Agenda Tuesday, July, 16
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Moldova: from Oligarchic Pluralism to Plahotniuc's Hegemony
Centre for Eastern Studies NUMBER 208 | 07.04.2016 www.osw.waw.pl Moldova: from oligarchic pluralism to Plahotniuc’s hegemony Kamil Całus Moldova’s political system took shape due to the six-year rule of the Alliance for European Integration coalition but it has undergone a major transformation over the past six months. Resorting to skilful political manoeuvring and capitalising on his control over the Moldovan judiciary system, Vlad Plahotniuc, one of the leaders of the nominally pro-European Democra- tic Party and the richest person in the country, was able to bring about the arrest of his main political competitor, the former prime minister Vlad Filat, in October 2015. Then he pushed through the nomination of his trusted aide, Pavel Filip, for prime minister. In effect, Plahot- niuc has concentrated political and business influence in his own hands on a scale unseen so far in Moldova’s history since 1991. All this indicates that he already not only controls the judi- ciary, the anti-corruption institutions, the Constitutional Court and the economic structures, but has also subordinated the greater part of parliament and is rapidly tightening his grip on the section of the state apparatus which until recently was influenced by Filat. Plahotniuc, whose power and position depends directly on his control of the state apparatus and financial flows in Moldova, is not interested in a structural transformation of the country or in implementing any thorough reforms; this includes the Association Agreement with the EU. This means that as his significance grows, the symbolic actions so far taken with the aim of a structural transformation of the country will become even more superficial. -
ADEPT Political Commentaries
ADEPT Political Commentaries September-December 2004 Concerns on the eve of elections Igor Botan, 15 September 2004 Democracy and governing in Moldova e-journal, II year, no. 37, August 30 - September 12, 2004 With the launch of the fall political season analysts and media alike engaged in assessing preparations for parliamentary elections. According to their estimates, elections might be held late May or even June next year. The source for such predictions is the Constitution itself. Paragraph 3 Article 61 of the Constitution provides that "election of Parliament members will be started not later than 3 months from the end of the previous mandate or from the dissolution of the previous Parliament". Article 63 specifies that "the mandate of the current Parliament may be extended until the structure of the new Parliament has been completed and the latter can meet in full session" that according to the same article is held "within at most 30 days from election day". That is why it is considered that Parliament mandate commences on the day of its first session. Given that the last parliamentary elections were held on February 25, while the Parliament was convened on a first session via a Presidential Decree on March 20, 2001, it is expected that parliamentary elections would be held sometime during the three months March 21 - June 21, 2005. This estimation is logical and at the first glance seems accurate. Arguments cited by those who claim election date would be set for the end of May or even June cite, derive from the supposed interests of the ruling party. -
OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 168 1 European Integration (AIE)
Centre for Eastern Studies NUMBER 168 | 22.04.2015 www.osw.waw.pl An appropriated state? Moldova’s uncertain prospects for modernisation Kamil Całus There have been several significant changes on Moldova’s domestic political scene in the wake of the November 2014 parliamentary elections there. Negotiations lasted nearly two months and re- sulted in the formation of a minority coalition composed of two groupings: the Liberal-Democratic Party (PLDM) and the Democratic Party (PDM). New coalition received unofficial support from the Communist Party (PCRM), which had previously been considered an opposition party. Contrary to their initial announcements, PDLM and PDM did not admit the Liberal Party led by Mihai Ghim- pu to power. Moreover, they blocked the nomination for prime minister of the incumbent, Iurie Leancă. Leancă has been perceived by many as an honest politician and a guarantor of reforms. This situation resulted in the political model present in Moldova since 2009 being preserved. In this model the state’s institutions are subordinated to two main oligarch politicians: Vlad Filat (the leader of PLDM) and Vlad Plahotniuc (a billionaire who de facto controls PDM). With control over the state in the hands of Filat and Plahotniuc questions are raised regarding the prospects of Moldova’s real modernisation. It will also have a negative impact on the process of implementation of Moldova’s Association Agreement with the EU and on other key reforms concerning, for example, the judiciary, the financial sector and the process of de-politicisation of the state’s institutions. From both leaders’ perspective, any changes to the current state of affairs would be tantamount to limiting their influence in politics and the economy, which would in turn challenge their business activities. -
