FINAL REPORT - Promo-LEX · Capriana village (Straseni d.), Ghiliceni township (Telenesti d.). The purpose of the final report is to show a general view of the entire electoral process

Chisinau

Observation Mission

of the Local Referendum on the Dismissal of the General Mayor of Chisinau municipality

and of the New Local Elections of 19 November 2017

FINAL REPORT

Published on 23 January 2018

2

All rights reserved. The content of the Report may be used and reproduced for not-for-profit purposes and without the preliminary consent of Promo-LEX Association, provided that the source of information is indicated.

The Observation Missions for the local referendum on the dismissal of Chisinau Mayor General and the new local elections of 19 November 2017 are funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and are co-funded by the Justice and Human Rights Development of Soros Foundation-Moldova.

The opinions set out in the public reports of Promo-LEX are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the donors’ view.

3

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 4

SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................................... 6

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF CHISINAU MAYOR GENERAL ............................................ 6

B. THE NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 ............................................................................ 8

OBSERVATION OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN ............................................................................................... 11

I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................................... 11

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF CHISINAU GENERAL MAYOR ...................................... 11

B. NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 .............................................................................. 13

II. ELECTORAL BODIES ................................................................................................................................ 15

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF CHISINAU MAYOR GENERAL ...................................... 15

B. NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 .............................................................................. 23

III. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION ..................................................................................................................... 32


B. THE NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 (3 DECEMBER 2017) ..................................... 33

IV. ELECTION CANDIDATES ........................................................................................................................ 35


B. THE NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 ...................................................................... 37

V. FINANCING OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN ............................................................................................ 39


B. NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS ..................................................................................................................... 46

VI. HATE SPEECH ........................................................................................................................................ 52

VII. CIVIC INVOLVEMENT AND ELECTORAL EDUCATION ............................................................................ 53

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF CHISINAU GENERAL MAYOR .......................................... 53

B. NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 .................................................................................. 54

ELECTION DAY ............................................................................................................................................... 55

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF THE GENERAL MAYOR OF CHISINAU MUNICIPALITY ..... 55

B. THE NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 .......................................................................... 57

RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 59

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 61

Annex 1 ......................................................................................................................................................... 62

4

INTRODUCTION

The final report was developed following the Promo-LEX Observation Mission of the local referendum on the dismissal of Chisinau General Mayor and of the new local elections of 19 November 2017. The report covered the activity of the central team and of the long-term observers (LTO): 4 October – 8 December 2017, and the activity of the short-term observers (STO) on the election days – 19 November and 3 December 2017, respectively (second round and re-run of the new local elections).

The local referendum was held with regards to the dismissal of Dorin Chirtoaca from the position of General Mayor of Chisinau municipality. The new local elections were organised with the aim to elect the mayors in the following settlements: Singera town (Chisinau mun.), Berlinti township (Briceni d.), Zirnesti township (Cahul d.), Plopi township (Cantemir d.) Stefanesti township (Floresti d.), Fundurii Noi (Glodeni d.), Lapusna township (Hincesti d.), Sarateni township (Leova d.), Capriana village (Straseni d.), Ghiliceni township (Telenesti d.).

The purpose of the final report is to show a general view of the entire electoral process. The report was developed by the central team of the Promo-LEX OM on the basis of the findings of observers. It describes the activity of all stakeholders involved in the organisation and conduct of elections: public authorities, electoral bodies, political parties, independent candidates and the civil society.

This report makes reference to the international standards developed by UN, OSCE, European Commission For Democracy through Law, European Union and Council of Europe. Recommendations for public and electoral authorities, potential election candidates and other stakeholders, aimed at improving the electoral process, can be found at the end of this report.

OBSERVATION METHODOLOGY

The Promo-LEX Observation Mission (OM) for the local referendum on the dismissal of Chisinau General Mayor and for the new local elections of 19 November 2017 are projects carried out by Promo-LEX Association under the Civic Coalition for Free and Fair Elections. Promo-LEX Association is a Non-Government Organisation that aims at developing the democracy in the Republic of Moldova, including the Transnistrian region, by promoting and defending the human rights, monitoring the democratic processes, and strengthening the civil society.

The electoral process was monitored in all the constituencies established for the elections of 19 November 2017, including in Chisinau constituency, in the context of the local referendum. On the day of the referendum and of the local elections, Promo-LEX delegated a short-term observer (STO) to each of those 307 and 24 opened polling stations (PS), respectively. In 5 PS from Singera t. both ballots were conducted at the same time. Therefore, the Promo-LEX OM delegated one observer to monitor the new local elections and another one to monitor the local referendum. On 3 December 2017, 11 STOs monitored the second round of the new local elections and the re-run.

All the observers involved in the monitoring process were trained at the seminars organised by the Promo-LEX Mission and signed the Code of Conduct1 of the Promo-LEX Independent National Observer, undertaking to act quickly, in good faith and in a non-partisan manner. The activity of all the observers is coordinated by the central team of the Association.

The official and public information, including observers’ standardized reports, produced as a result of visits planned randomly in each settlement in the area of responsibility, weekly visits to electoral bodies and reports of events worked out outside the visits normally planned when observers happen to identify electoral events, served as source for the drafting of public reports by the Observation Mission. During the planned visits, the observers collected information from discussions, meetings and reviews of official documents.

1https://promolex.md/4689-codul-de-conduita-al-observatorilor-electorali-promo-lex/?lang=ro

https://promolex.md/4689-codul-de-conduita-al-observatorilor-electorali-promo-lex/?lang=ro

5

Promo-LEX Observation Mission is not a political opponent for the election candidates involved in the electoral process, it is not an investigation body and does not assume the express obligation to support its findings by evidence. However, to the extent possible, the observers’ reports are accompanied by photo and video evidence, that can be made available only to law enforcement bodies upon proper requests and never to election candidates. Promo-LEX Election Observation Mission manages the web platform www.monitor.md, where each citizen can report on the electoral activities. The Mission’s observers verify them during the next visit planned in the settlement, where such activities were reported.

Promo-LEX OM is carried out under the ‘Democracy, Transparency and Accountability Program’, which is supported financially by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Hate speeches and discrimination were monitored under the ‘Consolidation of a platform for the development of activism and education in the area of human rights in Moldova’ Project, funded by the Justice and Human Rights Department of Soros Foundation Moldova. The opinions presented in the reports of Promo-LEX belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect the donors’ view.

http://www.monitor.md/

6

SUMMARY

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF CHISINAU MAYOR GENERAL

During 4 October – 20 November 2017, the Observation Mission for the local referendum on the dismissal of Chisinau Mayor General, with the help of five long-term observers, one medium-term observer and one regional coordinator, carried out a plenary monitoring of election procedures and participants. The Report was drafted on the basis of the analysis of the templates filled in by Promo-LEX observers and namely: 366 visit templates, 255 event templates, 5 visit templates for the visit to the Chisinau Municipality Electoral Constituency Council ((ECC II). On the day of the referendum, Promo-LEX observers were present in all the 307 PS opened for this purpose.

The referendum held in Chisinau municipality was held to decide whether to dismiss the mayor or not. ECC II registered only 2 participants in the local referendum of 19 November 2017: the Socialist Party of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM) and the Liberal Party (PL). At the same time, the Council rejected Dorin Chirtoaca’s application to be registered as a participant in the local referendum for the following reasons: the applicant violated the provisions of Article 41 of the Electoral Code (submission of the registration file in person, by the applicant) and failed to comply with the provisions of CEC Decision No 1145 of 3 October 2017 (lack of individuals on the list of potential participants in the local referendum).

Having analysed the legal framework, the Mission concluded that the procedures regarding the organisation and conduct of the local referendum were regulated faultily. Although the Electoral Code contains a separate chapter for local referenda, a number of procedures that should be followed by all the election stakeholders are not described sufficiently or are even missing. Other regulatory acts, that would extend the Code’s provision, are also insufficient in terms of their number and regulatory scope. In this context, Promo-LEX underscores that there are plenty of aspects that are not clearly regulated or that leave room for interpretation, e.g.: the status of participants in a referendum is not regulated enough and there is no definition of it in the Electoral Code; the categories of participants in a referendum are too restrictive; the concept of election campaign for a referendum leaves room for interpretation; voting by active duty servicemen, etc.

The local referendum on the dismissal of the mayor was organised and conducted with the joint efforts of CEC and ECC II. To organise and have a properly conducted local referendum on 19 November 2017, CEC adopted 32 decisions, of which: 16 were adopted for the general organisation of the procedures; 10 accredited 737 national observers and 4 international observers (of the national observers – 449 (60.92%) were appointed by Promo-LEX OM); 4 were meant to record the financial statements of the participants in the election campaign; 2 were adopted to invalidate the local referendum and close down Chisinau ECC No 1 and the associated EOPS.

CEC received 5 complaints from the participants in the referendum and some active citizens, but none of them were examined and they were sent back to their authors. We believe it timely and necessary to revisit the legislation to make it provide for concrete mechanisms allowing one to enjoy the right of filing a complaint regarding electoral matters and to inform the contenders and the active citizens about the content and specific nature of the procedures in a way as to avoid institutional ‘ping-pong’ situations that can be interpreted as avoidance of responsibilities, which worsens meaningfully the legitimacy of electoral processes.

The electoral constituency and the constituency council were established on time. ECC II operated without a chairperson, which – in the opinion of the OM – is a precedent that affects the favourable organisation of elections. ECC worked according to the established program, with the work schedule and membership of the council being public. The gender statistics show that the membership of ECC was balanced (45% – women and 55% – men).

7

As many as 307 PS were set up for the local referendum, but they did not work flawlessly. Promo-LEX observers reported that in only 58% of the EOPS the information on the membership and headquarters of the EOPS was made available to the public. In 50% of the EOPS, the management of the office was appointed after the deadline. Also, having made 324 visits to the 307 EOPS, the observers found that in 55 cases (17% of the visits), the headquarters of the EOPS were closed during the work hours.

The EOPS headquarters were not quite accessible. Promo-LEX observers found that of the 307 PS, only 154 PS (49%) had access ramps. The membership of EOPS is not gender-balanced. Of the 2977 members, 75% are women and 25% – men.

Promo-LEX OM found that the gap between the number of voters in the State Register of Voters (SRV) and the number of voters in the main voter lists was meaningful for a short period of time (1 September – 3 November 2017). We believe that in such situations, the responsible authorities must prove explanations that don’t leave room for interpretation. The voter lists reached 51.14% of the PS with a delay. In 14 PS (4.56%), the members of the EOPS told the observers what faults they found: that names of deceased persons were on the lists, that some voters’ addresses were incorrect, that strangers were registered as living in places where they did not actually live, that certain addresses were assigned to other PS, etc.

The role of LPA in the organisation of the local referendum was to appoint the members of the lower-level electoral bodies, provide places for posters, identify the PS premises, etc. At the same time, we found a low degree of compliance of LPA with the legal provisions on making public the information on the electoral process organisation. Thus, according to Promo-LEX observers, 23 LPAs passed decisions on the establishment of the minimum number of special places for electoral posters. However, such decisions were displayed at the headquarters of only 2 LPAs (Bacioi and Cruzesti). In the same context, all of these 23 LPAs passed/issued decisions on the provision of special venues for the meeting of the candidates with the voters, but only 2 LPAs made the respective information public (Cruzesti and Vatra).

Promo-LEX observers found that at least 243 electioneering activities were conducted. PSRM was involved in 206 cases of electioneering, while PL – in 37. Among the most frequent were the following: newspaper distribution (85 cases), meetings with voters (70 cases), electoral tents (65 cases), etc.

Eleven cases in which administrative resources were allegedly used during the election campaign were reported: PSRM – 5 cases and PL – 6.

Promo-LEX observers reported 326 cases of electoral advertising (outdoor/promotional/on-line): PSRM – 282 instances, PL – 44.

In the context of financial monitoring of the local referendum, Promo-LEX OM appreciates the harmonisation of the Regulation on the election campaigns funding with the new provisions of the Electoral Code, including the recommendations drafted previously by the mission. The funds of the participants in the referendum came from financial donations from individuals, which amounted to MDL 2 520 330 (PL – 14 donors that donated MDL 402 800, PSRM – 159 donors that donated MDL 2 117 230). Promo-LEX observers found that the reporting on advertising on TV, in the written media, on the radio and even on-line was better.

However, the reporting on promotional outdoors and mobile advertising, on expenses for transport and volunteer involvement was poor. Promo-LEX observers noticed electioneering activities that imply unreported expenses in addition to the reported ones, which flags an insufficient level of transparency in reflecting the funds used. The estimated amount of unreported expenses goes up to, at least, MDL 683 708 (PSRM – MDL 637 053; PL – MDL 46 655).

An important aspect that Promo-LEX OM believes needs to be monitored closely, considering the trends during the last election campaigns and the behaviours of election candidates, is hate

8

speeches. In the context of the local referendum, Promo-LEX Association noticed several cases that can be regarded as hate speeches, the target of which was mostly Dorin Chirtoaca: in at least 5 instances the hate speeches were against this politician, while in one instance, he made a hate speech himself.

From the perspective of civic education, we found that the representatives of the civil society organised one single activity in the form of public debates. The electoral debates organised by broadcasters were accepted by PSRM and boycotted by PL, as Dorin Chirtoaca insisted vehemently to be registered as a participant particularly because he wanted to promote his own viewpoint.

In principle, the polling stations were opened and closed according to the regulatory requirements. It was reported that about 14% of the polling stations were opened with insignificant delays. On the electoral day, the most frequent and the most serious incidents include certain deficiencies in the operation of Elections SAIS (at least 5 cases), deficiencies in the lists of voters (at least 16 cases), voters not understanding the question of the referendum (at least 14 cases), ballot boxes not being sealed as required by the law (22 cases), ballot papers being taken pictures of (10 cases), etc. Also in 2 of the 307 PS (PS 111 and PS 187), the members of the EOPS did not give the observers a copy of the minutes each.

The parallel vote tabulation allows identifying some insignificant differences in terms of percent and impact between the final results of the Promo-LEX OM compared against those of the electoral authorities. Still, the sole fact that such differences exist is reason enough to be concerned, given that the calculations are supposedly made on the basis of minutes with identical content.

B. THE NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017

During 4 October – 4 December 2017, the Observation Mission for the new local elections of 19 November 2017 conducted a full monitoring of the election campaign for the new local elections, having 5 long-term observers and one national coordinator. The Report was drafted on the basis of the analysis of the templates filled in by Promo-LEX observers and namely: 80 visit templates, 33 event templates, 33 visit templates for the visits at the level-one ECC. On the election days (19 November and 3 December 2017), the Promo-LEX STOs were present in all the opened PS (24 and 11, respectively).

The elections were organised in 10 level-one constituencies. Level-one ECCs registered 29 election candidates, of which 4 were independent candidates, whereas 25 were nominated by 8 political parties, as follows: PDM – 10 candidates, PSRM – 7 candidates, PN – 2 candidates, PPRM – 2 candidates, PCRM – 1 candidate, PL – 1 candidate, PNL – 1 candidate and PPEM – 1 candidate. Most candidates were registered for the position of mayor in Singera t. (Chisinau mun.) – 6 candidates, fewest candidates – Lapusna twp. (Hincesti d.) and Plopi twp. (Cantemir d.) – 1 candidate each. During the campaign, 3 candidates withdrew from the electoral race (PPRM and PCRM). Promo-LEX OM found signs implying that two of them might have been intimidated or put pressure on.

