On 25 June, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Moldova annulled the results of the 3 June mayoral election in Chişinău, won by the opposition candidate Andrei Năstase. The controversial verdict was reached despite social protests and calls from the EU and U.S. respect for democratic principles. This makes it easier for oligarch Vlad Plahotniuc, who is Moldova’s de facto leader, to retain power. However, at the same time, this moves Moldova away from European standards.
What is the position of the would-be mayor of the capital on the Moldovan political scene?
In 2015, Năstase and Maia Sandu led the biggest anti-government protests in Moldovan history. The protests, were provoked by the scandal of $1 billion fraud in the banking system. Năstase’s Dignity and Truth Platform Party (PPDA) and Sandu’s Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) are the only real, though non-parliamentary, pro-European opposition. Both parties oppose the silent coalition of Plahotniuc and his ruling the Democratic Party, which pay only lip service to concepts of European orientation, and openly pro-Russian President Igor Dodon and his Party of Socialists. Thanks to the alliance between PPDA and PAS, Sandu was nominated as a common candidate in the 2016 presidential election, and Năstase in this year’s Chişinău mayoral election, which he won by gaining 53% of votes in the second round.
Why was the election result annulled?
Ion Ceban from the Party of Socialists, Năstase’s opponent in the second round, lodged a complaint that Năstase had violated election law. He alleged that Năstase had violated election silence by publishing a video in the Internet encouraging voters to make their voices heard (although not specifying any candidate) and that foreigners had participated in his campaign. The Municipal Court in Chişinău dismissed the second allegation, but ruled that Năstase’s film could have had a significant impact on voters' decisions. The court also stated that Ceban had also violated election silence, although no complaints had been lodged. In the end, the court refused to confirm Năstase's victory and annulled the whole second round result. The decision was confirmed by the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.
Why did Plahotniuc care about the annulment of the election result?
Silvia Radu, then acting mayor nominated by the government, lost in the first round of the election. According to Plahotniuc’s calculations, she would have beaten Ceban in the second, round taking Năstase extremely anti-socialist voters. A victory for Ceban would also have been acceptable for Plahotniuc, because this would also obstruct PPDA and PAS activity. However, in the face of Năstase's victory, the annulment of the elections by courts (controlled by Plahotniuc) was the only chance to stop the opposition from seizing power in the capital and using its funds and administrative apparatus before the autumn parliamentary election. Because the Chişinău election was held earlier, and the original scheduled date for the vote is less than a year away, the capital will be ruled until that time by the current deputy mayor, who is associated with Plahotniuc.
What are the possible consequences for Moldova’s international orientation?
Plahotniuc sought support from the EU and the U.S. by presenting himself as a guarantor of Moldova’s pro-Western orientation and opponent of pro-Russian Dodon. Before the Supreme Court's decision, the U.S. Department of State and the European External Action Service issued statements calling on the Moldovan authorities to respect the will of voters and international standards. Ignoring these calls by the democrats may indicate their readiness to engage in electoral manipulation to keep power, sacrificing country's achievements on rapprochement with the EU. This may be confirmed by Moldova’s disregard of Venice Commission recommendations regarding an electoral law amendment beneficial to democrats. The refusal prompted the EU to withhold €100 million earmarked for macroeconomic assistance in Moldova.
What are the possible implications for the Eastern Partnership?
Symptoms of the Moldovan authorities' slide away democracy may be an argument for EU countries sceptical about the Eastern Partnership. This coincides with the European Commission's proposal to cancel the European Neighbourhood Instrument for 2021 to 2017, which was intended to help Eastern Partnership and Southern Neighbourhood countries to adapt to EU standards. In place of this and 12 other instruments addressed to external partners, the EC is seeking one new instrument focused on assistance for transit or migrant countries should be established. The consequences may be a significant reduction of funds for the functioning of the Eastern Partnership, and further discouragement for its constituent countries to push ahead with pro-European reforms that would be difficult for their societies to accept.