Institute for Public Policy Chișinău 2018 32(478+477):[659.4+004.738.5] N 20
RUSSIAN PROPAGANDA ON „ODNOKLASSNIKI”. THE CASE OF REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA. Institute for Public Policy Chișinău 2018 32(478+477):[659.4+004.738.5] N 20 Authors: Oazu Nantoi Alexandru Platon Aliona Cristei Descrierea CIP a Camerei Naţionale a Cărţii Nantoi, Oazu. Russian propaganda on "Odnoklassniki" the case of Repu- blic of Moldova / Oazu Nantoi, Alexandru Platon, Aliona Cristei; Inst. de Politici Publice. – Chişinău: Institute for Pu- blic Policy, 2018 (Tipogr. "Lexon-Prim"). – 68 p.: fig., tab. Referinţe bibliogr. în subsol. – Aut. sunt indicaţi pe vs. f. de tit. – 30 ex. ISBN 978-9975-139-50-2 (Tipogr. "Lexon-Prim"). Editors: Hans Gutbrod & Stella Uţica Russian Propaganda on Odnoklassniki in the Republic of Moldova 3 CONTENT Introduction & Overview: Odnoklassniki and Russian Propaganda ............................ 5 The origins and the essence of the Russian propaganda in the Republic of Moldova ............................. 7 The main messages of the Russian Federation’s propaganda – the case of the Republic of Moldova .......... 10 Mapping the Odnoklassniki Network in the Republic of Moldova .............................................................. 16 Identification, classification and grouping of Odnoklassniki communities in the Republic of Moldova .............................................................. 18 The network of communities with a pro-Russian affinity ............................................................. 27 The Topics of the Russian Propaganda on Odnoklassniki ....................................................................... -
Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by the Republic of Moldova
AS/Mon(2012)03 rev 14 March 2012 amondoc03r_2012 or. Engl. Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Republic of Moldova Information note by the co-rapporteurs on their fact-finding visit to Chisinau (28 November – 1 December 2011) 1 Co-rapporteurs: Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN, Norway, Socialist group, and Mr Piotr WACH, Poland, Group of the European People’s Party 1 This information note has been made public by decision of the Monitoring Committee dated 13 March 2012. F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | e-mail: [email protected] | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2733 AS/Mon(2012)03rev I. Introduction 1. After a first visit to Chisinau and Comrat in March 2011 (see doc. AS/Mon (2011) 13 rev), we paid a second fact-finding visit to the Republic of Moldova from 28 November to 1 December 2011. The programme of the visit is appended. We intended to address the implementation of Resolution 1572 (2007) on The honouring of obligations and commitments by Moldova, Resolutions 1666 (2009) and 1692 (2009) on The functioning of democratic institutions , the state of play of the election of the President of the Republic, and other current issues, such as the reform of the judiciary, the action taken to combat corruption and organised crime, the legislation and measures to combat discrimination and the latest developments in Transnistria. 2. The support of the Moldovan delegation to the PACE, the Moldovan parliament, and Mr Ulvi Akhundlu, Head of the Council of Europe Office in Chisinau, was again precious for facilitating our meetings, including with the acting President and Speaker, Mr Marian Lupu, the Prime Minister, Mr Filat, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Leanca, the Vice-Speaker of the parliament, Mr Plahotniuc, high-level representatives of the judiciary and enforcement bodies, representatives of the media and NGOs. -
Public Opinion Survey Residents of Moldova
Public Opinion Survey Residents of Moldova March 2016 Detailed Methodology • The survey was coordinated and analyzed by Dr. Rasa Ališauskienė from public opinion and market research company Baltic Surveys/The Gallup Organization on behalf of the International Republican Institute. The field work was carried out by Magenta Consulting. • Data was collected throughout Moldova (except in Transnistria) between March 11-25, 2016 through face-to-face interviews at respondents’ homes. • The main sample consisted of 1,500 permanent residents of Moldova older than the age of 18 and eligible to vote with an oversample in the capital Chisinau. It is representative of the general population by age, gender, education, region and size of the settlement. • Multistage probability sampling method was used with the random route and next birthday respondent’s selection procedures. • Stage one: all districts of Moldova are grouped into 11 groups. All regions of Moldova were surveyed. • Stage two: selection of the settlements: cities and villages. o Settlements were selected at random. o The number of selected settlements in each region was proportional to the share of population living in a particular type of the settlement in each region. • Stage three: primary sampling units were described. • The margin of error does not exceed plus or minus 2.8 percent. • Response rate was 50 percent. • Charts and graphs may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding. • The survey was funded by the National Endowment for Democracy. 2 Overwhelming Dissatisfaction with Status -