Promo-LEX OM found that the new local elections have a more precise legal framework and fewer procedures and phenomena that leave room for interpretation, compared to the legal framework for local referenda. This is because of a more persistent practice in the area. However, Promo-LEX OM warns about some aspects, the clarification of which, in our opinion, would improve considerably the quality of the following procedures: submission of the certificate of integrity during the registration, without any delays; explicit legal regulation of the way the citizens with domicile and residence shall vote, by removing interpretable notions and situations; voting of the active duty servicemen deployed in the settlement in which they have their domicile and where the elections are held etc. We would like to highlight that, unfortunately, most of the issues have a repetitive nature, being mentioned in our previous monitoring reports.

9

In order to organise and conduct the new local elections of 19 November 2017, the CEC adopted 62 decisions: 10 decisions set the date of the elections in those 10 settlements throughout the country; 30 decisions regulated the main organizational aspects of the process; 13 decisions envisaged the establishment and composition of ECC; other 7 decisions envisaged the financial statements of the electoral candidates; 2 decisions related to setting the second round of elections and election re-run.

In relation to the actions of stakeholders involved in the electoral process, CEC received 7 appeals from election candidates, as well as from active citizens. No appeal was examined on the merits, all of them were rejected/sent back or redirected. Similarly to the local referendum, Promo-LEX OM found an issue with the reliability and functionality of the appeal filing/examination mechanism. Their return and redirecting affect severely the perception of process integrity.

The constituencies, as well as the electoral constituency councils were established in line with the legal provisions. The deadline for organising the first meeting of level-one ECC and for electing the management of the electoral management bodies concerned was met. The work schedule was followed, with some exceptions (Capriana and Lapusna ECC). As well, level-one ECC from Capriana failed to publish its composition and work schedule. In terms of gender statistics, level-one ECC membership is not balanced: out of 74 members, 78% are women and 22% are men. At the same time, 60% of ECC chairpersons were men. The polling stations and their electoral offices were established according to the timeline. All premises are public property. In one case (EOPS No 20/41 from Lapusna twp., Hincesti district) the management was elected later than the established deadline. The work schedule was not followed properly: during 15 out of the 59 visits of Promo-LEX observers to the 24 PS, the offices were closed during opening hours (25.42%). The gender statistics reveal a lack of balance: out of 174 EOPS members, 81% were women. The accessibility of premises is limited: only 8 out of 24 PS had access ramps (4 out of them are located in Singera constituency).

Promo-LEX OM found that EOPS members from the constituency of Berlinti twp., Briceni d. were involved in collecting applications for voting at the place of voter’s residence, which violates the legal provisions. We believe that this is a precedent that affects severely the quality of electoral processes and we ask the senior electoral management bodies not to allow the spreading of such practices.

The voter lists arrived to 50% of the EOPS with a delay. The deficiencies detected by EOPS members in the voter lists are the following: deceased people included on the list (7 EOPS) and address errors (3 EOPS). No big changes in the number of voters on the voter lists were reported compared to the presidential election of 2016.

The role of local public administration (LPA) in the monitored new local elections related to the organisation of the elections. Given that the mayor's duties are performed by an interim mayor, Promo-LEX OM found that, in principle, the LPA had honored its obligations, contributing to the good organization of the process. In one out of 10 LPAs, the decision on the establishment of places for electoral posters and venues for meetings with voters was not publicly displayed (Fundurii Noi v.), while in another one – such a decision was not passed at all (Lapusna twp.). In the same context, according to Promo-LEX observers, only one LPA (Berlinti twp., Briceni d.) out of the 10 concerned did not provide special venues for the meetings of candidates with voters.

According to Promo-LEX observers, at least 24 electioneering cases were found and the most frequent types of activity were meetings with voters (11 cases), dissemination of information materials (6 cases), concerts (3 cases), etc. By candidate, most of the cases were reported in connection with: PSRM (8), PN (8) and PDM (6).

There were found 5 cases that may be qualified as provision of goods and services during the election campaign, which related to the candidates of PDM (3 cases); PSRM (1 case) and PL (1 case). Such goods and services include repairing and putting public premises into exploitation, bags with food and organisation of pilgrimages.

10

Promo-LEX OM reported 37 cases of electoral advertising (outdoor/promotional/on-line). Broken down by candidates, we see that the most active were: PDM (10), PN (8), PL and PSRM (6 each). At the same time, at least 4 candidates were found to use promotional advertising in violation of the legal provisions.

During the election campaign, only 4 out of 12 ECs confirmed their treasurers at CEC and only 2 opened ‘Electoral Fund’ accounts, which implies that only these ones were supposed to have spendings for financing the election campaign – PDM, PN, PNL and PSRM. Also, only 3 out of 4 independent candidates (IC) submitted declarations of not incurring any expenses, while one IC, according to Promo-LEX observers, submitted neither a financial statement, nor a declaration of not incurring any expenses to the level-one ECC.

According to the findings of Promo-LEX observers, for the period from 17 October to 1 December 2017 (the first election round), 5 election candidates (PPEM, PL, PN, PSRM, IC Afina Scutaru) either used funds that they did not fully declare or failed to reflect certain expenditures in their financial statement. No undeclared expenses were reported for the second round of elections. The total amount of unreported expenditures goes up to, at least, MDL 25 208.

Civil activism was not promoted extensively by the civil society organisations during the election period for the new local elections. Nonetheless, Promo-LEX Association managed, under its civic and electoral education component, to inform about 3 400 voters about the need for a conscience vote, by means of door-to-door activities. The Association also organised three public debate sessions with the participation of 7 out of the 10 candidates running in the election campaign and of about 260 citizens with the right to vote.

The organisation of the new local elections was less covered in the media than the local referendum from Chisinau municipality. Actually only two stages of the organization and conduct of elections procedure were covered: CEC issuing a decisions on the conduct of new local elections (at least 16 national and 3 regional websites) and the election day (at least 10 national and 2 regional websites). Compared to the local elections of 14 May 2017, we found an increased interest of online media in the new local elections.

In principle, the polling stations were opened and closed on the election days according to the regulatory requirements. On the election day, the most frequent and the most serious incidents include unjustified presence of unauthorised persons inside or within 50 m from the polling station (33 cases); situations that can be qualified as material rewards or money offered to voters (4 cases); organised transportation of voters, deficiencies in the lists of voters, ballot papers being taken pictures of and unjustified group voting (3 cases of each).

The parallel vote tabulation by Promo-LEX OM revealed differences that were insignificant and had no impact on the final results. Nevertheless, the fact that discrepancies exist, though the calculation should be done on the basis of the same minutes, could raise concerns that the minutes were changed after the observers saw them.

11

OBSERVATION OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN

I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Local referendum. Having analysed the legal framework, the Promo-LEX OM found that the procedures regarding the organisation and conduct of the local referendum were regulated faultily. Although the Electoral Code contains a separate chapter for the local referendum, a number of procedures that should be followed by all the election stakeholders are not described sufficiently or are even missing. Other regulatory acts, that would extend the Code’s provisions, are also insufficient in terms of their number and regulatory scope. In this context, Promo-LEX Association underscores that there are still plenty of aspects that are not clearly regulated or that leave room for interpretation, e.g.: the status of participants in a referendum is not regulated enough and there is no definition of it in the Electoral Code; the categories of participants in a referendum are too restrictive; the concept of election campaign for a referendum leaves room for interpretation; voting by active duty servicemen, etc.

The new local elections have a more precise legal framework and fewer procedures and phenomena that leave room for interpretation, if compared to the legal framework for local referenda. This is because of a more persistent practice in the area. However, Promo-LEX OM warns about some aspects, the clarification of which, in our opinion, would improve considerably the quality of the following procedures: submission of the certificate of integrity during the registration without any delays; legal and explicit regulation of the way the citizens with domicile and residence shall vote, by removing interpretable notions and situations; voting of the active duty servicemen deployed in the settlement in which they have their domicile and where the elections are held etc. We would like to highlight that, unfortunately, most of the issues related to the legal framework of the new local elections have a repetitive nature, being mentioned in our previous monitoring reports.

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF CHISINAU GENERAL MAYOR

1.1. Legal Context

Broadly, the referendum is the vote of the people on the most important problems in state’s and society’s life. As a form of referendum, the local referendum means consulting the citizens on issues of special interest for the village (township), town, city (municipality), district, special status administrative-territorial unit. Mayors of villages (townships), towns and cities (municipalities) are also revoked though local referendum. In this respect, Article 177 from the Electoral Code reiterates that besides the problems of particular significance for the settlement, the local referendum may also be held on the dismissal of the mayor, when he or she does not comply with the interests of local community, fails to fulfil appropriately the duties falling under the mandate of locally elected person, provided by law, violates the moral and ethical norms.

It is the will of 10% of the citizens with the right to vote, residents of the Chisinau municipality that served as grounds for organising the referendum of 19 November 2017 on dismissal of Chisinau General Mayor.

On 12 September 2017, the Chisinau Municipal Council adopted the Decision No 8/2, by which it proposed to the Central Electoral Commission to hold the local referendum on the dismissal on the Chisinau General Mayor, Dorin Chirtoaca, on 19 November 2017. The following question was decided to be the object of the referendum: ‘Susțineți revocarea primarului general al municipiului Chișinău, dl Dorin Chirtoacă?’ and Russian version: ‘Поддерживаете ли вы отзыв генерального примара

12

Муниципия Кишинэу, г-на Дорина Киртоакэ?’ (eng. ‘Do you support the dismissal of Chisinau General Mayor, Dorin Chirtoaca?’).

As a result, on the basis of the duty provided for in Article 179 of the Electoral Code, the superior electoral body adopted the Decision No 1122 of 19 September 2017 establishing that the local referendum on the dismissal of Dorin Chirtoaca from the position of Chisinau General Mayor will be hold on 19 November 2017.

1.2. Law Enforcement Issues, Reflected in the Intermediary Reports

During the local referendum campaign, Promo-LEX OM identified and presented in its intermediary reports several issues of legal nature:

- Registration of participants in the referendum2. As regards the subjects that may be registered to promote an option for referenda, Promo-LEX Association expresses its concern that this right is limited literally only to political parties. The definition of ‘participant in the referendum’ suggested by CEC in the Instruction on the way of participation of political parties and other social-political organisations in the election campaign for the republican referendum, which is not found in the Electoral Code and is not defined clearly in the law, should be given a broader meaning that would include other stakeholders than political parties: citizens, electoral blocks or initiative groups. - Situation of voters having both domicile and residence in the context of the local referendum3.The local referendum and the local elections are two types of elections, which are similar in terms of organisation, conduct and their meaning for the settlement. At the same time, a special rule (Article 123) was established for local elections, according to which the voters who do not reside in the relevant administrative-territorial unit shall not participate in the elections of the local council and mayor. To unify the rules of electoral processes, Promo-LEX Association highlights that a similar provision should be included in the ‘Local referendum’ chapter. However, like the provision of Article 123, it should give priority either to the voters’ domicile or their residence. - Use of the voting right certificate4. Having analysed the provisions of the Electoral Code regarding the voting right certificate, Promo-LEX Observation Mission found the lack of a clear definition of this voting mechanism, its role in the electoral process and the subjects it is meant for.

1.3. Summary of Law Enforcement Issues as of the End of Campaign

1.3.1. Legal grounds for circulars issued by CEC

In order to avoid the erroneous interpretation of the Electoral Code and different application of the law during the organisation and conduct of the local referendum of 19 November 2017, CEC issued 3 circulars detailing how lower-level electoral bodies have to apply electoral procedures. Other 5 circulars were issued in the context of the new local elections of the same date.

Note that Article 22(1)c) of the Electoral Code stipulates that CEC shall develop regulations and instructions meant to improve the electoral procedures. Neither the Electoral Code nor the Regulation on the operation of the Central Electoral Commission have provisions about the circulars as documents. Similarly, the Commission did not make any reference to the legal grounds of the circulars in the text of the circulars issued in connection with the elections of 19 November 2017.

2Report No 1 - Observation Mission for the local referendum on the dismissal of Chisinau General Mayor and the new local elections of 19 November 2017 (hereinafter referred to as Report No 1), p. 11. https://promolex.md/10708-raportul-nr-1-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro 3 Report No 1. (p.13) https://promolex.md/10708-raportul-nr-1-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro 4Report No 2 – Observation Mission for the local referendum on the dismissal of Chisinau General Mayor and the new local elections of 19 November 2017 (hereinafter referred to as Report No 2), p. 10. https://promolex.md/10808-raport-nr-2-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro

https://promolex.md/10708-raportul-nr-1-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro





https://promolex.md/10808-raport-nr-2-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro



13

At the same time, Article 26(1)a) of the Electoral Code provides that the CEC, when performing its duties during an election period, shall coordinate the activity of all electoral bodies in order to prepare and conduct the election in line with the rules of the Electoral Code. As well, in line with Article 22(2) of the Code, during the organisation and conduct of elections the Commission shall collaborate with state-owned enterprises and institutions, central and local public authorities, media and public associations.

Taking into account the aforementioned CEC duties, the dissemination of circulars seems to result from them and to be, in this respect, an instrument by means of which the Commission carries out its functions. Nevertheless, an explicit regulation of the circulars as document of the senior electoral body would be appropriate and would give them a determined legal force.

Promo-LEX OM welcomes the dissemination of circulars by CEC during an election period and encourages strengthening their legal grounds, but they have to remain guiding documents, with details and explanation of electoral procedures and not set primary rules that would be missing from the Electoral Code or CEC Regulations or would contradict them.

1.3.2. Uncertain Rules for Sealing the Ballot Boxes

When monitoring the local referendum of 19 November 2017, Promo-LEX OM found multiple cases where stationary ballot boxes were sealed with only two seals.

The Guidelines on Enabling the Polling Station Infrastructure provide at point 26 that the ballot boxes shall be secured through sealing. The stationary ballot boxes and the mobile ballot boxes shall have the possibility to be sealed by means of 4 and, respectively, 2 collar-type self-locking seals. The seal code shall be written down in the minutes on the preparation of the polling station.

We believe that the phrase ‘shall have the possibility to be sealed’ leaves room for interpretation, i.e. it is potentially deficient, because the incomplete sealing of the ballot box can be caused by ballot papers manipulation.

For this purpose, we recommend to amend the Guidelines on Enabling the Polling Station Infrastructure by introducing express provisions on the procedure of ballot boxes sealing and the obligatory number of applied seals.

B. NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017

1.1. Legal Context

On the basis of the legal grounds for the organisation of new local elections provided for by Article 139(1) of the Electoral Code, the CEC took note of the circumstances found in some settlements and passed decisions on setting the date of 19 November 2017 as the day for the new local election of the mayor in 10 settlements. With respect to the found circumstances, out of 10 mayors, whose position became vacant, 6 mayors submitted resignation letters, 1 mayor is unable to perform the duties due to sickness and 3 mayors passed away.

1.2. Law Enforcement Issues during the Election Period5

- Participation of active duty servicemen with the domicile in the settlement where the new local elections are held. We refer to the right of military staff to vote in local elections and in this respect, the Article 123(1) of the Electoral Code stipulates that ‘the servicemen fulfilling the in-term military service may not attend the local elections’. However according to Promo-Lex, the

5 Report No 1 (p.15) https://promolex.md/10708-raportul-nr-1-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro



14

situation is completely different when the active duty servicemen have their domicile in the settlement where the military unit is located and where the election takes place. In other words, they should be admitted to the electoral process. - Voting by citizens with valid domicile and residence on the local election day. Promo-LEX Observation Mission for the local elections from 19 November 2017 underscores repeatedly the uncertain regulation that leaves room for interpretation when it comes to the restrictions to exercise the right to vote of voters who have both domicile and residence at the same time. We believe that the legal and explicit regulation on how the citizens that have both valid domicile and residence on election day and citizens without domicile and residence visa shall vote on the election day is extremely important – not only to ensure the uniformity of the legal framework, but also to avoid interpreting rules and adopting decisions that give a temporary solution to the problem. - Submission of the certificate of integrity issued by the National Integrity Authority for the registration of the election candidate. Following the amendments made to the Electoral Code by Law No 154 of 20 July 2017, enacted on 21 July 2017, besides the documents that are traditionally necessary to register the candidates, now the candidate must personally submit the certificate of integrity to the CEC or ECC. The new local election proved that the authorities could find it difficult to comply with this provision. Following the current practice and given the future parliamentary election, the Promo-LEX OM considers that the electoral management bodies and other public institutions involved must be prepared to face the new procedural challenges in order to avoid any delays in the registration of candidates.

