Pavel Postica: Election invalidation situation can be overcome by improving legislation


The situation generated by the invalidation of the Chisinau early mayoral elections can be overcome by improving the legal framework so as to exclude possibilities of interpreting the legislation with ill will, Pavel Postica, programs director at Promo-Lex Association, said in the public debate “Legislative and political, internal and external solutions to the conflict situation generated by invalidation of Chisinau elections”, which was the 92nd installment of the series “Developing political culture by public debates” staged by IPN News Agency.

He noted the current electoral legislation enables to hold relatively free and fair elections, but only when all the players involved in the electoral process are well-intentioned. Regrettably, in the recent mayoral elections a large part of the players showed ill will in the interpretation of the legislation and imposition of penalties, in the adoption of particular decisions by the state authorities. That’s why, when there is such a tendency, the modification of the electoral framework is the only solution that should be taken.

Pavel Postica said he would have never imagined that a judge who should judge can become part of the process and can turn into an player, which is inadmissible. “There was no application, from no candidate, concerning the invalidation of elections. The electoral authorities asked to validate the elections. The voters didn’t complain about the election results. Why did the judicial system turn into a player in this process?” he asked.

He considers the supreme legislative body is to blame for what happened. “We have a Constitutional Court judgment of 2016 that obliges Parliament to bring the electoral legislation in order and there are six requests in this regard. Regrettably, even if the legislation clearly provides that these requests were to be satisfied within three months, most of them are directly related to what happened in Chisinau, including the solving of electoral disputes, organized transpiration of voters or electoral agitation on the day of elections. Then the Constitutional Court pointed out particular problems, noting that these should be solved,” he stated.

According to Pavel Postica, the judicial system made a mistake and seems to be following an incorrect direction when it is about such a negative phenomenon as selective justice. “We have a problem with the proportional application of punishment and here Parliament should determine who was actually penalized – the candidate who was elected and wasn’t invested or the voters who took part in the elections?”, he said, adding the Central Election Commission’s decision to end the electoral process that should have continued until the election of the mayor is worrisome.

In another development, Pavel Postica said the politicians do not hold discussions to find common solutions to the situation generated by the invalidation of elections because most of the politicians who can really take decisions in Moldova at present abide by the principle “Divide and conduct!”. The politicians create preconditions for generating competition where this should not exist and for avoiding competition where this should exist.

The debate “Legislative and political, internal and external solutions to the conflict situation generated by invalidation of Chisinau elections” forms part of the series of public debates staged by IPN News Agency and Radio Moldova within the project “Developing political culture by public debates” that is supported by the German Hanns Seidel Foundation.