The Chicu Government during half a year has worked in absolutely unordinary conditions and this is a criterion for assessing its work. During the first four months, there was a minority Government, while during the next two months there was a state of emergency. The previous governments implemented about 30% of the announced programs on average. Due to the pandemic and for other reasons, a number of aspects of the government program of the current executive will most probably remain unimplemented, also because the Government is at half of its mandate, expert Igor Boțan stated in a public debate titled “Government’s performance during six months since its appointment and during two months of state of emergency: pros and cons” that was staged by IPN News Agency.
“I monitored the implementation of the government programs in situations of normality and reached the conclusion that the executives during the last two legislatures managed to implement approximately 30% of their programs. The current program is rather ambitious for an unordinary situation,” stated Igor Boțan.
According to him, the government program presented at the start of the mandate of Prime Minister Ion Chicu serves as a benchmark for assessing the executive’s work. The program specifies the justice sector reform, the reform of the Superior Council of Magistracy and of the Supreme Court of Justice, the testing of prosecutors and judges. It also contains provisions regarding public order, public administration, foreign policy, economic development, energy security, agriculture, Transnistrian issue. “The Government should focus mainly on the justice sector reform and public order as these provisions are very important,” stated Igor Boțan.
The expert noted that another important aspect for assessing the work of the Government is the fact that this executive is at half of its mandate as, when it was appointed, in its government program it said that it will work until the presidential elections. It’s not clear what will happen to this Government after the presidential elections and if it will be reinvested. Such practices when the Government had a mandate of one year only didn’t exist.
“Another criterion for assessing the Government’s work surely derives from the self-assessment of the executive, the appraisal given by the opposition and, evidently, the opinion polls. If we take all these factors together, we can have a picture of the way in which the Government worked during these six months,” stated the expert. According to him, society should have a reference point to be able to appropriately assess the executive’s work, but this is absent and the society’s impression as to the fight against COVID-19 is formed by the mass media. “In such conditions, the question is, how independent the mass media are and if the public opinion is not shaped so as to suit those who are in power as they have all the available instruments in hand?”
The debate titled “Government’s performance during six months since its appointment and during two months of state of emergency: pros and cons” was the 135th installment of the series of debates “Development of political culture through public debates” that are supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.