15

II. ELECTORAL BODIES

Local referendum. The local referendum on the dismissal of the mayor was organised and conducted with the joint efforts of CEC and CMECC. To organise and have a properly conducted local referendum on 19 November 2017, CEC adopted 32 decisions that were relevant for the respective democratic process. CEC received 5 complaints from the participants in the referendum and from some active citizens, but none of them were examined by the authority.

The electoral constituency and the constituency council were established on time. ECC worked according to the established program, with the work schedule and membership of the council being public. Gender statistics show that the membership of ECC was balanced (45% – women and 55% – men).

A total of 307 PSs were established. There were issues in their operation. In only 58% of the EOPS the information on the membership and location of the EOPS was made available to the public. In 50% of the EOPS, the management of the office was appointed past the deadline. Also, having made 324 visits to the 307 EOPS, the observers found that in 55 cases (17% of the visits), the venues of the EOPS were closed during the work hours. Promo-LEX observers found that of the 292 PS that were visited, only 137 PS (47%) had access ramps. The membership of EOPS is not gender-balanced. Of the 2977 members, 75% are women and 25% – men.

New local elections. In order to organise and conduct the new local elections of 19 November 2017, CEC adopted 62 decisions relevant for the process. In relation to the actions of stakeholders involved in the electoral process, CEC received 7 appeals. No appeal was examined by CEC, all of them were rejected/sent back or redirected.

The constituencies, as well as the electoral constituency councils were established in line with the legal provisions. The work schedule was followed, with some exceptions (Capriana and Lapusna). In terms of gender statistics, level-one ECC membership is not balanced: out of 74 members, 78% are women and 22% are men.

The polling stations and their electoral offices were established according to the timeline. The work schedule was not followed properly: during 15 out of the 59 visits of Promo-LEX observers to the 24 PS, the offices were closed during opening hours (25.42%). The gender statistics also reveal a lack of balance: out of 174 EOPS members, 81% were female. The accessibility of premises is limited: only 8 out of 24 PS had access ramps. The voter lists arrived to 50% of the EOPS with a delay. The deficiencies detected by EOPS members related to the following: deceased people included on the list (7 EOPS) and address errors (3 EOPS).

Promo-LEX OM found that EOPS members from the constituency of Berlinti twp., Briceni d. were involved in collecting applications for voting at the place of voter’s residence, which violates the legal provisions.


2.1. Decisions of the Central Electoral Commission

2.1.1. Overview

To organise and have a properly conducted local referendum on 19 November 2017, CEC adopted 32 decisions during the election period, which were relevant for the respective democratic process, out of which: 16 decisions focused on the general procedures for the organisation and conduct of the referendum; 10 decisions accredited national and international observers to monitor the local referendum of 19 November 2017; 4 decisions were meant to record the financial statements of the participants in the election campaign of the local referendum; 2 decisions by means of which,

16

subsequent to the voting and knowing its results, CEC invalidated the local referendum and closed down the level-two Chisinau ECC and the associated EOPSs.

2.1.2. Appeals

Altogether during the monitored period CEC received 5 complaints from the participants in the referendum and from some active citizens. We would like to mention that no appeal was examined, all of them were sent back to the people who submitted them. The appeals were filed against the action/failure to act of the lower-level electoral bodies (four appeals) and the activity of participants in the referendum (one appeal).

We believe it is timely and necessary to revisit the legislation to make it provide for concrete mechanisms allowing one to enjoy the right of filing a complaint regarding electoral matters and to inform the candidates and the active citizens about the content and specific nature of the procedures in a way as to avoid institutional ‘ping-pong’ situations that can be interpreted as avoidance of responsibilities, which affects severely the legitimacy of electoral processes, things that were emphasised by the Constitutional Court as well.

2.1.3. Establishment of the Level-Two Constituency and of Chisinau Municipality Electoral Constituency Council No 1

Both the electoral constituency and the constituency council were established according to the timeline provided by the legislation and by the CEC Calendar for the conduct of the local referendum. Thus, by Order No 943-d of 29 September 2017, the Chisinau Municipal Council proposed to establish the level-two Chisinau Municipal Constituency. As a result, by Decision No 1146 of 3 October 2017, CEC established the Chisinau Municipal Electoral Constituency No 1.

As well, on 10 October 2017, CEC adopted the Decision No 1173 establishing Chisinau CMECC No 1, consisting of 11 members. At the same time, according to Article 188(3) of the Electoral Code, the chairperson of Chisinau CMECC No 1, in charge of conducting the local referendum, shall be elected by the Chisinau Municipal Council. Note that Chisinau CMECC No 1 operated until the end without a chairperson, since Chisinau Municipal Council never elected one.

2.1.4. Other Aspects of Collaboration with Lower Level Electoral Bodies

Dissemination of circulars. In order to avoid the erroneous interpretation of the Electoral Code and different application of the law, CEC issued to level-two Chisinau ECC and EOPS 3 circulars where it provided details on the following:

- subjects that may vote in the local referendum and the applicable restrictions, as well as the identification documents, on the basis of which one may vote;

- packaging, sealing and transmission of documents and materials; - method of voting in Singera constituency No ¼.

Relationship between the number of voters in the State Register of Voters (SRV) and the number of voters in the main voter lists. In the opinion of Promo-LEX OM, authorities must show more openness and proactive communication in order to explain the short-term differences between the number of voters in the SVR and the one in the main lists of voters. Having compared the data from the main voter lists in Chisinau municipality and the data from the State Register of Voters (SRV), we found significant differences: 18 713 voters in 2016 (in the context of presidential election) and 17 368 in 2017 (in the context of the local referendum)6.

6 Report No 2 (p.13-14) https://promolex.md/10808-raport-nr-2-misiunea-de-observare-a-referendumului-local-privind-revocarea-primarului-general-al-municipiului-chisinau-si-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro



17

2.2. Activity of Chisinau Municipality Electoral Constituency Council No 1

2.2.1. Work Schedule of Chisinau CMECC No 1

From 17 October to 17 November 2017, except for the days off, Promo-LEX observers made 5 field visits to level-two ECCs. As a result, they found that it had worked according to the approved work schedule (the office was open). It was also reported that the membership and location of level-two ECC was made public, in line with the legal terms.

2.2.2. Registration of Participants in the Local Referendum

Chisinau ECC registered 2 participants in the local referendum on the dismissal of the mayor:

1) PSRM, by Decision No 5 of 12 October 2017 (statement regarding the chosen option – ‘pro’). 2) PL, by Decision No 10 of 22 October 2017 (statement regarding the chosen option – ‘against’).

At the same time, the request of Dorin Chirtoaca to be registered as participant in the local referendum was rejected, by Decision No 9 of 19 October 2017 of Chisinau CMECC No 1. The reasons invoked were the following: the applicant violated the provisions of Article 41 of the Electoral Code (submission of the registration file in person, by the applicant) and failed to comply with the provisions of CEC Decision No 1145 of 3 October 2017 (lack of individuals on the list of potential participants in the local referendum).

2.2.3. Membership of Chisinau Level-Two ECC, by Genders

The Promo-LEX OM assessed the level of compliance with the Law on Gender Equality when the members of level-two CMECC were appointed. Thus, it was found that out of 11 members of level-two ECC, 45% of them were women and 55% were men (See Chart 1). At the same time, we note that the position of CMECC chairperson stayed vacant.

Chart 1

2.2.4. Establishment of polling stations

Chisinau level-two ECC established the polling stations by the deadline. Thus, Chisinau ECC No 1 established 307 PS on the basis of the Decision No 7 of 18 October 2017, which is by 5 less than for the 2016 presidential election (Centru district).

As for the location of PS offices, according to Promo-LEX observers, 301 PS offices were opened in public locations (see Chart 3) and 6 PS offices were opened in private locations. Thus, most of the 307 PS (236) were located in educational institutions (schools, lyceums, kindergartens), public institutions (25 PS) and in state institutions (22 PS).

18

Chart 2

In comparison with the Presidential Elections of October-November 2016, 11 PS changed their location (5 in Botanica district, 4 in Buicani district, 1 in Centru district and 1 in Durlesti town).

The accessibility of PS premises is a separate topic. Promo-LEX observers found that of the 307 PS that were visited, only 156 PS (49%) had access ramps (see Chart 3).

Chart 3

2.2.5. Establishing electoral offices of polling stations and changing the membership

The procedures and deadlines regarding the establishment of EOPS were observed. Thus, Decision No 13 of 26 October 2017 of Chisinau level-two ECC established 307 electoral offices, of which 47% consisted of 11 members, 41% – of 9 members and 12% – of 7 members, respectively (see Chart 4).

19

Chart 4

Having analysed the data provided by 270 PS open at the time of the visit, Promo-LEX observers reported that the number of members in 28 EOPS changed, one of the key reasons being that some EOPS members resigned (68%, either for personal reasons, or because of incompatibility with the position of members of an electoral body), while in other EOPS the number of members increased (21%) (see Chart 15).

Chart 5

2.2.6. Registration of representatives with the right to consultative vote and accreditation of observers

The Promo-LEX OM reported that each of the two participants in the referendum – PSRM and PL – appointed for the local referendum a representative to Chisinau level-two ECC. Also, according to the Promo-LEX observers, Chisinau level-two ECC accredited 478 observers (see Chart 6).

20

Chart 6

2.3. Activity of the electoral offices of polling stations

2.3.1. EOPS work schedule

According to Article 188(6) of the Electoral Code, within 2 days from the establishment date, the EOPS should make public the names of their members, the location of their office and the means of contacting them. Promo-LEX observers reported that 58% of the EOPS observed this provision (see Chart 7).

Chart 7

From 30 October to 17 November 2017, except for the days off, Promo-LEX observers made 324 visits to 307 EOPS. They found that in 55 cases (17% of the visits) the EOPS premises were closed. The EOPS premises that were found to be closed at the first visit, were visited repeatedly.

Also, on the date of 13 and on 16 November 2017, respectively, Promo-LEX observers called by phone 60 PS during the working hours. The polling stations were selected, starting with PS 3 and PS 6, respectively, by applying the counting step of 10. The phone was answered in only 16 out of the 60 PS called.. Therefore, we may conclude that the work schedule was not observed in these cases (see Chart 8).

21

Chart 8

Of the 16 PS that were interviewed, 14 had heating (87.50%), 15 (93.75%) had internet and enough light.

2.3.2. EOPS Membership, by Genders

The Promo-LEX OM assessed the level of compliance with the Law on Gender Equality when appointing the members of EOPS. Thus, it was found that in the EOPS (established by Decision 13 of 26 October 2017 of Chisinau level-two ECC), 75% of the 2977 members were women and 25% were men (See Chart 9).

Chart 9

The management of the EOPS was also analysed from the same perspective. It turned out that 79% of the managerial positions were filled in by women, while 21% – by men (checked in 270 PS, as 37 PS were closed). See Chart 10.

27%

73%

Survey based on 60 called PS

Answered Did not answer

22

Chart 10

2.3.4. Compliance with the deadline for the election of the EOPS management

The information provided by Promo-LEX observers revealed that in 50% of the EOPS the deadline provided for by the law (within 2 days since the date that the EOPS was established on – see Chart 11) was violated.

Chart 11

2.3.5. Verification of voter lists by EOPS Promo-LEX OM found that the term within which the voter lists were supposed to be sent to the EOPS to ensure that the voters could check the accuracy of the data was not observed in 157 EOPS (see Chart 12).

Chart 12

23

The Promo-LEX Association is concerned with the fact that the members of the following 5 EOPS – 1/19, 1/82, 1/85, 1/205 and 1/206 – refused to provide details regarding the activity of the PS for various reasons. Later, when they were visited for the second time, 2 of them provided the requested information (EOPS 1/82 and 1/85). In addition, another 26 EOPS (see Chart 13), although open, denied access to voter lists for various reasons (they were either locked in the safe box, the keys to which were with the chairperson who was gone, or the EOPS members were not at the office, etc.).

Chart 13

Also, the data provided by the Promo-LEX OM observers and the discussions with the members of the EOPS revealed a number of issues with the quality and content of the voter lists in 14 EOPS (see Chart 14). Thus, the presence of deceased persons of the voter lists represented the greatest share of flaws (36%), followed by incorrect addresses (22%), strangers registered as living on voters’ address (14%), reassignment of some streets to other PS (14%), etc.

Chart 14


2.1. Decisions of the Central Electoral Commission

2.1.1. Overview

In order to organise and conduct the new local elections of 19 November 2017, CEC adopted 62 decisions. Thus, due to the legal circumstances regarding the organization of new elections, 10 decisions were adopted to set the date of the elections in those 10 settlements throughout the country. Later, 38 decisions were adopted to clarify some general aspects regarding the organisation

24

of procedures. Additionally, CEC adopted 7 more decisions whereby it accredited observers to monitor the new local elections of mayors in certain settlements on 19 November 2017. CEC also issued 7 decisions whereby it recorded election candidates’ financial statements.

2.1.2. Establishment of Level-One Constituencies and their Electoral Councils

On 3 October 2017, in compliance with the Electoral Code and the Timetable, CEC adopted the Decision No 1144 on the establishment of level-one constituencies for the conduct of the new local elections of 19 November 2017 as follows: Singera t. No 1/4, Chisinuu municipality; Berlinti twp. No 6/6, Briceni district; Zirnesti twp. No 7/37, Cahul district; Plopi twp. No 8/19, Cantemir district; Stefanesti twp. No 18/33, Floresti district; Fundurii Noi v. No 19/10, Glodeni district; Lspusna twp. No 20/21, Hincesti district; Sarateni twp. No 22/18, Leova district; Capriana v. No 30/3, Straseni district; Ghiliceni twp. No 34/14, Telenesti district.

In compliance with the Articles 26, 27 and 120 of the Electoral Code, as well as the Timetable, on 9 October 2017 CEC also adopted the Decisions No 1149-1158, on the basis of which 10 level-one ECCs were established. Two of them consisted of 9 members (Capriana village and Fundurii Noi village), and the other 8 ECCs – of 7 members. The councils’ memberships were found to be stable, reporting only two changes in the level-one ECCs (Fundurii Noi village and Plopi township). The change was caused by the resignation of 2 ECC members.

At the same time, according to the information submitted by Promo-LEX observers, the deadline (till 12.10.2017) for organising the first meeting of level-one ECC and for electing the management of the electoral management bodies concerned was met.

After the new local elections, by the Decision No 1310 of 12 December 2017, CEC dissolved the level-one ECC and EOPS that were created for the purpose of organising and conducting the new local elections of 19 November and 3 December 2017.

2.1.3. Cooperation with the Lower Level Electoral Bodies

To improve the electoral procedures of the new local elections in certain localities of the country, CEC disseminated 5 circulars detailing the actions of the range of electoral procedures:

- voters who may vote in the new local elections, the applicable restrictions, as well as the identity documents on the basis of which one may vote; - procedure and subjects of voting based on the voting right certificates; - use of the certificate of integrity for registration of candidates; - making the adopted decisions public using the means provided by LPAs; - peculiarities of voting in the second round of the new local elections of 3 December 2017.

