDM with 12.7%,
giving it 15 seats, and the PLM with 10%, giving it 12 seats.
57. On 1 December 2010, the PCRM lodged an application with the
CEC for,
inter alia:
- mistakes identified in the counting
protocols to be corrected;
- the supplementary lists to be checked so that double voting
is excluded;
- the PCRM to be provided with copies of the supplementary
lists;
- the number of invalid ballot papers to be checked in the
presence of election participants' representatives;
- the ballot papers cast for the PCRM and PLDM to be recounted;
- the ballot papers in the form of sheets of A4 paper which
were used in the polling stations abroad where there was a shortage
of ballot papers to be declared invalid.
58. On 6 December 2010, the PCRM lodged an application with the
Constitutional Court for a recount of the ballot papers from the
early parliamentary elections of 28 November. On 10 December, the
Constitutional Court decided to authorise a recount of the ballot
papers. On 20 December, the CEC, after a complete vote recount announced
that the PCRM obtained 308 voters more then after the first count.
Nevertheless, the seat distribution remains the same: PCRM – 42
seats; LDPM – 32; PDM – 15; and LPM – 12 seats.
8 Conclusions
59. The ad hoc committee of the Assembly which was asked
to observe the early parliamentary elections of 28 November 2010
in Moldova has concluded that these elections complied with most
of the commitments made to the OSCE and the Council of Europe; they
were conducted transparently and impartially, and the variety of
candidates offered voters a genuine choice.
60. The ad hoc committee was pleased to note that polling day
was calm. A pre-electoral visit made by the Assembly Delegation
to Chişinău on 27 October, one month before the ballot, had addressed
the citizens of Moldova, emphasising that "the active participation
of citizens in the elections, and continuous trust in the democratic
process, despite current lassitude, could help to end the political
crisis". The ad hoc committee wishes to congratulate the citizens
of Moldova on their enthusiasm, democratic conduct and active participation in
the ballot, despite the fact that this was the third parliamentary
election in two years.
61. The ad hoc committee again stresses the fact that it is now
for the main political players, including the parties now in parliament,
whatever their political position, to ensure at last the operational
functioning of public institutions and to place the general interest
of the country above personal or political disagreements.
62. The campaign was pluralistic, but, in contrast, it took place
in a tense atmosphere because of the polarisation of society. The
ad hoc committee regrets that the election campaign was used by
certain political leaders to aggravate still further the divide
in Moldovan society on the difficult issues of the country's recent history,
namely the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, the commemoration of 28 June
as the Day of Soviet Occupation, evaluation of the communist legacy,
relations with Romania and the Russian Federation, the status of
the Russian language, as well as other sensitive questions.
63. In this respect, the ad hoc committee is convinced that it
is a direct responsibility of the main political players to start
a civilised dialogue through the organisation of public debates
with broad participation of civil society and historians, so as
to come to terms with the past and to create the necessary conditions
for reconciliation between the different categories of citizens,
rather than systematically using the painful issues of history for
electoral purposes.
64. On 18 June 2010, approximately four months before the date
of the election, the Moldovan authorities amended the Electoral
Code, particularly Article 87 on the allocation of seats in parliamentary
elections. Prior to this amendment, the Electoral Code provided
for seats to be allocated using the D’Hondt formula, which favours
the parties which have obtained the largest numbers of votes. The
system was replaced by an apparently unique method which gives a
significant advantage to small parties.
65. In this context, the ad hoc committee considers that the choice
of electoral system is a sovereign decision for each state. However,
this choice must be made on the basis of public consultation and
broad agreement among the main political parties. The committee
ad hoc recalls the common conclusions of the IMOE which stresses
that “the adoption, four months before the elections and without
public consultations, of a new mandate allocation system, which
favours small parties led to the wide perception that the change
was designed to benefit the parties in power. This is not in line
with the Venice Commission Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters”.
66. The electoral administration as a whole functioned transparently
and impartially. Despite the efforts made to improve the quality
of the voter lists, their accuracy still remains problematic.
67. Media coverage was on the whole well balanced, including that
provided by Teleradio Moldova's public broadcasters, which had previously
tended to provide coverage more in favour of the parties in power.
The ad hoc committee considers that the news-reporting environment,
particularly in the private national TV channels, could be calmer,
more tolerant and non-partisan, so as to avoid becoming a means
of propaganda for any political party.
68. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe will closely
follow changes in the situation in Moldova in the context of its
monitoring procedure.
9 Recommendations
69. In order to increase citizens' confidence in the
democratic process in Moldova, particularly where elections are
concerned, the ad hoc committee recommends that the following measures
be taken:
- the newly elected
parliament is urged to strengthen its co-operation with the Assembly's
Monitoring Committee in order to improve still further the functioning
of democratic institutions in Moldova and to pursue rigorous reform;
- having set up public institutions after the early parliamentary
elections, the leaders of the main political forces should, without
waiting for the next national elections, engage in constructive
and responsible dialogue on the country's political system, in order
to find the broadest agreement on possible amendments to the current
constitution. The Assembly would be willing to make a contribution;
- as far as the Electoral Code is concerned, it is recommended
that the Moldovan authorities, and more particularly the newly elected
parliament, fully implement the recommendations made by the Venice Commission
on 4 June 2010, in close co-operation with the Venice Commission
and on the basis of broad agreement among the main political parties.
