CEC Continues to Cover Up the Authorities’ Illegal Moves

Cristian RUSSU

As the parliamentary election campaign heats up, the Central Election Commission appears to be acting as PAS’s primary advocate, creating favorable conditions for the party to secure seats

Moldova’s election campaign is now in full swing: August 13 marked the deadline for registering electoral blocs, and just five days later, the legally defined period for candidate registration will be over. As of yesterday, 15 political rivals have either registered or submitted documents to the CEC, officially putting themselves “in the game.” This group includes 4 electoral blocs, 11 parties, and 3 independent candidates. The latest entrants are Olesea Stamate and the Bloc of National Unity. The CEC will announce the final list of participants on August 19 and is eager to showcase its openness and independence through the number of candidates. The aim is to match, or even exceed, the candidate number from the last parliamentary campaign. However, the claim that no electoral rights have been restricted serves the interests of the ruling authorities, not the CEC. In the end, the length of the ballot will serve as the main proof of the PAS regime’s commitment to democratic norms. In terms of eliminating undesirable participants, the electoral commission fulfilled its role by requesting the exclusion of all entities suspected of ties to fugitive oligarch Ilan Sor. The Ministry of Justice must now enforce this through the courts. The move came at the last minute, following changes to the electoral code made just before the election period began on July 14, a new “record” in the country’s political history, once again framed under the banner of protecting democracy. All potential successors to the SOR party, which has been declared unconstitutional, are to be removed from the race. For now, the Revival party remains formally on the candidate list, but that is expected to change, as its case is already under review. Some inconsistencies remain between the actions of the ruling party and the CEC, likely stemming from the over-talkativeness of the outgoing parliament and PAS leadership. For instance, Igor Grosu is alarming the public by attempting to bar Ion Ceban from the elections, citing recent changes to the electoral code. Under these amendments, individuals subject to sanctions like Ceban are supposedly prohibited from running. However, the CEC has yet to receive guidance on how to interpret the expanded Article 16 of the Code. For now, we are left waiting for the “coordination” process to be finalized. On July 14, the government’s propaganda campaign “Moldova Can” officially came to an end, after the Central Election Commission received a corresponding notification from the authorities. In practice, however, few noticed any halt to the campaign by all kinds of officials. Launched early by the authorities as an information campaign and approved by the CEC, it smoothly morphed into political advertising for PAS. The banners remained. The campaign team stayed the same. Only the funding source changed. Since July 14, it has supposedly been funded exclusively by the party, even though the announcement of the campaign account and the call for donations appeared only a month later. The CEC, predictably, found nothing illegal in this. Another curious aspect of the commission’s work is its announcement that 3,298,000 Moldovan voters could theoretically take part in the autumn campaign. These numbers come from the population register of the Public Services Agency, which the CEC integrates into its databases. It is no secret that the register contains “dead souls”, and the only question is the scale and potential for fraud. The 2024 census recorded just 2,400,000 voters in the country, excluding minors. To this must be added residents of the left bank of the Dniester and our precious diaspora. Often, relatives of deceased Moldovan citizens abroad or in the eastern regions fail to notify the authorities, so amid a demographic decline, the voter registry is not shrinking but even growing. Who controls citizens’ passport data at overseas polling stations and how is a big question. So far, we see only indirect signs of a growing number of voters abroad. The organizational base for this expansion is being steadily strengthened. The preliminary number of polling stations abroad has once again set a new record – as of today, 294. Even if this changes, the total will still surpass last year. This, of course, comes with the segregation approach fully intact, where voters’ rights are respected based on the authorities’ geopolitical preferences. For those living in Russia, only two polling stations will be opened, supposedly for “security reasons.” The fact that about ten thousand citizens there have already expressed a desire to vote seems to bother no one. They have all already been labeled “bots”. At the same time, the question remains: who really needed to process dozens of applications from identical email addresses? The CEC made no effort to make postal voting accessible to Moldovan citizens worldwide, limiting it this year to just ten countries, a clear signal of continued segregation. The authorities also appear to have a plan for manipulating diaspora votes: voting can be organized over two days, a provision already reflected in legislation proposed by ruling party deputies. The final news from yesterday concerned the possible imminent extradition of Vlad Plahotniuc to Moldova. His eagerness to return is understandable, given another quirk of the current election rules: anyone abroad wishing to be included on party electoral lists must now appear in person at the Central Election Commission. In other words, for Plahotniuc to appear, for instance, on the party list led by Marian Lupu, he must be registered with the Central Election Commission by August 29. Moldovan prosecution authorities have confirmed that their Greek counterparts have received two additional extradition requests, which are to be processed in full compliance with legal procedures. Curiously, Moldovan diplomats attended yesterday’s session of the Appeals Chamber in Athens. It is not hard to guess why more requests are being submitted when the decision on the first application is already known.