2.1.4. Appeals

In relation to the actions of the stakeholders involved in the electoral process, CEC received 7 appeals both from election candidates (3 appeals), and from active citizens (4 appeals). No appeal was examined on the merits. All of them were either sent back to the applicant or redirected to other public institutions for examination (Anti-corruption Prosecutor’s Office, court of law, General Police Inspectorate). The appeals were filed against the action/failure to act of the lower-level electoral bodies (5 appeals) and the activity of the election candidates (2 appeals).

2.2.Activity of Level-One Electoral Constituency Councils

2.2.1. Work Schedule of Level-One ECC

From 17 October to 30 November 2017, except for the days off, Promo-LEX observers made 35 visits to all 10 level-one ECC (at least 3 visits to each). As a result, it was found out that the level-one ECC of Capriana was closed during 2 visits, and the level-one ECC of Lapusna was closed during one visit.

25

ECC informed the public about their composition and registered offices in compliance with the legal provisions, except for level-one ECC of Capriana7 (see Chart 15).

Chart 15

2.2.2. Registration of Candidates for the New Local Elections

For the new local elections of 19 November 2017, 29 election candidates in 10 level-one ECC were registered for the position of mayor. Out of them, 4 candidates were independent candidates and 25 were appointed by political formations (see Chart 6). The Annex 1 to the Report lists all the candidates for the position of mayor in all 10 constituencies.

Chart 16

Withdrawal of Candidates. During the election campaign 3 candidates have withdrawn. Thus, on the basis of Article 46 of the Electoral Code, on 8 November 2017 Ms. Pasenco Maria – PPRM candidate for the position of Mayor of Plopi twp., submitted a request to the level-one ECC of Plopi, asking to withdraw her candidacy for the position of Mayor because of personal health condition.

7 The Report No 1 (p. 25) states that 3 level-one ECC did not comply with the respective provisions. However, the second and third visits showed that 2 out of 3 level-one ECC met the said obligation – their work schedule has been made public. https://promolex.md/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/RAPORT-nr.1_02.11.2017_final_web.pdf

https://promolex.md/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/RAPORT-nr.1_02.11.2017_final_web.pdf

26

During the discussion with a Promo-LEX observer, Ms. Pascenco stated that there was no pressure or threats from the election candidate or other persons.

Situations that can be Qualified as Intimidation of Candidates. At the same time, when visiting Stefanesti (Floresti d.) on 3 November 2017, Promo-LEX observer found out that the candidates nominated by PCRM (Patras Valeriu) and PPRM (Pupeza Anton) for the position of Mayor, were pressured by their employer – Mr. Oleg Zabica, head of ‘Valenagro Com’ S.R.L. Company. During the meeting and discussion with Mr. Pupeza Anton, as well as in a telephone conversation with Mr. Patras Valeriu, both candidates acknowledged that they had discussions with their employer concerning their decision to run for Mayor. Later, on 7 November 2017, and, respectively, on 8 November, the candidates Patras Valeriu and Pupeza Anton submitted requests to level-one ECC of Stefanesti, asking to withdraw them from the electoral race on their own initiative.

2.2.3. Membership of Level-One ECC, by Gender Promo-LEX OM assessed the level of compliance with the Law on Gender Equality when assigning members in level-one ECC. Thus, out of the 74 members of level-one ECC 78% are women and 22% are men (see Chart 17). At the same time, 60% of ECC chairpersons were men.

Chart 17

2.2.4. Establishment of polling stations Promo-LEX observers reported that the procedures and deadlines regarding the establishment of EOPS were complied with. Note that in case of Fundurii Noi and Capriana villages, level-one ECC also had the role of EOPS (the said settlements had only one PS each).

As for the location of offices, according to Promo-LEX observers, all the PS offices were opened in public locations (see Chart 18). Most of the 24 PS (12) were located in educational institutions (schools, lyceums, kindergartens), followed by those located in Culture Houses (9 PS). In comparison with Presidential Elections of October-November 2016, one PS changed its location (Plopi v. – it changed its location from kindergarten to the Culture House).

Chart 18

27

2.2.5. Establishment of EOPS. Changes to the Membership

Promo-LEX observers reported that the procedures and deadlines regarding the establishment of EOPS were complied with. Thus, 2 of the 24 EOPSs consisted of 5 members, 17 – of 7 members and 5 – of 9 members. The changes in the numerical composition were reported by 10 EOPS, 4 of which increased the number of members from 7 to 11 (level-one ECC of Singera), while 6 changed the members.

2.2.6. Registration of representatives with the right to consultative vote and accreditation of observers

Promo-LEX observers reported the registration of 8 representatives with the right to consultative vote in 5 level-one ECC (PDM – 4; PSRM – 2; PN – 1 and IC – 1). Concurrently, at least 8 electoral bodies issued accreditations for 20 observers, as follows: PDM – 11; PSRM – 4; PPEM – 1; IC – 2; NGO – 2 (see Table 1).

Table 1. Representatives with the right to consultative vote registered by level-one ECC

No ECC Representatives with the right to consultative vote

Observers

1. Sarateni v., Leova PDM (1); Independent Candidate (1) PDM (2), IC (2) 2. Plopi v., Cantemir PDM (1) PDM (3) 3. Berlinti twp., Briceni PDM (1); PN (1) - 4. Fundurii Noi v., Glodeni PSRM (1) PSRM (1), PDM (1) 5. Stefanesti twp., Floresti PSRM (1), PDM (1) PSRM (1) 6. Ghiliceni twp., Telenesti - PDM (2) 7. Singera t., Chisinau - PDM (1), PPEM (1) 8. Zirnesti twp., Cahul - PSRM (2), PDM (2) 9.

Lapusna twp., Hincesti - Speranta NGO of Carpineni

(2)

2.3. Operation of the Electoral Offices of the Polling Stations (EOPS)

2.3.1. EOPS work schedule

From 30 October to 30 November 2017, except for the days off, 59 visits to 24 PS were made. Promo-LEX observers reported that during 15 visits (25.42%) the offices were closed during opening hours.

At the same time, According to Article 29(12) of the Electoral Code, within 2 days since the EOPS establishment date, its members shall elect the management of the office. According to the information provided by Promo-LEX observers, at least 1 EOPS violated the legal time limits for electing the chairperson, deputy chairperson and secretary (EOPS No 20/41 of Lapusna twp., Hincesti d.), where the first meeting was held one day later than requested by law.

Promo-LEX observers also reported 5 cases in which the EOPS members did not publish the information regrading the name of EOPS members and their working schedule, respectively (see Chart 19).

28

Chart 19

Besides this, on 10 November and on 15 November 2017, respectively, Promo-LEX observers called by phone 24 PS during their working hours. The phone was answered in only 16 out of the 24 PS called, which means that not all offices respect their work schedule. Of the total 16 EOPS interviewed, 15 had heating and enough light, while 11 were connected to the Internet (see Chart 20).

Chart 20

2.3.2. EOPS Membership, by Genders

Promo-LEX observers found that 81% of the 174 EOPS members were women. At the same time, out of 72 management positions (chairperson, deputy chairperson and secretary), 81% were occupied by women and 19% – by men (see Chart 21).

Chart 21

29

2.3.3. Accessibility of EOPS Offices

According to legal provisions, the registered offices of polling stations shall be arranged so as to be accessible for the elderly and persons with disabilities. Promo-LEX observers found that only 8 PS had access ramps, 4 of which were in the level-one ECC of Singera (see Chart 22).

Chart 22

2.3.4. EOPS Actions in Violation of the Legal Rules

Promo-LEX OM found that EOPS members from the constituency of Berlinti twp., Briceni d. were involved in collecting applications for voting at the place of voter’s residence, which violates the legal provisions. The discussions with the chairpersons of the 2 EOPS revealed that this was done when the members of the offices distributed invitations urging people to turn out to vote.

With 1000 voters who voted (got ballot papers) during the second round of elections, 124 applications for voting at home were registered with the EOPS. Out of them, 123 people actually voted. Accordingly, the 123 votes cast at home in relation to the 1000 ballot papers issued, represent 12.30% of the total number of voters who participated in the elections. Given that the difference between the candidate who won and the one who ranked second was of just 28 votes, the number of 23 votes cast at home, collected in most cases in violation of the legal rules, could have probably had a decisive weight in deciding who was the winner.

2.3.5. Verification of Voter Lists

The Promo-LEX OM found that the number of voters on the main voter lists is not significantly different from their number at the 2016 presidential elections. What is more, the number of voters in half of the settlements where the new local elections were held decreased.

According to the law, the lists of voters shall be made available at the PS premises 20 days before the election day. In this context, the Promo-LEX OM found that the term within which the voter lists were supposed to be sent to the EOPS to ensure that the voters could check the accuracy of the data was not observed in 12 EOPS (50%) (see Chart 23).

30

Chart 23

As regards voters accessibility to voter lists, in 4 EOPS (30/11 from Capriana, 20/39, 20/40 and 20/41 from Capriana), according to reports, voters’ access to voter lists was difficult because most of the time the offices were closed.

Also, the data provided by the Promo-LEX OM observers and the discussions with the members of the EOPS revealed a number of issues with the quality and content of the voter lists (see Chart 24). The most frequent issue is that deceased persons are included in the main voter lists (7 EOPS), followed by incorrect addresses (3 EOPS).

Chart 24

2.3.6. Registration of representatives with the right to consultative vote

The Promo-LEX observers found that 14 EOPS registered 19 representatives with the right to consultative vote for the new local elections (See Chart 25). Most of the representatives were appointed by PDM (9 representatives), followed by PSRM (5 representatives).

31

Chart 25

32

III. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Local referendum. The role of LPA in the organisation of the local referendum was to appoint the members of the lower-level electoral bodies, provide places for posters, identify the PS premises, etc. At the same time, we found a low degree of compliance of LPA with the legal provisions on making public the information during the electoral organisation. Thus, according to Promo-LEX observers, 23 LPAs passed decisions on the establishment of the minimum number of special places for electoral posters. However, such decisions were displayed at the offices of only 2 LPAs (Bacioi and Cruzesti). In the same context, all of these 23 LPAs passed/issued decisions on the provision of special venues for the meetings of candidates with voters, but only 2 LPAs made the respective information public (Cruzesti and Vatra, Chisinau municipality).

New Local Elections. The role of local public administration (LPA) in the monitored new local elections related to the organisation of the elections. Given that the mayor's duties are performed by an interim mayor, Promo-LEX OM found that, in principle, the LPA had honored its obligations, contributing to the good organization of the process. In one (Fundurii Noi v.) out of 10 LPAs, the decision on the establishment of places for electoral posters and venues for meetings with voters was not publicly displayed, while in another one (Lapusna twp.) – such a decision was not passed at all. In the same context, according to Promo-LEX observers, only one LPA (Berlinti twp., Briceni d.) out of the 10 concerned did not provide special venues for the meetings of candidates with voters.


3.1. Election Organization Activities Involving Local Public Authorities (LPA) During the monitored period, LPA was involved in the following types of activities provided by the law in force, according to the responsibilities on the electoral process organization: appointing the members of level-two ECC; providing special places for electoral posters and venues for meetings with voters; appointing EOPS members; participating in the identification of potential PS locations that are public property; participating in checking the lists of voters; providing EOPS the needed equipment.

3.2. Establishment of Places for Electoral Posters and Venues for Meetings with Voters According to Article 47(7) of the Electoral Code, the LPAs are obliged to establish and ensure, within 3 days since the initiation of the election period, the minimum number of special places for electoral posters, the minimum number of venues for meetings with voters. These decisions/provisions shall be immediately displayed at the offices of these authorities and made known to the interested subjects through the media. Promo-LEX observers found that 23 LPAs took decisions on the establishment of the minimum number of special places for electoral posters. Of them, only 2 authorities (Bacioi and Cruzesti LPAs) displayed this decision at their offices. The decisions were not displayed in the other 21 authorities (see Chart 26).

Chart 26

33

In the same context, according to Promo-LEX observers, all 23 LPAs passed/issued decisions on the provision of special venues for the meeting of the candidates with the voters (see Chart 27). However, only 2 LPAs made the respective information public (Cruzesti and Vatra, Chisinau municipality). Note that the venues provided for the election candidates to organize meetings with voters were free of charge.

Chart 27

B. THE NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS OF 19 NOVEMBER 2017 (3 DECEMBER 2017)

3.1. Election Organization Activities Involving Local Public Authorities (LPA)

During the monitored period, LPA was involved in the following types of activities provided by the law in force, according to the responsibilities on the electoral process organization: appointing the members of level-one ECC; providing special places for electoral posters and venues for meetings with voters; appointing EOPS members; participating in the identification of potential PS locations that are public property; participating in checking the lists of voters; providing EOPS the needed equipment. 3.2. Establishment of Places for Electoral Posters and Venues for Meetings with Voters Promo-LEX observers found that for the new local elections of 19 November 2017 (3 December 2017), 9 out of 10 LPAs took decisions on the establishment and guaranteeing the minimum number of special places for electoral posters (see Chart 28). Of them, 8 authorities displayed this decision at their offices, while one authority (Fundurii Noi twp.) did not publicly display it. The tenth LPA (Lapusna twp., Hincesti d.) approved no decision on the special places for posters and venues for meetings, respectively.

Chart 28

34

In the same context, according to Promo-LEX observers, only one LPA (Berlinti twp., Briceni d.) out of the 10 concerned did not provide special venues for the meetings of candidates with voters. The other 9 mayoralties provided venues for the meetings with the election candidates free of charge, although 2 of them (Capriana and Lapusna) passed no decision to this end (see Chart 29). At the same time, note that only 5 LPAs published the decision on providing venues for the meetings of the election candidates.

Chart 29

35

IV. ELECTION CANDIDATES

Local referendum. Promo-LEX observers found that at least 243 electioneering activities were conducted. PSRM was involved in 206 cases of electioneering, while PL – in 37. Among the most frequent were the following: newspaper distribution (85 cases), meetings with voters (70 cases), electoral tents (65 cases), etc. Promo-LEX observers reported 326 cases of electoral advertising (outdoor/promotional/on-line). Broken down by participants, we found 282 cases of promotion conducted by PSRM and 44 – by PL. The promoting materials most used by PSRM include: newspapers, posters, and the use of caps, bags, coats with party/referendum symbols.PL used posters, leaflets, electoral posters and on-line sources.

Eleven cases in which administrative resources were allegedly used during the election campaign were reported, and namely: organization by the participants in the referendum of meetings with the voters from state institutions during their work program: PSRM – 5 cases and PL – 6. Broken down by public institutions, these meetings were held in: health care (4), education (5), other public institutions (2).

New Local Elections. According to Promo-LEX observers, at least 24 electioneering cases were found. The most frequent types of such activity were meetings with voters (11 cases), dissemination of information materials (6 cases), concerts (3 cases), etc. By candidate, most of the cases were reported in connection with: PSRM (8), PN (8) and PDM (6). Promo-LEX OM reported 37 cases of electoral advertising (outdoor/promotional/on-line). Broken down by candidates, we see that the most active were: PDM (10), PN (8), PL and PSRM (6 each). Among the most used promoting materials are the following: leaflets/posters – at least 18 cases and banners – at least 12 cases. At the same time, at least 4 candidates were found to use promotional advertising in violation of the legal provisions.

The 5 cases that may be qualified as provision of goods and services during the election campaign related to the candidates of PDM (3 cases); PSRM (1 case) and PL (1 case). Such goods and services include repairing and putting public premises into exploitation, bags with food and organisation of pilgrimages.


