The uninominal vote // Iurie Leanca: It's a project with upsides and downsides. We will analyze all!
Almost all political parties - both in Government and Opposition - vehemently oppose the uninominal vote, the initiative announced yesterday by the Democratic Party, led by Vlad Plahotniuc. The subject can not be discussed too much on the substance because the bill containing the changes has not been published yet. However, PPEM is currently the only party that did not express a categorical position on it. We talked about this in a brief interview with Iurie Leanca, the chairman of PPEM.
- How do you assess the initiative announced by Plahotniuc on the uninominal electoral system , given the realities in Moldova and the general features of the Moldovan electorate?
-I do not know if I can speak for the electorate or of most citizens. What is clear, and has been seen in the last presidential election, is that the citizen of Moldova considers as an advantage the right to directly elect a representative of power. To what extent this is an advantage, we will see through the actions of the elected President, Igor Dodon. About the initiative is already talking for some time, only that they did not know that will mean a radical change, i.e. the uninominal electoral system. All I can say is that any electoral system has advantages and disadvantages, the problem is how do you apply it and the human factor that determine the effectiveness of one or another system. As far as we are concerned, we will have a debate within the party. I do not want to assume a selfish manner, without talking with my colleagues from districts, which would be the PPEM position on this subject - an important one, it is true! We will analyze the nuances of this initiative as well, because we also have uninominal voting in Romania, but out there the candidates are, however, on party lists and then such an approach as it is in Romania does not generate a decrease of the party's role in society. On the other hand, it allows citizens to know exactly who is responsible for one situation or another. I read somewhere that the president Candu will create a working group with the participation of civil society, experts, asking the opinion from outside partners. We must have a broad debate, to see what we eventually will choose.
- But how ready it is our political class for a uninominal system. Do you think there is sufficient political maturity, to be implemented effectively?
- Details matter a lot. If we go on Romanian model, where all those in the constituencies who are appointed are part of one party or another, it diminishes the political migration phenomenon. Yesterday was expressed a general idea, but let's see if the uninominal system will be based on party lists or by uninominal vote based on independent lists. I think, these are extremely important elements. As I said, it needs a broad debate and only after that we will see how prepared are the political parties and what expectations have the Moldovan citizens.
- Given the fact that all parties have spoken against this initiative, how do you think things will settle during the forthcoming period in the Parliament? In the parliamentary majority and in the relationship of the majority with the opposition? Do you think the Democratic Party is ready to compromise or will fight that this initiativen to be approved by the vote of any factions?
- I do not know to what extent PD cares about this project, at least at the formula that they launched it. It is possible that they launched it as a platform for debate, that after some compromises to reach a mixed electoral system. That I would not know, I have not talked with anyone from PD. How things will evolve in the parliamentary majority, taking into account these divergent points? It's hard to anticipate. To my knowledge, there were no differences before. How will end this time, I cannot tell. It concerns them.
- Many political parties have criticized the initiative just because it is assumed and announced by Plahotniuc. When PPEM will take a decision about this project, it will take into account of who is its author, or will consider only the substance of the initiative advantages and disadvantages?
- From my point of view it matters the essence of the proposal. Who released it, from my point of view - it is secondary. If it is a proposal for the benefit of citizens, do not understand why it should be rejected on the grounds that someone released it