Comments
RULES OF GAME IN PLACE. HOW WILL PARTIES ACT?
Commentary by Igor Volnitchi, Infotag political observer.
Part 2 of 2. Parties Have to Adjust to New Conditions.
The ruling Moldovan Communist Party and the Christian Democratic Popular Party did not simply raise the electoral barrier up to 6%. They also voted team-like for abolishing voting blocs as such, and have thus prevented possible unification of democratic forces who, in apprehension of an electoral failure in the 6% conditions, would certainly form voting blocs. Both the Communists and Christian Democrats remember the year 2001 and 2005, when the voting blocs, created in haste on the eve of parliamentary elections, became the second strongest force in parliament, after the Communists, outstripping even the Christian Democratic Popular Party. In 2001, such force was the Braghis Alliance that won 19 mandates in the 101-member legislature, and in 2005 it was the Democratic Moldova, with 34 mandates.
After that, the Communists had to work so long and so hard to provoke a split between the blocs in parliament and to get rid of a mighty oppositional force. The presence of voting blocs may be good to anybody but only not to the ruling Communist Party or de-jure oppositional Christian Democratic Popular Party: the former are still strong enough to run elections all by themselves, while the latter ones have nobody to form alliances with, as they have managed to make enemies of all parties in the country last 10 years.
The 6%-barrier advocates did all they could to have in the next parliament as few parties as only possible. They are vitally interested in having their main opponents receive under 6% because in that case the percents won by losers will be proportionally divided between parliamentary parties. As a result, the Communists, for instance, can get extra 10-15 mandates – thank to redistribution of the anti-communist electorates’ ballots.
In addition to the above-mentioned 2 crucial changes (a higher barrier and abolishing of blocs), the Communists and Christian Democrats went even further: they railroaded a provision saying that people belonging to a certain party or movement are not eligible to stand for parliament on other parties’ tickets. The MCP and CDPP thus sought to insure themselves against whatever unofficial voting blocs, when the representatives of several parties could run for parliament on one ticket. The Christian Democrats even offered a more radical variant – that party tickets may include only the members of the party concerned. But the Communists voted that idea down.
Iurie Rosca really knew what he was doing and proposing. He knows so well that even one person, being no member of a given party, is able to play a crucial role for the party and bring it to parliament. In 2001, Rosca ‘borrowed’ such an outstanding personality from the then President Petru Lucinschi. It was police general Nicolae Alexei, who was fairly popular here in those days, as the wide public used to perceive him as #1 fighter against corruption. According to unofficial estimates, general Alexei had brought extra 2-3% ballots to the Christian Democratic Popular Party, and the party jumped into parliament all right.
However, the Communists yielded a small concession to the opposition on the election eve: the highly disputable Law prohibiting persons with dual citizenship to hold sensitive state posts was reluctantly re-considered and adopted in a more acceptable shape. So, now the Law stipulates that such dual citizens may run for parliament, but should they really be elected to the forum, they must initiate the procedure of renouncing their second, foreign citizenship, or they must renounce their parliamentary mandates. Thus, many members of pro-Romania parties have obtained the right to stand for parliament in 2009. The draft of this Law might well be reconsidered under the pressure by Moldova’s external partners. Anyway, in its present shape, the document has somewhat alleviated tension in Moldovan political kitchen.
All the said amendments to the Electoral Code have provided advantages to only two political forces – the ruling Communist Party and the oppositional Moldova Noastra Alliance, for only these two can state with confidence they will be necessarily present in the next parliament. Moreover, the higher electoral barrier will bring them next year much more mandates than they have now – thank to the redistribution of the ballots to be won by loser runners.
So, all the rest parties in Moldova have an option that cannot indeed be called rich. As a matter of fact, they have only 2 ways to choose between: either they immediately embark on wide-scale merger activities, or they must work hard to consolidate their positions and, all the same, must take a great risk of running for parliament independently.
Such is the situation that has crystallized in Moldova after the latest amending of the Electoral Code, and it is unlikely to change before the 2009 parliamentary elections.