4.1. Promotion Activities

The reports of Promo-LEX observers found the conduct of at least 243 electoral activities (See Chart 30). PSRM was involved in 206 cases of electioneering, while PL – in 37.

Chart 30

* newspapers have been distributed not only on the street, but also in the postal boxes of apartment building, during other events (for instance, during the meetings with the voters, at electoral tents, etc.).

36

4.2. Cases that can be Qualified as use of Administrative Resources During the Election Campaign

In this context, Promo-LEX observers reported 11 cases when the participants in the referendum held meetings with the voters from state institutions during their work program (see Chart 31). Hence, these meetings were held in: health care (4), education (5), other public institutions (2). PSRM participants were involved in 5 cases, while PL – in 6.

Chart 31

4.3. Outdoor/Promotional/On-line Advertising

Promo-LEX observers reported 326 cases of use of this kind of advertising (see Chart 32). Broken down by participants, we found 282 cases of promotion conducted by PSRM and 44 – by PL. The promoting materials most used by the socialists include: newspapers, posters, and the use of caps, bags, coats with party/referendum symbols. The liberals used posters, leaflets, electoral posters and on-line sources.

Chart 32

At the same time, note one case when a political party, not registered as a participant in the referendum – the National Unity Party (PUN), on 13.11.2017, displayed in Durlesti t. (Gribov Street) a leaflet on the information board asking the population to boycott the referendum of 19.11.2017.

37


4.1. Activities/Events during the Election Campaign According to Promo-LEX observers, at least 30 electioneering activities were organised. Most of the activities were conducted by the election candidates for the position of mayor of Singera t. (50% of all reported activities), followed by the electoral activities conducted by the candidates for the position of mayor from Berlinti twp. (23.33%), Stefanesti twp. (10%), Ghiliceni twp. (10%), Lapusna twp. (3.33%) and Capriana (3.33%) – see Chart 33.

Chart 33

4.2. Cases that can be Qualified as Provision of Goods and Services during the Election Campaign Promo-LEX OM observers found at least 5 cases that can be qualified as provision of goods and services to voters during the election campaign: PDM – 3 cases (Berlinti (2) and Lapusna); PSRM – 1 case (Berlinti); PL – 1 case (Singera). Such goods and services include contributions to repairing/refurbishing and putting public premises into exploitation (3 cases – Berlinti and Lapusna); offering bags with food (1 case – Berlinti) and organisation of pilgrimages (1 case – Singera).

4.3. Outdoor/Promotional/On-line Advertising Promo-LEX observers identified at least 37 cases of use of this kind of advertising (see Chart 34).

Chart 34

According to Promo-LEX observers, around 70% of such advertising was used by the election candidates to the position of mayor in Singera t., 11% – Capriana v., 11% – Ghiliceni twp., 5% –

38

Zirnesti twp. and 3% – Stefanesti. The most active election candidates were PDM – 10 cases, PN – 8 cases, PSRM and PL – 6 cases each (see Chart 34).

In the same context, according to the reports of Promo-LEX observers, at least 4 candidates used the electoral advertising contrary to the legal provisions: IC (Capriana), PPEM, PSRM and PL (Singera).

39

IV. FINANCING OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN

Local referendum. In the context of financial monitoring of the local referendum, Promo-LEX OM appreciates the harmonisation of the Regulation on the Election Campaigns Funding with the new provisions of the Electoral Code, including the recommendations drafted previously by the mission.

The funds of the participants in the referendum came from financial donations from 173 individuals, which amounted to MDL 2 520 330 (PL – 14 donors that donated MDL 402 800, PSRM – 159 donors that donated MDL 2 117 230). Promo-LEX observers noticed a better reporting on TV, written media, radio and online advertising and found a deficient reporting on the promotional, outdoors and mobile materials, transport expenses and volunteer involvement.

Promo-LEX observers noticed additional electioneering activities that imply unreported expenses in addition to the reported ones, which further indicates an insufficient level of transparency in reflecting the funds used. The estimated amount of unreported expenses goes up to, at least, MDL 683 708 (PSRM – MDL 637 053; PL – MDL 46 655).At the same time, Promo-LEX found that the expenses incurred by third parties on their own behalf, for both participants in the referendum, cannot be qualified as material donations as they are not included in the list of donations in the form of commodities, objects, works or services made during the election period(19 October 2017 – 17 November 2017), which the participants had to submit to CEC together with the financial report.

New local elections. During the election campaign, only 4 out of 12 ECs confirmed their treasurers at CEC and only 2 opened ‘Electoral Fund’ accounts, which implies that only these ones were supposed to have spendings for financing the election campaign – PDM, PN, PNL and PSRM. Also, only 3 out of 4 independent candidates (IC) submitted declarations of not incurring any expenses, while one IC, according to Promo-LEX observers, submitted neither a financial statement, nor a declaration of not incurring any expenses to the level-one ECC.

According to the findings of Promo-LEX observers, for the period from 17 October to 1 December 2017 (the first election round), 5 election candidates (PPEM, PL, PN, PSRM, IC Afina Scutaru) either used funds that they did not fully declare or failed to reflect certain expenditures for the Local Elections of 19 November 2017 in their financial statement submitted to CEC. No undeclared expenses were reported for the second round of elections. The total amount of unreported expenditures estimated by Promo-LEX goes up to, at least, MDL 25 208.


5.1. Activities to Organise the Functioning of Initiative Groups (IGs)

On 16 May 2017, CEC amended the Regulation on the Funding of Initiative Groups8in order to develop the provisions of the Regulation related to the activity of the initiative groups for conducting the local referendums. The amendments aimed at involving the LPAs in the work of the initiative group for conducting the local referendums.

The establishment of the general threshold of funds that can be transferred on the ‘Funds for Initiative Group’ account for conducting the Referendum was another important aspect. On 16 May 2017, in accordance with the legal provisions and the timetable, CEC established the threshold of funds that can be transferred on the ‘Funds for Initiative Group’ account, in the amount of MDL 1 637 327.62. The threshold was calculated by multiplying the coefficient of MDL 25.42 by 10% of the number of citizens with the right to vote – 64 411 voters. The coefficient of MDL 25.42 was established according to the updated law and constitutes 0.5% of the average salary per economy

8 CEC Regulation on the Funding of Initiative Groups approved by CEC Decision No 114 of 18 August 2016 amended by the CEC Decision No 935 of 16 May 2017 http://cec.md/files/files/Legi/tabel_regulamente/114_1Reg_finan%C8%9B_grup_ini%C8%9Biat_vers_redactat%C4%83%20cu%20modificari%202017.pdf

http://cec.md/files/files/Legi/tabel_regulamente/114_1Reg_finan%C8%9B_grup_ini%C8%9Biat_vers_redactat%C4%83%20cu%20modificari%202017.pdf

http://cec.md/files/files/Legi/tabel_regulamente/114_1Reg_finan%C8%9B_grup_ini%C8%9Biat_vers_redactat%C4%83%20cu%20modificari%202017.pdf

40

for the year preceding the election, which amounted to MDL 5 048. On 15 May 2017, the ‘Funds for Initiative Group’ bank account was opened in accordance with the legal norm.

Promo-LEX OM welcomes both the formula for calculating the threshold and the reasoning behind the establishment of the share of 10% of the number of voters from the constituency where the collection of signatures will take place, which share shall be kept even in case of a minimum number of signatures collected to initiate the referendum. At the same time, Promo-LEX found the sufficiency of the threshold of funds for collecting the signatures.

5.2 Totalising Financial Statements of the Initiative Group during Signature Collection

During 19 May 2017 – 10 July 2017, the initiative group for collecting signatures to initiate the local referendum on the dismissal of the Chisinau General Mayor submitted 4 bimonthly and one totalising financial statements9, according to the legal provisions of the Electoral Code10.

According to the totalising statements, the amount of revenues declared by the initiative group for the period from 27 April to 7 July 2017 is MDL 181 909 and the amount of expenses – MDL 181 909. The initiative group did not exceed the maximum threshold of MDL 1 637 327.62 set by the Central Electoral Commission for the period of signature collection.

5.3 Regulating the Financing of Election Campaign for the Referendum

5.3.1. Legal Framework

The financing of election campaigns is regulated by the Electoral Code, Law No 249 on Political Parties and CEC Regulation on Financing of Election Campaigns, adopted by CEC Decision No 3352 of 4 May 2015.

On 13 October 2017, CEC amended the Regulation on Financing of Election Campaigns11 to harmonise the provisions of this Regulation to the new provisions of the Electoral Code. Promo-LEX OM welcomes the amendments to the Electoral Code and Regulation, in the light of a few recommendations drafted previously by the organisation, both in its election reports, and in those not referring to the election campaign. Thus, Promo-LEX appreciates the initiative to introduce the following amendments to the said Regulation, namely:

- diminishing the thresholds of donations received both from individuals and legal entities; - the reporting in the statements on election campaign financing of all actions for which expenses were incurred, the services provided free of charge by individuals and legal entities, as well as all volunteer actions performed during the election campaign in favor of the electoral candidates; - the possibility to transfer the existing funds from the account of the party on the account of the election candidate, with the reflection of primary donors in the financial statement submitted to CEC, at the beginning of the election campaign.

5.3.2. Election Funds and Treasurers

According to Article 37(a) of the Electoral Code, to fund the election campaign, each election candidate shall open a bank account to be specified as an ‘Electoral Fund’, on which the participants shall transfer their own funds and those received from individuals and legal entities of the country.

Only two parties submitted their applications for registration as participants in the Referendum before 24 October 2017, in addition, they confirmed their treasurers at CEC and opened ‘Electoral Fund’ bank accounts (see Table 2. Appointment of Treasurers).

9 Reports published on www.cec.md of the initiative group http://cec.md/index.php?pag=cat&id=1977&l=ro 10 According to Article 38(8) of the Electoral Code, during the election period, the IG must submit to CEC, within 3 days from submitting the signature sheets, the statement on funds flow for the entire activity period of the initiative group. 11 CEC Regulation on Financing of Election Campaigns approved by CEC Decision No 3352 of 4 May 2015

http://www.cec.md/

http://cec.md/index.php?pag=cat&id=1977&l=ro

41

Table 2. Appointment of treasurers

Participants in the

Referendum

Date of registration at CEC

No of participants in

the referendum

Date of confirmation of treasurers

by CEC

Date of opening the ‘Electoral Fund’

accounts

PL 22 October 2017 1 24 October 2017 22 October 2017 PSRM 12 October 2017 1 13 October 2017 17 October 2017 Total - 2 - -

5.3.3. General Threshold of the Funds that can be transferred on the ‘Electoral Fund’ Account of the Participant in the Referendum

According to Article 38(2)(d) of the Electoral Code, as well as the CEC Decision No 1137 of 29 September 2017 establishing the general threshold for the funds that can be transferred on the ‘Electoral Fund’ account of the participant in the referendum, the maximum threshold of MDL 16 508 739 for revenue collection was established. A coefficient12 (MDL 25.42) multiplied by the number of voters from the constituency in which the local referendum is held, Chisinau mun. (649 349 voters), was taken as a basis for calculation. The average salary per economy for the year preceding the referendum year – 2016, i.e. MDL 5 04813, was taken as reporting basis for setting the coefficient.

5.3.4. Submission of the Statement on the Own Funds from the Party’s Account at the Beginning of the Election Period to the Central Electoral Commission

According to Article 382(61) of the Electoral Code, at the beginning of the election period, the political parties intending to submit the documents for registration as election candidates and to transfer their own funds held on their account to the ‘Electoral Fund’ account shall submit to CEC a financial statement according to the sample established by the Commission in Article 382(1).

Table 3. Funds on the party’s account at the beginning of the election period

Political parties

Sources of financing,

thousand MDL

Payments, thousand MDL

Initial balance, thousand MDL

Final balance, thousand MDL

PL 3 403 985 3 877 6 294 PSRM 6 216 7 854 2 795 1 157

By 17 October 2017, both parties submitted the financial statements on their own funds accrued until the beginning of the election period – 19 September 2017, where they indicated the revenues, expenditures as well as the donors thereof. Promo-LEX OM found that only these two parties had the right to transfer their own funds to the ‘Electoral Fund’ accounts for the Local Referendum of 19 November 2017 and New Local Elections of 19 November 2017.

5.4. Financial Reporting of the Participants in the Referendum

According to Article 382(1) of the Electoral Code, during the election campaign, the election candidate shall submit weekly financial statements to the competent bodies, which shall include data on the revenues and expenses according to the intended purpose. On 27 October, 3, 10 and 17 November 2017, the 2 participants in the referendum (PSRM and PL) submitted financial statements with CEC for the four weeks of election campaign. Their revenues and expenses amounted to MDL 2 520 330 (see Chart 35).

12 The amount of coefficient being of 0.5% of the average salary for the year preceding the election (MDL 5 084) 13 According to the data of the National Bureau of Statistics, the average salary per economy in 2016 amounted to MDL 5 084.0, thus the amount of the calculated coefficient is MDL 25.42

42

Chart 35

Promo-LEX OM also found that CEC complied with the 48-hour legal deadline for publication of weekly statements, by placing them by set deadline.

Chart 36

The total amount of declared revenue constitutes 15.27% of the threshold established for a single participant in the referendum. No participant exceeded the maximum threshold of MDL 16 508 73914 set by the Central Electoral Commission (see Chart 36).

The funds of the participants in the referendum came from financial donations from 173 individuals, which amounted to MDL 2 520 330: PL – 14 donors (MDL 402 800) and PSRM – 159 donors (MDL 2 117 230).

14 According to Article 38(2)(d) of the Electoral Code, as well as the CEC Decision No 1137 of 29 September 2017 establishing the general threshold for the funds that can be transferred on the ‘Electoral Fund’ account of the participant in the referendum, CEC established the maximum threshold of MDL 16 508 739 for revenue collection.

43

Chart 37

5.5 Estimation of Expenditures of the Participants in the Referendum Found by Promo-LEX Observers, which are not Reflected in the Financial Statements

According to the findings of the Promo-LEX observers, for the period from 19 October to 17 November 2017, the participants in the referendum (PSRM, PL) either used funds that they did not fully declare or omitted to reflect certain expenditures in the financial statement submitted to CEC for the election campaign for the Referendum. The total amount of unreported expenditures goes up to, at least, MDL 683 708. This amount was estimated by connecting the expenditures declared in the statements submitted to CEC and the expenditures found by Promo-LEX observers (see Charts 38 and 39).

Chart 38

44

Chart 39

5.5.1. Estimation of Expenditures for Promotion Materials, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX OM, both participants in the referendum (PL and PSRM) incurred expenditures for promotional materials that were not reported to the competent bodies. The expenditures estimated by Promo-LEX amount to at least MDL 460 500.

Table 4. Expenditures for promotion materials

PL

A4 posters, newspapers without

typographical data

Sirius Printing House Unit cost – MDL 215

Contract No 56 of 26 October 2017 – 5 000 printed copies

Total estimated costs MDL 10 000

PSRM

Newspapers, 4 pages A3 format (in Romanian and Russian), with messages calling to the Referendum Newspapers, 7 pages A3 format (in Romanian), with messages calling to the Referendum

‘Edit Tipar Grup’ SRL Unit cost – MDL 0.4816 ‘Edit Tipar Grup’ SRL Unit cost – MDL 0.6817

order 1193 - 70 000 copies, order 1194 – 100 000 copies, order 1223 – 70 000 copies, order 1144 – 40 000 copies, order 1145 – 70 000 copies, order 1129 – 50 000 copies, order 1130 - 90 000 copies, order 1087 – 90 000 copies, order 1103 – 90 000 copies, order 1102 – 50 000 copies, order 1183 – 15 000 copies, order 1184 – 35 000 copies.