Public Opinion Survey Residents of Moldova
Public Opinion Survey Residents of Moldova September 2016 Detailed Methodology • The survey was coordinated by Dr. Rasa Ališauskienė from the public opinion and market research company, Baltic Surveys/The Gallup Organization on behalf of the International Republican Institute. The field work was carried out by Magenta Consulting. • Data was collected throughout Moldova (with the exception of Transnistria) between September 1–23, 2016 through face- to-face interviews at respondents’ homes. • The main sample consisted of 1,516 permanent residents of Moldova older than the age of 18 and eligible to vote. The survey also contained an oversample in the capital of Chisinau. It is representative of the general population by age, gender, education, region and size of the settlement. • Multistage probability sampling method was used with the random route and next birthday respondent’s selection procedures. • Stage One: All districts of Moldova are grouped into 11 groups. All regions of Moldova were surveyed. • Stage Two: Selection of the settlements – cities and villages. o Settlements were selected at random. o The number of selected settlements in each region was proportional to the share of population living in a particular type of the settlement in each region. • Stage Three: Primary sampling units were described. • The margin of error does not exceed plus or minus 2.8 percent. • The response rate was 61 percent. • Charts and graphs may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding. • The survey was funded by the National Endowment for Democracy. -
Alegeri 2005
CZU 324 (478) A 36 Proiect al Asociaţiei pentru Democraţie Participativă ADEPT realizat cu sprijinul Ambasadei Regatului Ţărilor de Jos Asociaţia pentru Democraţie Participativă ADEPT este un centru independent, de analiză şi consultanţă privind procesul decizional, politic, electoral şi social-economic din Republica Moldova şi regiune. Misiunea ADEPT este de a promova valorile demo- cratice şi sprijini participarea activă la viaţa publică. ADEPT, str. V. Alecsandri nr. 97, Chişinău, MD 2012 Tel.: (373 22) 210422, 212992, tel./fax: (373 22) 213494 E-mail: [email protected], www.e-democracy.md ALEGERI 2005 Volum coordonat de Sergiu Buşcaneanu La apariţia publicaţiei au mai contribuit: Igor Boţan Tamara Chitoroagă Natalia Gîrdea Lector: Lucia Ciocanu Coperta: Mihai Bacinschi Prezentare grafică şi tehnoredactare: Marin Bulat Prepress: Editura GUNIVAS Djxhwnjwjf CIP f Cfrjwjn NfÏntsfqj f C wÏnn Alegeri 2005/ coord.: Sergiu Buşcaneanu. – Ch.: Gunivas, 2005 (Tipogr...). – 164 p. ISBN 9975-908-54-3 1000 ex. 324 (478) Opiniile exprimate în această publicaţie nu reprezintă în mod neapărat punctul de vedere al instituţiei finanţatoare. ISBN 9975-908-54-3 Proiect al Asociaţiei pentru Democraţie Participativă ADEPT realizat cu sprijinul Ambasadei Regatului Ţărilor de Jos Asociaţia Ambasada pentru Democraţie Participativă Regatului Ţărilor de Jos ADEPT CUPRINS PREFAŢĂ ........................................................................................................... 7 CAPITOLUL I. ALEGERI PARLAMENTARE 2005 ..................................... 8 1. Alegerile parlamentare 2005 – viziune de ansamblu ............... 8 1.1. Radiografie generală ............................................................8 1.2. Profilul sociologic al listelor de candidaţi ......................... 9 1.3. Reprezentarea femeilor pe listele de candidaţi ...............10 2. Concurenţi electorali principali .................................................11 2.1. Partidul Comuniştilor din Republica Moldova (PCRM) ... 11 2.2. Blocul electoral „Moldova Democrată” (BMD) ...............21 2.3. -
Republica Moldova, Între România Şi Rusia 1989-2009
Biblioteca revistei „Limba Română” Dorin CIMPOEŞU REPUBLICA MOLDOVA, ÎNTRE ROMÂNIA ŞI RUSIA 1989-2009 Coordonatorul ediţiei: Alexandru BANTOŞ, redactor-şef al revistei „Limba Română”, director al Casei Limbii Române „Nichita Stănescu” Lectori: Veronica ROTARU Vasile GAVRILAN Machetare: Oxana BEJAN Coperta: Mihai BACINSCHI Descrierea CIP a Camerei Naţionale a Cărţii Cimpoeşu, Dorin Republica Moldova, între România şi Rusia. 1989-2009 Biblioteca revistei „Limba Română”. Chişinău, Tipografia Serebia, 2010, 428 p. ISBN CZU Volumul este editat pe cheltuiala proprie a autorului. Biblioteca revistei „Limba Română” Dorin CIMPOEŞU REPUBLICA MOLDOVA, ÎNTRE ROMÂNIA ŞI RUSIA 1989-2009 Cuvânt înainte de prof. univ. dr. Mihai RETEGAN Casa Limbii Române Nichita Stănescu Chişinău – 2010 Dedic această carte comemorării a 70 de ani de la deportările staliniste, cărora le-au căzut victime zeci de mii de români, după reocuparea Basarabiei de către armata roşie sovietică, la 28 iunie 1940 SUMAR Cuvânt înainte de Mihai Retegan .................................................................................. 11 Nota autorului ............................................................................................................... 13 INTRODUCERE Background istoric ........................................................................................................ 17 Perioada marilor transformări naţionale şi democratice ............................................... 27 Contrareacţia Moscovei la transformările naţionale şi democratice din Basarabia -