Appendix 1 – Programme
Friday, 26 November 2010
08.30-09.30 Ad hoc committee meeting:
- Opening of the meeting and information on the pre-electoral
mission by Mr I. Saar, Head of the Delegation
- Briefing by other members of the pre-electoral mission
- Political situation and background, Ms B. Abraitiene,
Special Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of
Europe in Moldova
- Recent developments in the field of election legislation,
Mr K. Olszewski, Venice Commission
- Practical and logistical arrangements, Secretariat
Joint Parliamentary Briefing
09.30-09.50 Opening by the Heads of parliamentary delegations:
- Mr T. Picula, Head of the Delegation
of the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE
- Mr I. Saar, Head of the Delegation of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe
- Mrs M. Macovei, Head of the European Parliament Delegation
09.50-10.15 Political background:
- Ambassador P. Remler, Head of the OSCE Mission to Moldova
- Mrs B. Abraitiene, Special Representative of the Secretary
General of the Council of Europe in Moldova
- Mr D. Lorenz, Political Officer, European Union Delegation
to the Republic of Moldova
10.15-11.15 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission:
- Introduction by Mr
P. Eicher, Head of OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission
- Political overview, campaign activities and media landscape:
Ms D. Paprocka-Rzehak, Political Analyst and Mr I. Godarsky, Media
analyst
- Legal framework and complaints: Mr D. Bisson, Legal analyst
- Election administration and Election day procedures: Mr
A. Cayuso, Election analyst
11.30-13.00 Meetings with the representatives of political
parties:
- Mr G. Petrenco, MP,
Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova
- Mrs Fruntasu, Vice-President of the Liberal Democratic
Party of Moldova
- Mrs Fusu, Vice-President of the Liberal Party
- M. Tulea, Vice-President of the Democratic Party of Moldova
- M. Balan, MP, Representative of Moldova Noastra Alliance
13.00-14.30 Lunch Break
14.30-15.15 Meetings with the representatives of political
parties:
- Mr S. Corobcean, MP,
Social Democratic Party
- Mr A. Curararu, Independent candidate
- Mrs T. Ţîmbalist, Independent Candidate
15.15-16.00 Electoral Administration:
- Mr E. Ştirbu, Head of the Central Electoral Commission.
16.00-17.00 Panel with media representatives:
- Ms N. Gogu, Director, Independent
Journalism Centre
- Mr P. Macovei, Director, Association for Independent Press
(API)
- Ms A. Sirbu, Director, TV Moldova 1
- Ms A. Reazantev, general producer, NIT TV
- Mr C. Tănase, Director, Timpul de Dimineaţă
17.00-18.00 Panel with NGO Representatives:
- Mr Postica, Deputy Director,
Promo-LEX Association, election observation mission
- Mr I. Botan, President, Association for Participative
Democracy (ADEPT)
- Mr S. Mereacre, President, East European Foundation (former
Eurasia Foundation)
- Mr S. Ostaff, Director, Resource Center for Human Rights
NGOs in Moldova (CREDO)
Saturday, 27 November 2010
09.00-11.00 Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation
Mission:
- Observation forms:
Mr A. Cayuso, Election Analyst
- Area specific briefing by Long-Term Observers (LTOs) for
the teams operating in Chisinau
11.00 Meeting with interpreters and drivers
Sunday, 28 November 2010
Election day Observation of opening, voting and vote count
Monday, 29 November 2010
08.30-9.30 Debriefing of the ad hoc committee
14.00 Press conference
Appendix 2 – Press release of the international election
observation mission:
Moldovan parliamentary elections met most
international standards
Strasbourg, 29.11.2010 – Yesterday’s early parliamentary elections
in Moldova met most OSCE and Council of Europe commitments, the
international observers concluded in a statement issued today.
The observers noted that the elections were administered in
a transparent and impartial manner and a diverse field of candidates
provided voters with a genuine choice. Election day was assessed
positively although some procedural errors were observed. Civil
and political rights were respected during the election campaign.
A lively and diverse media covered the campaign actively and provided
voters with varied information. A number of amendments to the electoral
code improved the electoral framework overall. However, the introduction
of a new mandate allocation system – shortly before the elections
and without public consultations – was problematic. The quality
of voter lists remained a weak point and led to diminished public
confidence. Further efforts are needed to remedy remaining deficiencies
and strengthen public confidence.
“These elections reflected the will of the people, and were
a positive step in Moldova’s democratic development. We commend
the competitive and pluralistic environment of this country, and
hope that the political forces will act responsibly in building
bridges and bringing Moldova out of this political crisis,” said Tonino
Picula, who led the short-term OSCE observer mission and headed
the delegation of OSCE Parliamentary Assembly.
“We congratulate the citizens of Moldova on their democratic
conduct both during the election campaign and on the election day
itself with a remarkably high turnout. The delegation insists once
again that it now belongs to the main political stakeholders, whatever
their political position, to assure, at last, the functional operation
of public institutions and to put the interests of the country as
a whole over and above their personal or political disagreements,”
said Indrek Saar (Estonia, SOC), head of the delegation of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE).
“The European Parliament delegation observed real democratic
elections, and witnessed the clear improvement of the election process
since the last elections. The election results reflect the will
of the people. When elections are held every year, it is politics
in crisis and not politics as usual. For us these elections mean that
Moldova is perceived as the flagship of the Eastern Partnership
of the EU,” said Monica Macovei, head of the delegation of the European
Parliament.
“I am pleased that we can issue an overall positive assessment.
These elections have strengthened democracy in Moldova. But a number
of deficiencies remain to be tackled. Every effort should be made
to build broad-based support among political parties for the outstanding
reforms of the electoral framework,” said Peter Eicher, head of
the election observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR).