Total estimated costs MDL 379 600

15 prime cost of one unit of A4 poster is at least MDL 2 for 5 000 printed copies 16 prime cost of one unit of 4 page newspaper, A3 format, is at least MDL 0.48 for 100 000 printed copies 17 prime cost of one unit of 7 page newspaper, A3 format, is at least MDL 0.68 for 35 000 printed copies

45

A4 Posters

A5 Flyers

Printed by ARVA Color SRL Unit cost – MDL 118 Printed by ARVA Color SRL Unit cost – MDL 0.1519

Invoice No 0786 of 27 October 2017, 25 000 printed copies invoice No 0775 of 17 October 2017, order 0681, 25 000 printed copies; order 0681, invoice No 0773 of 13 October 2017, 25 000 printed copies;

Total estimated costs MDL 32 500 Coats (white raincoats) with the Referendum logo Bags with the Referendum logo

Unit cost – MDL 37020 Unit cost – MDL 18021

70 units 70 units

Total estimated costs MDL 38 400 TOTAL MDL 460 500

5.5.2. Estimation of the Expenses for Online Advertising, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

Promo-LEX OM found the presence of online advertising (online banners) on a number of portals from both participants in the referendum (PL, PSRM). Only PSRM reported expenses of MDL 259 220.84, similar to the estimates made by Promo-LEX OM. The costs for online banners were calculated by multiplying the number of online advertising companies that own the platforms presented below by the price of EUR 3 500/month (MDL 70 000).

As regards PL, Promo-LEX observers reported at least one online advertising company, the banners of which disseminated messages boycotting the referendum (Numbers SRL) on www.999.md and on other websites, all running for 14 days. The estimated expenses amount to at least MDL 35 000.

As regards PSRM, Promo-LEX observers reported at least 3 online advertising companies, the banners of which disseminated messages encouraging the participation in the referendum (Numbers SRL, ICS Pro Digital, Interact Media SRL) on at least 10 different online portals, all running for 14 days. The estimated expenses amount to at least MDL 105 000.

5.5.3. Estimation of the Expenses for Outdoor and Mobile Advertising, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX observers, for the period indicated, only one participant in the referendum – PSRM – incurred expenses for outdoor and mobile advertising. The expenses in this area were not fully reflected in the financial statement of the above.

According to Promo-LEX OM verifications, the minimum estimated monthly price for placing a street billboard of 6x3 m2 is at least MDL 6 660, a street billboard of 4x2 m2 – at least MDL 2 000, a banner of 2x2 m2 (for booth) – at least MDL 699, a LED board – MDL 7 770.

Regarding PSRM, Promo-LEX observers reported 65 units of banner of 2x2m2 (a banner for each booth), 26 units of billboards of 6x3m2, 9 units of LED boards. According to estimates, the expenses for street billboards for 4 weeks amount to at least MDL 288 525.

5.5.4. Estimation of Expenses for Transportation of People and Goods, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX observers, for the period concerned, both participants in the referendum incurred transport expenses for electoral meetings in Chisinau municipality (PSRM – 45 electoral

18 prime cost of one unit of A4 poster is at least MDL 1 for 25 000 printed copies 19 prime cost of one unit of A5 flyer is at least MDL 0.15 for 25 000 printed copies 20 prime cost of one unit of raincoat is at least MDL 300, printing – MDL 70. 21 prime cost of one bag is at least MDL 130, printing – MDL 50.

http://www.999.md/

46

meetings; PL – 25 electoral meetings). Promo-LEX estimated minim fuel expenses in the total amount of MDL 6 782.69: PSRM – at least MDL 5 127.41 (3 237 km), PL – at least MDL 1 655.28 (1 045 km). These expenses were not reflected at all in the financial statements of the participants in the Referendum submitted to CEC.

At the same time, Promo-LEX found that both participants in the referendum did not submit the list of donations in the form of commodities, objects, works or services made during the election period (19 October 2017 – 17 November 2017), if they incurred such expenses as own donations for participants. For these reasons, fuel expenses cannot be classified as material donations, and the Mission considers these expenses as undeclared.

5.5.5. Estimation of Expenses for Promotion Materials, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX observers, during the reporting period, PSRM involved at least 128 volunteers in the electioneering for Referendum. If estimating one working day of a volunteer on the basis of the minimum guaranteed salary for 2017, which is MDL 14.09 per hour, then it would be MDL 112.72 related to 8 working hours a day22. If we multiply the respective coefficient by 128 volunteers, the minimum of MDL 14 428.16 per working day will be obtained.

Similarly, Promo-LEX found that PSRM did not submit the list of donations in the form of commodities, objects, works or services made during the election period (19 October 2017 – 17 November 2017), if they incurred such expenses as own donations for participants. For these reasons, the volunteers’ work cannot be classified as material or ‘in-kind’ donation, and the Mission considers these expenses as undeclared.

A. NEW LOCAL ELECTIONS

5.1. Regulating the Financing of Election Campaign

5.1.1. Legal Framework

The financing of election campaign is regulated by the Electoral Code, Law No 249 on Political Parties and CEC Regulation on Financing of Election Campaigns, adopted by CEC Decision No 3352 of 4 May 2015.

5.1.2. Election Funds and Treasurers

During the election campaign, only 4 out of 12 ECs confirmed their treasurers at CEC and only 2 opened ‘Electoral Fund’ accounts, which implies that only these ones were supposed to have spendings for financing the election campaign (see Table 5). Also, only 3 out of 4 ICs submitted declarations of not incurring any expenses, while one IC (Scutaru Afina), according to Promo-LEX observers, submitted neither a financial statement, nor a declaration of not incurring any expenses to the level-one ECC, the electoral bodies suggesting her to submit the statement/declaration to CEC23.

22 According to the Decision No 165 of 9 March 2010 on the Minimum Guaranteed Salary in the Real Sector, since 1 May 2017 the minimum guaranteed salary in the real sector (enterprises, organisations, financially autonomous institutions, regardless of the type of property and legal form of organization, hereinafter referred to as ‘Units’) shall be established in the amount of MDL 14.09 per hour, or MDL 2 380 per month, calculated for a full working schedule of average 169 hours per month. http://lex.justice.md/md/333943/ 23 According to the candidate, on 13.11.2017, she went to CEC and submitted several payment receipts (which did not reflect printing and publishing expenses). She said that she had opened no electoral account and that she had been sent to CEC when she went to level-one ECC from Capriana to declare her expenses.

47

Table 5. Appointment of treasurers and opening of the ‘Electoral Fund’ accounts Political

affiliation of candidates

No of candidate

s in elections

Date of registration of

the election candidate

Date of confirmation of treasurers by CEC/level-

one ECC

Date of opening the ‘Electoral

Fund’ accounts

Declaration of not

incurring any

expenses PCRM 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a PDM 10 17-20.10.2017 13.10.2017 19.10.2017 n/a PL 1 17.10.2017 n/a n/a 03.11.2017 PN 2 20.10.2017 20.10.2017 27.10.2017 n/a PNL 1 20.10.2017 27.10.2017 27.10-01.11.2017 n/a PPEM 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a PPRM 2 n/a n/a n/a n/a PSRM 7 17.10.2017 20.10.2017 20.10.2017 n/a IC Burlaca Ghenadii

1 n/a n/a n/a 10.11.2017

IC Prida Igor 1 n/a n/a n/a 13.11.2017 IC Scutaru Afina 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a IC Hajdeu Vera 1 n/a n/a n/a 14.11.2017 Total 29 - 4 4 3

5.1.3. Maximum Threshold for Revenue Collection The threshold was established according to Article 38(2)(d) of the Electoral Code, as well as the CEC Decision No 1137 of 29 September 2017 establishing the general threshold for the funds that can be transferred on the ‘Electoral Fund’ account of the election candidate in the new local elections of 19 November 2017. A coefficient multiplied by the number of voters from the constituency in which the new local elections are held was taken as basis for calculation. The average salary per economy for the year preceding the year of new local elections – 2016 was taken as the reporting basis for establishing the coefficient, the amount of coefficient being of 0.5% of the said average salary (MDL 5 084)24.

The amounts of thresholds from Table 6 were reached by multiplying the coefficient of MDL 25.42 (0.5% of the average salary per economy for 2016, or MDL 5 084) by the number of voters of the 10 level-one ECC. According to Promo-LEX OM, the current calculation basis is inclusive for the independent candidates, where the established thresholds create them equal conditions for the use of funds in the constituencies they compete with parties’ candidates (see Chart 40 and Table 6).

Chart 40

24 According to the data of the National Bureau of Statistics, the average salary per economy in 2016 amounted to MDL 5 084.0,

48

Table 6. Maximum thresholds for revenue collection per constituency

No Constituencies Threshold coefficient, MDL

Number of voters Maximum established

threshold, MDL

1. Singera t., Chisinau mun. 25.42 11 927 303 184.35

2. Berlinti twp., Briceni d. 25.42 1 628 41 383.76

3. Zirnesti twp., Cahul d. 25.42 2 304 58 567.68

4. Plopi twp., Cantemir d. 25.42 1 410 35 842.20

5. Stefanesti twp., Floresti d. 25.42 1 730 43 976.60

6. Fundurii Noi twp., Glodeni d. 25.42 659 16 751.78

7. Lapusna twp., Hincesti d. 25.42 5 134 130 506.28

8. Sarateni twp., Leova d. 25.42 852 21 657.84

9. Capriana twp., Straseni d. 25.42 2 025 51 475.50

10. Ghiliceni twp., Telenesti d. 25.42 2 000 50 840

Total 754 185.99

5.1.4. Submission of the Statement on the Own Funds from the Party’s Account at the Beginning of the Election Period to the Central Electoral Commission

According to Article 382(61) of the Electoral Code, at the beginning of the election period, the political parties intending to submit the documents for registration as election candidates and to transfer their own funds held on their account to the ‘Electoral Fund’ account shall submit to CEC a financial statement according to the sample established by the Commission in Article 382(1).

By 17 October 2017, only 3 parties submitted the financial statements on their own funds accrued until the beginning of the election period – 19 September 2017, where they indicated the revenues, expenditures, as well as the donors thereof. Promo-LEX OM found that only these three parties had the right to transfer their own funds to the ‘Electoral Fund’ accounts, for the new local elections.

Table 7. Own funds on the party’s account at the beginning of the election period

Political parties

Sources of financing,

thousand MDL

Payments, thousand MDL

Initial balance, thousand MDL

Final balance, thousand MDL

PDM 46 998 41 378 7 504 13 124 PL 3 403 985 3 877 6 294 PSRM 6 216 7 854 2 795 1 157 Total 56 617 50 217 14 177 20 576

5.2. Financial Reporting of Election Candidates

According to Article 382(1) of the Electoral Code, during the election campaign, the election candidate must submit weekly financial statements to the competent bodies, which shall include data on the revenues and expenses according to the intended purpose. During the reporting period, only 5 out of 12 ECs registered at CEC submitted financial statements to CEC for the the first round of election (17 December – 1 December 2017), and namely: PDM (6 reports), PSRM (6 reports), PN (3 reports), PL (2 reports), PNL (2 reports). None of the independent candidates submitted any financial statements or documents proving that expenses were not incurred to the level-one ECC. According to Promo-LEX OM, CEC met the deadline for publication of weekly statements, which was till 17 October 2017.

49

According to ECs’ statements, the amount of revenues and expenses in the election campaign for the both rounds of election is of MDL 101 389 and MDL 101 117, correspondingly, the final balance being of MDL 272 (see Charts No 41 and 42). None of the candidates exceeded the maximum thresholds set by the Central Electoral Commission on the basis of the constituencies the election candidates compete in25.

Chart 41

Chart 42

25 According to Article 38(2)d) of the Electoral Code, as well as the CEC Decision No 1137 of 29 September 2017 establishing the general threshold for the funds that can be transferred on the ‘Electoral Fund’ account of the election candidate in the New Local Elections of 19 November 2017, CEC set the maximum thresholds for revenue collection. Thus, the correlation between the number of election candidates and the number of constituencies they are running in showed that PCRM may collect MDL 43 977, PDM – MDL 754 186, PL – MDL 303 184, PN – MDL 344 568, PNL – MDL 303 184, PPEM – MDL 303 184, PPRM – MDL 79 819, PSRM – MDL 582 039, I.C. Burlaca Ghenadii – MDL 41 384, I.C. Prida Igor – MDL 21 658, IC Scutaru Afina – MDL 51 476, I.C. Hajdeu Vera – MDL 50 840 .

50

5.3 Estimation of Election candidates’ Expenses Found by the Promo-LEX Observers, not Reflected in the Financial Statements

According to the findings of Promo-LEX observers, for the period from 17 October to 1 December 2017 (reporting period), 5 election candidates (PPEM, PL, PN, PSRM, IC Afina Scutaru) either used funds that they did not fully declare or failed to reflect certain expenditures for the New Local Elections of 19 November 2017 in their financial statements submitted to CEC. No undeclared expenses were reported for the second round of elections. The total amount of unreported expenditures goes up to, at least, MDL 25 208 (see Chart 43).

Chart 43

5.3.1. Estimation of Expenses for Promotion Materials, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX OM, 3 ECs (PPEM, PL, IC Afina Scutaru) incurred expenses for promotional materials that were not reported to the competent bodies in full.

Table 8. Expenses for Promotion Materials

PL

at least one ‘Votează Nichita Lari’ (Vote for Nichita Lari) A4 leaflet

‘Sirius’ Print House, Contract No 56 of 26.10.2017 Unit cost – MDL 126

Print run 8 000 copies

MDL 8 000 IC Afina Scutaru

At least 3 A4 posters Without typographical data Unit cost – MDL 127

MDL 3

MDL 3 PPEM

A5 flyer (Valeriu Popa) Without typographical data MDL 1

MDL 1 TOTAL MDL 8 004

26 prime cost of one unit of A5 flyer is at least MDL 1 for a print run of 300 copies 27 prime cost of one unit of A4 flyer, thin paper, is at least MDL 1 for a print run of 300 copies

51

5.3.2. Estimation of the Expenses for Outdoor and Mobile Advertising, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX observers, only one EC (Afina Scutaru) incurred expenses for outdoor advertising during the indicated period – 2 units of 2x2m2 billboard. The estimated amount of unreported expenses is at least MDL 1 598.

5.3.3. Estimation of the Expenses for Advertising in the Written Media, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

Till 10 November 2017 Promo-LEX OM has found advertising in the written media on the part of PDM and PN. No EC has reported such expenses. Estimated expenses: PM – at least MDL 1 750; PN – MDL 8 750.

PDM published its electoral advertising in the ‘Meleag Natal’ district newspaper No 42 (716) of 10.11.2017, on the page 2, on the surface of 500 cm2. The newspaper print run is of 3 500 copies.

PN published its electoral advertising in the ‘Meleag Natal’ district newspaper No 42 (716) of 10.11.2017, on the pages 3 (1250 cm2) and 6 (1250 cm2). The newspaper print run is of 3 500 copies.

5.3.4. Estimation of Expenses for Transportation of People and Goods, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX observers, over the period concerned, 3 ECs (PL, PSRM, PN) incurred transport expenses for electoral meetings both in Chisinau municipality and outside of it (PSRM – 1 electoral meeting in Singera twp., a trip to Berlinti twp. (Briceni d.); PL – a car trip to Hincu Monastery). Promo-LEX estimated the total amount of the minimum fuel expenses at MDL 1 597, at least: PSRM – at least MDL 697 (440 km), PL – at least MDL 800 (104 km), PN – MDL 100 (50 km). These expenses were not reflected in the ECs’ financial statements submitted to CEC at all.