Report 1, Api, Ijc, September 15-29, 2016
1 Media Monitoring in the Period Prior to the Presidential Elections of 2016 Report no. 1 15 – 29 September 2016 This monitoring takes place as part of a project funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (USA) and the Council of Europe. The opinions expressed here belong to the authors and do not necessarily express the viewpoint of the donors. 2 I. GENERAL DATA 1.1 Objective of the project: to monitor and inform the public opinion about the editorial behavior of media outlets in the election period and in the campaign for presidential elections in the Republic of Moldova. 1.2 Monitoring period: 15 September 2016 – 13 November 2016. 1.3 Criteria of selection of the media outlets subjected to monitoring: Media outlets were selected based on the following objective criteria: a) type of ownership; b) geography; c) language of broadcasting; d) fame/audience. Thus, we monitor public and private media outlets, with national, quasi-national and regional coverage, in Romanian and Russian. 1.4 Media monitored: Broadcast media Moldova 1, Prime TV, Canal 2, Canal 3, Publika TV, Jurnal TV, Realitatea TV, NTV Moldova, ProTV Chişinău, TV7, Accent TV, N4 TV Online portals Agora.md, Deschide.md, Gagauzinfo.md, Jurnal.md, Moldova24.info, Newsmaker.md, Noi.md, Realitatea.md, Sputnik.md, Today.md, Unimedia.info, Ziarulnational.md Print media Komsomolskaia pravda v Moldove, Panorama, Săptămîna, Timpul 1.5 Subject matter of monitoring TV (interval between 18.00 and 24.00) A. Newscasts; B. Programs of electoral character; C. Interviews with the candidates; D. Vox Populi; E. Election debates. -
Moldova Page 1 of 6
Moldova Page 1 of 6 Published on Freedom House (https://freedomhouse.org) Home > Moldova Moldova Country: Moldova Year: 2016 Freedom Status: Partly Free Political Rights: 3 Civil Liberties: 3 Aggregate Score: 60 Freedom Rating: 3.0 Overview: Moldova experienced a significant political crisis in 2015, as the aftershock of a banking scandal and discord among parliamentary parties and prominent officials caused deep government dysfunction and stalled ongoing reform efforts. Details about a major fraud scheme involving three Moldovan banks continued to emerge during the year, implicating high-ranking public figures and leading to mass protests. The tense climate complicated the process of government formation, contributing to disagreements among the parties that had won seats in the November 2014 parliamentary elections. After multiple transfers of power, the year ended in a political impasse, with parties unable to form a new governing coalition. Trend Arrow: ↓ Explanatory Note: The numerical ratings and status listed above do not reflect conditions in Transnistria, which is examined in a separate report. Political Rights and Civil Liberties: https://freedomhouse.org/print/48074 7/13/2016 Moldova Page 2 of 6 Political Rights: 25 / 40 (−3) [Key] A. Electoral Process: 10 / 12 Voters elect the 101-seat unicameral parliament by proportional representation for four- year terms. Parliament elects the president, who serves up to two four-year terms, with a three-fifths supermajority. Parliament must approve the prime minister, who holds most of the executive power. Nicolae Timofti was elected president in 2012, filling a post that had been vacant since 2009 due to partisan gridlock. The next presidential election is scheduled for 2016. -
Freedom House, Its Academic Advisers, and the Author(S) of This Report
Moldova By Victor Gotișan Capital: Chisinau Population: 3.5 Million GNI/capita, PPP: $5,670 Source: World Bank World Development Indicators. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 National Democratic 5.75 6.00 5.75 5.75 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.75 5.75 5.75 Governance Electoral Process 4.00 4.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Civil Society 3.75 3.50 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Independent Media 5.75 5.75 5.50 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Local Democratic 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.75 5.50 5.50 5.50 Governance Judicial Framework 4.50 4.75 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.75 4.75 4.75 5.00 5.00 and Independence Corruption 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.75 5.75 5.75 6.00 6.00 6.00 Democracy Score 5.07 5.14 4.96 4.89 4.82 4.86 4.86 4.89 4.93 4.93 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. If consensus cannot be reached, Freedom House is responsible for the final ratings. The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest.