Announcing the cardinal intend to change the current electoral system in Moldova has aroused many reactions from civil society and opposition political parties. Adoption of a new election law before the next parliamentary elections in 2018 may create a feeling of narrow interests that they pursue ruling parties to strengthen their positions before the election, it is the perception that could compromise any legislative initiatives. Moreover, the adoption of an electoral system uninominal majority uninominal on 101 constituencies, instead of the current system proportional party lists in one constituency, is asking the support of a broad public consensus at national level, along with satisfactory clarification to multiple legitimate concerns over how the new electoral system will work for the benefit generally will solve many problems, mentioned several times by rapporteurs OSCE / ODIHR, Venice Commission, the technical monitoring institution of the Council of Europe. These debates were widely encouraged Saturday, April 8th, at the International Conference "Changing the electoral system: Pros and Cons", organized in Chisinau by foundations Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS-Moldova) and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Moldova (FES) in partnership with the Association for Participatory Democracy and the Institute for Development and Social Initiatives (IDIS-Viitorul).
The conference provided an opportunity to the authors of this initiative, members, and loyalists of the Democratic Party to express their positions in an effort to promote the opportunity of changing the electoral system. Equally, other speakers had a chance to analyze the risks and hazards that can be created with this electoral system, noting that the choice of a new type of election is not a cosmetic surgery, but a very strong mechanism to review the political power. Its implications may affect the political party system, the legitimacy of newly elected, the representation of women, ethnic minorities, diaspora involvement and Moldovan citizens permanently resident in the eastern districts, etc. Many experts have stressed the severely impact on the authors' intention to cancel the "the imperative is zero" of the Constitution might have on political stability and the sovereign mandate that, as a whole, the legislative body forms after the elections.
Moderator of the I panel, Igor Munteanu, director of IDIS, said that the majoritarian electoral system, where the winner takes all, creates an absolute right of some political actors to impose its will in absolute minority, creating a solution completely undemocratic, especially in fragmented and fragile societies, under transition and because of a weak judiciary or controlled to create an award winning risk permanently by introducing this system. The proportional system establishes the rule of proportional representation, thus more nuanced, closer to the recognition of plurality, there is no absolute majority rule, which forbids the danger of establishing a new autocracy. He said the words of Giovanni Sartori, then, "the false ideas about democracy hurt democratic model, by imposing rules that have nothing to do with democracy", advancing the hypothesis that slogan "your vote, your deputy" is totally false and even harmful. Members elected to the national legislature fall into the service of the national interest, national sovereignty, and are not anchored at the service of local provisions and citizens have every right to ask local authorities accountable for the quality of local self-government".
Other speakers, including members of Parliament, leaders of opposition parties, MEPs and experts on electoral systems have continued this line of thought, extending the list of alerts that rises legitimately to a bill that is unbalanced, raw, uncorrelated with previous standards and recommendations that were made for Moldova to adjust the legal framework and electoral regulations concerning the functioning of the political process.