Promo-LEX also found that none of the ECs submitted the list of donations in the form of commodities, objects, works or services made during the election period (28 October 2017 – 10 November 2017), if they incurred such expenses, as well as own donations for the campaign. This is why fuel expenses cannot be classified as material donations.

5.3.5. Estimation of Expenses for Volunteers’ Remuneration, Found by Promo-LEX Observers

According to Promo-LEX observers, during the reporting period, PN involved at least 26 volunteers in the electioneering for the new local elections in Singera v. If estimating one working day of a volunteer on the basis of the minimum guaranteed salary for 2017, which is MDL 14.09 per hour, then it would be MDL 112.72 for an eight-hour working day28. If we multiply the respective coefficient by 26 volunteers, the minimum of MDL 2 930.68 per working day will be obtained.

28 According to the Decision No 165 of 9 March 2010 on the Minimum Guaranteed Salary in the Real Sector, since 1 May 2017 the minimum guaranteed salary in the real sector (enterprises, organisations, financially autonomous institutions, regardless of the type of property and legal form of organization, hereinafter referred to as ‘Units’) shall be established in the amount of MDL 14.09 per hour, or MDL 2 380 per month, calculated for a full working schedule of average 169 hours per month. http://lex.justice.md/md/333943/

52

VI. HATE SPEECH

Proceeding from the trends of the past election campaigns and the need for plenary monitoring of the election candidates’ behaviour, Promo-LEX OM deemed it necessary and relevant to monitor the cases of hate speech in candidates’ messages. Hate speech implies incitement, promotion or justification of racial hatred, xenophobia, antisemitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance. In the context of the local referendum, Promo-LEX Association noticed several cases that can be regarded as hate speeches, the target of which was mostly Dorin Chirtoaca: in at least 5 instances the hate speeches were against this politician, while in one instance, he made a hate speech himself.


In the context of the Local Referendum on the dismissal of the General Mayor of Chisinau municipality of 19 November 2017, Promo-LEX Association recorded a number of messages containing elements of denigrating or hate and discriminatory speech. The monitoring revealed a massive leak of certain defamatory materials and information in the media. Most of them concerned the suspended General Mayor of Chisinau municipality Dorin Chirtoaca.

On 3 November 2017 a video appeared on the internet showing a private party with the participation of Dorin Chirtoaca.29 Later this video was reposted by several media portals.30 A video showing the suspended General Mayor of the capital – Dorin Chirtoaca, was posted on 8 November 2017. According to the media, the video was made during one of the Mayor’s trips.31

Certain information about the images of sexual character depicting Dorin Chirtoaca appeared on 10 November 2017 in the media and on the social networks.32 It is worth noting that the majority of media publications did not distribute the images themselves, nor did they give the links to such images. They only referred to the fact that such images appeared online.

A post was published 33on 8 November 2017 on the Dorin Chirtoaca’s Facebook page as a reaction to certain denigrating information distributed in the media. The post contains hate and discriminatory elements, especially due to aggressiveness of its contents and of used expressions.

Sexist, denigrating, hate and discriminatory messages were also found in the ‘Intersecția RM’34 TV show, broadcast by Accent TV on 30 October 2017.

29http://luchianiuc.com/blog/2017/11/03/da-chirtoaca-este-un-marlan-video/ 30 1) https://zugo.md/article/video---din-garaj--in-camin--dorin-chirtoaca--surprins-acum-4-ani-la-o-petrecere-privata--reactia-edilului_21901.htm 2) http://unimedia.info/stiri/foto-dorin-chirtoaca--la-o-petrecere-privata--de-acum-patru-ani-trebuie-sa-fii-marlan-sa-difuzezi-astfel-de-informatii-inainte-de-referendum-142257.html 3) https://point.md/ro/noutati/politica/dorin-chirtoaca-trebuie-sa-fii-marlan-sa-difuzezi-astfel-de-informatii-inainte-de-referendum 31 1) http://aif.md/kirtoakje-fljash-herca-i-pojatje-zazhigajut-na-avtotrasse-jekskljuzivnoe-video/ 2) http://www.realitatea.md/-tenerife--cheful-lui-chirtoaca--fleas--herta--poiata-si-alti-functionari--care-vrea-sa-detroneze-petrecerea-din-garajul-primariei--video-_66835.html 3) http://telegraph.md/exclusiv-vezi-cum-s-au-distrat-in-tenerife-dorin-chirtoaca-si-echipa-sa-de-la-primarie/ 32 1) https://ro.sputnik.md/moldova/20171110/15526650/dorin-chirtoaca-video-sex-filat-iordan.html 2) http://unimedia.info/stiri/video-ceva-nu-este-in-regula--cu-siguranta--cele-mai-sumbre-asteptari-ale-lui-chirtoaca-s-au-adeverit-142615.html 33https://www.facebook.com/Dorin-Chirtoac%C4%83-106244906075994/ 34http://a-tv.md/index.php?newsid=37018

http://luchianiuc.com/blog/2017/11/03/da-chirtoaca-este-un-marlan-video/

https://zugo.md/article/video---din-garaj--in-camin--dorin-chirtoaca--surprins-acum-4-ani-la-o-petrecere-privata--reactia-edilului_21901.htm

https://zugo.md/article/video---din-garaj--in-camin--dorin-chirtoaca--surprins-acum-4-ani-la-o-petrecere-privata--reactia-edilului_21901.htm

http://unimedia.info/stiri/foto-dorin-chirtoaca--la-o-petrecere-privata--de-acum-patru-ani-trebuie-sa-fii-marlan-sa-difuzezi-astfel-de-informatii-inainte-de-referendum-142257.html

http://unimedia.info/stiri/foto-dorin-chirtoaca--la-o-petrecere-privata--de-acum-patru-ani-trebuie-sa-fii-marlan-sa-difuzezi-astfel-de-informatii-inainte-de-referendum-142257.html

https://point.md/ro/noutati/politica/dorin-chirtoaca-trebuie-sa-fii-marlan-sa-difuzezi-astfel-de-informatii-inainte-de-referendum

https://point.md/ro/noutati/politica/dorin-chirtoaca-trebuie-sa-fii-marlan-sa-difuzezi-astfel-de-informatii-inainte-de-referendum

http://aif.md/kirtoakje-fljash-herca-i-pojatje-zazhigajut-na-avtotrasse-jekskljuzivnoe-video/

http://www.realitatea.md/-tenerife--cheful-lui-chirtoaca--fleas--herta--poiata-si-alti-functionari--care-vrea-sa-detroneze-petrecerea-din-garajul-primariei--video-_66835.html

http://www.realitatea.md/-tenerife--cheful-lui-chirtoaca--fleas--herta--poiata-si-alti-functionari--care-vrea-sa-detroneze-petrecerea-din-garajul-primariei--video-_66835.html

http://telegraph.md/exclusiv-vezi-cum-s-au-distrat-in-tenerife-dorin-chirtoaca-si-echipa-sa-de-la-primarie/

https://ro.sputnik.md/moldova/20171110/15526650/dorin-chirtoaca-video-sex-filat-iordan.html

http://unimedia.info/stiri/video-ceva-nu-este-in-regula--cu-siguranta--cele-mai-sumbre-asteptari-ale-lui-chirtoaca-s-au-adeverit-142615.html

http://unimedia.info/stiri/video-ceva-nu-este-in-regula--cu-siguranta--cele-mai-sumbre-asteptari-ale-lui-chirtoaca-s-au-adeverit-142615.html

https://www.facebook.com/Dorin-Chirtoac%C4%83-106244906075994/

http://a-tv.md/index.php?newsid=37018

53

VII. CIVIC INVOLVEMENT AND ELECTORAL EDUCATION

Local referendum. In the context of local referendum, we found that the civil society representatives organised a single one electoral education activity in the form of public debate; such activities can be attributed to the electioneering and promotion of a certain option. The electoral debates organised by broadcasters were accepted by PSRM and boycotted by PL, because, let us remind, Dorin Chirtoaca insisted vehemently to be registered as a participant particularly because he wanted to promote his own viewpoint. The following stages of organisation and conduct of the referendum were most covered by the media: voting and referendum results tabulation (at least 21 websites); CEC decision on conducting the local referendum (at least 18 websites); registration of participants to referendum (at least 10 online sources); the procedure costs (at least 5 sources).

New Local Elections. Civil activism was not promoted extensively by the civil society organisations during the election period for the new local elections. Nonetheless, Promo-LEX Association managed, under its civic and electoral education component, to inform about 3 400 voters about the need for a conscious vote, by means of door-to-door activities. The Association also organised three public debate sessions with the participation of 7 out of 10 candidates running in the election campaign and of about 260 citizens with the right to vote.

The organisation of the new local elections was less covered in the media than the local referendum of Chisinau municipality. Actually, only two stages of the organization and conduct of elections procedure were covered: CEC issuing a decision on the conduct of new local elections (at least 16 national and 3 regional websites) and the election day (at least 10 national and 2 regional websites). Compared to the local elections of 14 May 2017, we found an increased interest of online media in the new local elections.


7.1. Organisation and conduct of election debates

Promo-LEX observers found that neutral civic education and civic activism promotion events are virtually non-existent. Nevertheless, on 30 October 2017 IPN News Agency held a public debate entitled: ‘Anti-Chirtoaca referendum: to take part or to boycott it, where and why do we put the mark on the ballot paper?’ of the series of ‘Development of political culture in public debates’ IPN thematic events. The representatives of participants in the referendum, municipal counsellors, representatives of civil society were involved in the debate.

Besides this, according to Article 641(3) of the Electoral Code, during the electoral campaign for parliamentary elections in single-member constituencies, general local elections and local referenda, local/regional broadcasters are obliged, whereas the national ones are entitled, to organise electoral debates. Out of two registered participants (PSRM and PL), only the socialists were poised to participate in the debates. PL decided not to delegate representatives for election debates prior to the local referendum of 19 November 2017.

7.2. Coverage of Campaign for the Local Referendum

National media monitoring is not included in the observation methodology of Promo-LEX OM. However, to develop a complete picture of the ongoing processes, we highlighted some general trends. The national news websites served as object of monitoring.

The subject of the referendum on the dismissal of the General Mayor of Chisinau municipality was of increased interest for media of the Republic of Moldova. While voting and referendum results tabulation received the most media coverage – of at least 21 national websites. Other stages of organisation and conduct of the referendum covered by the media were as follows: CEC decision on

54

conducting the referendum on dismissal of Chisinau municipality Mayor, Dorin Chirtoaca, on 19 November 2017 – covered by at least 18 news websites; registration of participants to referendum – by at least 10 online sources; the issue of the procedure costs – by at least 5 sources.


7.1. Activities for Apolitical Mobilization of Voters in the context of New Local Elections

During 4–12 November 2017 Promo-LEX Association has been holding the ‘COME TO VOTE!’ Civic and Electoral Campaign, with the financial support of USAID, aimed at raising awareness about the importance of a conscious and informed voting, as well as at apolitical mobilization of citizens eligible to vote.

Electoral Information. During the ‘COME TO VOTE!’ Campaign Promo-LEX trained 43 volunteers and 9 local coordinators, who organised the ‘door to door’ campaign during 4–5 November 2017 – in Lapusna twp. (Hincesti d.), Fundurii Noi v. (Glodeni d.), Stefanesti twp. (Floresti d.), Plopi twp. (Cantemir d.), Sarateni twp. (Leova d.), Ghiliceni twp. (Telenesti d.), Berlinti twp. (Briceni d.), Capriana twp. (Straseni d.) and Zirnesti twp. (Cahul d.). About 3400 citizens eligible to vote in the 9 said localities were informed during the campaign.

Organisation and conduct of public debates. During 11–12 November 2017 Promo-LEX Association organised three electoral public debate sessions on the topic of ‘Election Candidates’ Vision of the Solving of Local Problems and Community Development’ – in Ghiliceni twp. (Telenesti d.), Stefanesti twp. (Floresti d.) and Căpriana v. (Straseni d.), with the participation of 7 out of 10 candidates running in the election campaign and of about 260 citizens with the right to vote.

The debates were aimed at promoting equitable, balanced and impartial electoral education actions, creating a platform for the dialog among the citizens and candidates running for mayor’s office, as well as promoting the freedom of expression and political pluralism during new local elections of 19 November 2017. The following topics were touched upon during the debates: waste collection and arrangement of landfills, infrastructure development, tariffs for drinking water and water supply systems management, attraction of investments for community development, educational and cultural development, etc.

7.2. Coverage of Campaign for New Local Elections

The organisation of the new local elections was less covered in the media than the local referendum from Chisinau municipality. Actually, only two stages of the organization and conduct of elections procedure aroused particular interest of the national news websites: the subject of CEC issuing a decision on the conduct of new local elections in the respective localities for 19 November 2017 was covered by at least 16 national and 3 regional websites; information about the election day and presenting the results was published by at least 10 national and 2 regional websites. Compared to the local elections of 14 May 2017, we found an increased interest from online media towards the new local elections.

55

ELECTION DAY

FIRST ROUND OF ELECTION. SECOND ROUND OF ELECTION. ELECTION RE-RUN

Local referendum. In principle, the polling stations were opened and closed according to the regulatory requirements. It was reported that about 14% of the polling stations were opened with insignificant delays. On the election day, the most frequent and the most serious incidents include certain deficiencies in the operation of Elections SAIS (at least 5 cases), deficiencies in the lists of voters (at least 16 cases), voters’ failure to understand the content of the question subjected to referendum (at least 14 cases), ballot boxes not being sealed as required by the law (22 cases), ballot papers being taken pictures of (10 cases), etc. Also in 2 of the 307 PS (PS 111 and PS 187), the members of the EOPS did not give the observers a copy of the minutes each.

The final data of Promo-LEX and those of CEC differ slightly. A total of seven minutes contain errors in at least one verification formula.

New Local Elections. In principle, the polling stations were opened and closed according to the regulatory requirements. Insignificant delays were registered during the opening of 2 stations and at closing of one PS out of 24 on 19 November 2017, and at opening of one section out of 11 during the second round of election (3 December 2017).

On the election day, the most frequent and the most serious incidents include unjustified presence of unauthorised persons inside or within 50 m from the polling station (33 cases); situations that can be qualified as material rewards or money offered to voters (4 cases); organised transportation of voters, deficiencies in the lists of voters, ballot papers being taken pictures of and unjustified group voting (3 cases of each).

The final data of Promo-LEX and those of CEC differ slightly. Only one copy of minutes (for 19 November 2017) containing insignificant errors in one verification formula was found.

A. LOCAL REFERENDUM ON THE DISMISSAL OF THE GENERAL MAYOR OF CHISINAU

MUNICIPALITY

1.1.Polling Stations Opening and Closing

As many as 307 Promo-LEX observers monitored the voting process. From their reports Promo-LEX OM found out that 43 PS (14.01%) opened with delays of up to 15 minutes. Besides this, at one PS the access of Promo-LEX observer was restricted. The stations were closed without violation of the legal norm (9.00 p.m.)

1.2.Incidents on the Referendum Day35

During the election day, the Promo-LEX observers were reporting various types of incidents found in the polling stations and within their territory. One incident reported during the election day, characterised by specific elements of the referendum is related to the: voters’ failure to understand the content of the question subjected to referendum (at least 14 cases). According to the observers, certain voters had difficulties in expressing their opinion due to the formulated question.

The majority of incidents are related to the fact that the ballot boxes were not sealed according to the legal procedures (22 cases): one stationary ballot box had to be sealed with 4 seals and one mobile ballot box – with 2 collar-type self-locking seals. In certain reported cases the stationary ballot boxes were sealed with 2 or 3 seals.

35 The incidents in detail are presented in the Report 3 of the Observation Mission: https://promolex.md/10992-10992/?lang=en

https://promolex.md/10992-10992/?lang=ro


56

The most frequent and the most serious incidents also include certain deficiencies in the operation of Elections SAIS (at least 5 cases) and deficiencies in the lists of voters (at least 16 cases). The disaggregation of cases by problems reveal the following situations: technical problems in the operation of Elections SAIS (2); deficiencies in the presence of voters in the system (3); deceased persons on the lists (4); unknown persons or previous owners registered at the addresses of voters (3); change of the PS where the voters previously voted without informing them (5); voting on the additional lists because the voters were not registered in both databases (SAIS and lists) or in one of them (4).

Other reported incidents include: ballot papers being taken pictures of (10 cases); electioneering or black PR near the polling station to influence the voters (6 cases); unjustified presence of unauthorised persons inside or within 50 m from the polling station (5 cases); electioneering on the election day by using LED billboards (4 cases); involvement in the electoral process of the observers delegated by the participants in the referendum (4 cases), etc.

1.3. Vote Tabulation Results Comparative analysis of the vote counting final data provided by Promo-LEX and the Central Electoral Commission final data

The final results of the Referendum on the dismissal of the General Mayor of Chisinau municipality were calculated on the basis of the data of minutes on the number of valid votes cast for each option, submitted by the observers to the Promo-LEX OM. They were calculated on the basis of the data from 307 minutes on the vote tabulation results of the PS set up for the 19 November 2017 local referendum on the dismissal of the General Mayor. These minutes were given to the Promo-LEX OM observers, while the data were manually verified by the Mission. The electoral office members at two polling stations out of 307 (PS 111 and PS 187) did not hand out a copy of the minutes to each observer. In one case the observer made a photo of the minutes (PS 111) and in another (PS 187) – the observer introduced the data from the minutes in the STO’s reporting form. The information was confirmed by the stamp and signature of EOPS chairperson. Thus, the information from the said two polling stations was used for tabulation as well.

Table 9. Final data in comparison (local referendum)

Option Final data, Promo-LEX Final data, CEC Difference (related to the Promo-LEX data)

PRO dismissal 96644 96465 -179 AGAINST dismissal

11095 11112 +17

TOTAL 107739 107577 -162

We found certain insignificant differences in terms of percentage and impact on the final results between the Promo-LEX OM data and those of the electoral authorities. Still, the sole fact that such differences exist is reason enough to be concerned, given that the calculations are supposedly made on the basis of minutes with identical content.

Accuracy of the Vote Counting Minutes Promo-LEX analysed the accuracy of the minutes on the vote tabulation results as well. To that end, the information from the 305 minutes that were given to Promo-LEX observers by the EOPS chairpersons was analysed. Information from the polling stations No 111 and No 187 was verified on the basis of the data on the picture of the minutes and transcripts of the information from the vote tabulation minutes.

A total of seven minutes contain errors in at least one verification formula. These are the minutes of the following PS: 102, 107, 133, 149, 180, 199, 311. The accuracy was checked by examining the formulae in the body of the protocol: c ≤ a + b; c ≥ d; d=f+h; e=c-d; f=d-h; h=g1+g2+g3+g4+…+gn; i=c+j; j=i–c.

57


1.1.Polling Stations Opening and Closing

The voting process on the election day of 19 November 2017 was monitored on the basis of findings of 24 Promo-LEX observers, while the procedures of 3 December 2017 (second round, re-run) were observed by 11 observers. On the basis of their reports, Promo-LEX OM in general found compliance with the terms of activity of PS, with minor deviations in terms of duration and number (see Table 10).

Table 10. PS opening and closing (new local elections)

Date No PS PS opening

Access and unobstructed

observation in the PS PS Closing

19 November

2017

24 Before 7.00 a.m.: 12.50% (3 PS); at 7.00 a.m.: 79.17% (19 PS); between 7.01 a.m. and 7.15 a.m.: 8.33% (2 PS).

YES – 100% (24 PS); As per regulations – 23 PS Insignificant delay – 1 PS

3 December

2017

11 before 7.00 a.m.: 9.09% (1 PS); at 7.00 a.m.: 81.82% (9 PS); between 7.01 a.m. and 7.15 a.m.: 9.09% (1 PS).

DA – 90.91% (10 PS); NO – 9.09% (1 PS).

As per regulations – 11 PS

1.2.Incidents found on the election day (19 November, 3 December 2017)36

The Promo-LEX observers monitored the process in the PS throughout the election day and reported on the run of events, including the found incidents. The most frequently reported incident, somewhat characteristic of the election day was the unjustified presence of unauthorized persons inside or within 50 m from the polling station (33 cases). The categories of unauthorized persons include: representatives of central party bodies, public officials, candidates, unidentified citizens.

4 situations that can be qualified as material rewards or money offered to voters were reported as well – in Singera and Berlinti constituencies. Promo-LEX observers also reported other incidents: deficiencies in the lists of voters (3 cases), ballot papers taken pictures of (3 cases), unjustified group voting (3 cases), organised transportation of voters (3 cases) and others.

1.3. Final Vote Tabulation by Promo-LEX OM Comparative analysis of the data on parallel vote tabulation performed by Promo-LEX OM and final data provided by CEC

The final results, submitted by Promo-LEX OM regarding the number of valid votes cast for each electoral candidate were calculated on the basis of the data from 24 vote tabulation minutes for 19 November, as well as 11 minutes drawn up on 3 December 2017, given to Promo-LEX OM observers and verified manually by the mission.

In the majority of cases, comparison of the Promo-LEX final data for the election day of 19 November 2017 with the CEC final data shows no distinctions. A difference of 0.34% (Promo-LEX data – 24.10% vs CEC data – 24.44%) which didn’t affect the final results, was registered in terms of participation rate in Lapusna constituency.

36For more information see Reports Nos 3 and 4 of the Observation Mission:https://promolex.md/10992-10992/?lang=ro and https://promolex.md/11105-raport-nr-4-privind-misiunea-de-observare-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro


https://promolex.md/11105-raport-nr-4-privind-misiunea-de-observare-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro

https://promolex.md/11105-raport-nr-4-privind-misiunea-de-observare-a-alegerilor-locale-noi-din-19-noiembrie-2017/?lang=ro

58

As for the second round of election and election re-run of 3 December 2017 – certain minor differences, not affecting the election results, were reported as well. These were: participation rate in Lapusna constituency – 0.06% (Promo-LEX data – 22.52%, CEC data – 22.58%), the difference of 0.11% between the candidates in Singera constituency.

In conclusion we can state that the found differences are few and insignificant for the final results. However, since the calculation should be done based on the same minutes, the fact that these discrepancies exist may raise concerns about the potential editing of the minutes.

Accuracy of the Vote Counting Minutes

In its effort to monitor the new local elections, Promo-LEX OM also analysed the accuracy of vote counting minutes for the both election rounds.

As a result, 24 minutes (given to the Promo-LEX observers by the EOPS chairpersons) were examined in the first round. Promo-LEX OM found that in 23 of the 24 minutes drawn up at the new local elections the verification formulae were observed. Insignificant errors (2 votes) were found in the minutes of the PS 1/273 from Dobrogea, in the formula h=g1+g2+g3+g4+g5+g6.

Within the second round of the new local elections Promo-LEX OM also analysed the accuracy of 11 vote counting minutes. According to Promo-LEX, all these were filled in in compliance with the verification formulae.

59

RECOMMENDATIONS

To the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova

1. Amend the Electoral Code in order to regulate explicitly the procedures, conditions and subjects that can promote one option or another during a local or republican referendum.

2. Define, by means the Electoral Code norm, the main notions that can be applied to the process of organising and holding a referendum: ‘referendum participant’, ‘electioneering’, ‘campaign’, etc.

3. Amend the Code so as to give the active duty servicemen fulfilling the in-term military service in a unit located in the same locality where their domicile is and where the elections are conducted, the possibility to be admitted to the electoral process. In the same context, the express regulation of electoral rights of active duty servicemen in a local referendum is required.

4. An explicit regulation in the Electoral Code is required on how the citizens having valid domicile and residence visa and citizens who do not have both domicile and residence visa vote on the election day. This is extremely important not only to standardize the legal framework, but also to avoid the interpretation of rules and adoption of decisions providing temporary solution to the issue that is convenient to certain political forces.

5. Clearly define in the Electoral Code the procedure of using a Voting Rights Certificate, its role in the electoral process and who can vote under this procedure.

6. Amend legislation in order to enhance viability of the appeal procedure and establish a secure and functional examination procedure, by minimising the risk of evasion from responsibility of the concerned authorities.The candidates and citizens should be actively informed as well, in order to avoid the cases of institutional ‘ping-pong’, which severely affects the integrity and legitimacy of electoral processes.

7. Standardize the legal framework for the similar types of elections analysed in this Report, such as local elections and local referendum.

8. Amend the Code in terms of adopting sanctions for unjustified presence within the perimeter of the polling station or, on the contrary, consider allowing electioneering on the election day, except for the perimeter of the polling station.

To the Central Electoral Commission

9. Approve an Guidelines on the way of participation in election campaign for the local referendum, with due regard to the suggestions about expanding the categories of participants to the elections.

10. Amend the Guidelines on the way of participation of political parties and other social-political organisations in the election campaign for the republican referendum, to clarify the key terms and to expand the categories of persons having the right to participate in the respective campaign.

11. Amend the Guidelines on Enabling the Polling Station Infrastructure by introducing express provisions on the procedure of ballot boxes sealing and the obligatory number of applied seals.

12. Circulars disseminated by the CEC during the election period must represent the acts that guide through, describe in details and explain electoral procedures, rather that substitute primary norms lacking in the Electoral Code or in the CEC Regulations.

13. Monitor the activity of EOPS members in terms of not allowing them to violate the legal provisions through limiting the access to the lists of voters and/or participating in collection of the requests to vote at the place of residence.

14. Monitor the lower-level electoral bodies more efficiently, in order to make their activity accountable, in compliance with the approved work schedule.

15. Update the lists of voters to solve the issues of deceased voters and address errors.

60

16. Ensure compliance with the legislation in sending the lists of voters to EOPS.

17. Submit plenary and conclusive information (in the spirit of transparency and integrity of the electoral processes) about the nature of discrepancies between the number of voters in the SRV and in the main lists of voters generated by it on the eve of elections.

18. Apply evenly the rules on voting on the basis of the voting right certificates during the similar elections.

19. Assess the possibility of examination of complaints by CEC, even in case of certain procedural deviations in their submitting. For instance, in case of belated submission, or in case of request for examination of the acts of the lower-level electoral bodies other than judgements. The recommendation is valid for the complaints, examination on the merits of which could protect a voters’ right.

20. Initiate the research procedures and, if necessary, apply the sanctions provided for in the Electoral Code for the incomplete submission of information about the expenditures incurred during the Election Campaign.

21. Apply the sanctions provided for in the Electoral Code for the candidates that printed electoral advertising without typographical data (Printing House, printing date, order/contract, print run).

22. Publish information about the documents proving that no expenses were incurred, on the CEC official website, in corresponding sections (financial support of the election candidates/Referendum participants).

23. Ascertain and asses, in accordance with the guidelines of the Venice Commission, any unauthorized use of administrative resources by political parties or candidates as a financial contribution for funding the election campaign and request that this would be duly reported. At the same time, the CEC should notify the appropriate authorities.

24. EOPS members should standardize the practices of filling in all the sections of the minutes on the vote tabulation results (for instance, using/not using zeroes to fill in all the cells)

To the National Integrity Agency

25. Assess the capacities and prepare in advance the procedure for coping with the new procedural challenges determined by the legislative amendments and the need to issue certificates of integrity, so as to not delay the candidates registration process.

To the Electoral Constituency Councils

26. Observe the legal provisions stipulated in the Electoral Code (Article 382(5)) on the receipt of the independent candidates’ statements on the financial management of election campaigns and clarify the mandate for receiving the independent candidates’ statements on financial management of the election campaigns.

To the Electoral Offices of Polling Stations

27. Comply with the Timetable for performing the activities of organization and conduct of the new local elections.

To Election Candidates

28. Reflect expenses for trips related to election meetings, expenses related to the use of volunteers’ work and non-material donations.

To the Local Public Authorities

29. Comply with the legal provisions on making public the information on the electoral process organisation.

61

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

para – paragraph NIA – National Integrity Authority LPA – Local Public Administration Art. – Article EOPS – Electoral Office of the Polling Station twp. – township CEC – Central Electoral Commission ECC – Electoral Constituency Council CMECC – Chisinau Municipality Electoral Constituency Council IC – Independent Candidate ord. – order Mr. – Mister ET – Event Template VT – Visit Template IG – Initiative Group let. – letter m2 – square meter OM – Observation Mission mun. – municipality No – Number t. – town OSCE – Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe OSCE/ODIHR – OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights LTO – Long-Term Observer STO – Short-Term Observer PCRM – Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova p. – point PDM – Democratic Party of Moldova PL – Liberal Party PN – ‘Our Party’ Political Party PNL – Liberal National Party PPEM – ‘People’s European Party of Moldova’ Political Party PPRM – People’s Party from the Republic of Moldova PSRM – ‘Party of Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party PUN – National Unity Party d. – district RM - Republic of Moldova SRV – State Registry of Voters v. – village STS – State Tax Service PS – polling stations pr. – print run TV – television ATU – Administrative Territorial Unit u. – unit USAID – United States Agency for International Development

62

ANNEX 1

Candidates for the position of mayor in the new local elections (19.11.2017/03.12.2017)*

No Name of the

candidate Political affiliation Settlement

1 Brinzila Sergiu ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

Singera t., Chisinau

2 Poiata Valeriu Democratic Party of Moldova

3 Lari Nichita Liberal Party

4 Baciu Igor Liberal National Party

5 Duca Ion ‘Our Party’ Political Party

6 Popa Valeriu ‘People’s European Party of Moldova’ Political Party

1 Grosu Ion ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party Capriana v.,

Straseni 2 Scutaru Ion Democratic Party of Moldova

3 Scutaru Afina Independent candidate

1 Beliciuc Iurii ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

Berlinti twp., Briceni

2 Oleinic Viorica Democratic Party of Moldova 3 Coltiuc Victor ‘Our Party’ Political Party 4 Burlaca Ghenadii Independent candidate

1 Ghetmancenco Tatiana ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

Fundurii Noi v.,

Glodeni 2 Colenco Vasili Democratic Party of Moldova

1 Hajdeu Ion ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

Ghiliceni twp.,

Telenesti 2 Rotaru Nicolae Democratic Party of Moldova 3 Hajdeu Vera Independent candidate

1 Bubuioc Ion Democratic Party of Moldova Lapusna

twp., Hincesti

1 Cojocari Ivan ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party Stefanesti

twp., Floresti

2 Zdragus Ludmila Democratic Party of Moldova

3 Patras Valeriu Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova

4 Pupeza Anton ‘People’s Party of the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

1 Ungureanu Vladimir Democratic Party of Moldova Sarateni v., Leova 2 Prida Igor Independent candidate

1 Todorov Anatoli Democratic Party of Moldova Plopi twp., Cantemir 2 Pasenco Maria ‘People’s Party of the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

1 Pascal Victor ‘Party of the Socialists from the Republic of Moldova’ Political Party

Zirnesti twp., Cahul

2 Beju Nicolae Democratic Party of Moldova * The candidates whose names are struck out have withdrawn from the electoral race.

Documents

FINAL REPORT - Promo-LEX · Capriana village (Straseni d.), Ghiliceni township (Telenesti d.). The purpose of the final report is to show a general view of the entire electoral process