Friday, April 24, 2009

First signs of crackdown on NGOs on the day of Solana's visit

On the very day of Javier Solana's visit to Moldova, today, 24 April 2009, the Communist subordinated Fiscal inspectorate of Moldova sent five summons to the Non-Governmental Organisations, members of the Coalition 2009, for free and fair elections that monitored the polls and declared the elections neither free nor fair.

For the first time in their history, the five leading Moldovan NGOs - ADEPT, IPP, IDIS, APEL, CIJ - were asked to present the information about their funding sources in a form that is usually submitted to poltical parties. In that form the authorities asked about all sources of funding - that included funding from political parties and particularly foreign funding. If the NGOs do not comply they would be fined with 3000 Moldovan Lei. However, unltimetely they face blockage of their accounts.

Also today, three newspapers that reported on protests and police violence, received letters from the Ministry of Interior with a request to prove their stories (that would be possible only if disclosing their sources, which is illegal) or to publish a denunciation.

People believe the warnings that the communist authorities would continue the path to an authoritarian regime to be true - after political parties were accused of "coup d'etat" with penal cases started against their leaders, and hence "dealt with", and after intimidating the population, the authorities are now on inconvenient and "non-patriotic" NGOs.

In a reminder to Kremlin's crackdown on Russian NGOs that received foreign funding (particulrly UK), today's request is perceived as an identical act by the Moldovan authorities that copy and adapt the Russian "vertical of power" from their Kremlin partners.

The Russian factor was not only indirectly present in Moldovan post-electoral developments.

Right before President Voronin met EU's Javier Solana he was visited by the Russian Ambassador to Moldova, Valery Kuzmin.

They exchanged views about the Moldovan realities after the April 5 parliamentary elections.

Voronin spoke about "spirit of centuries-old friendship relations and the strategic partnership established between those two countries and peoples."

Right after that acting president Voronin met with Javier Solana, who came from a meeting with opposition, at which he spoke about the need to find a common solution and need for engament (of these parties with communists)...

So you tell me who is "engaged" with whom in this story?

Remember? On April 10 Moscow's Kommersant newspaper reported that Russia sent tear-gas and other equipment to Moldovan communist authorities to deal with expected protests. However, the load with tear-gas AND EQUIPMENT arrived in their IL-76 aircarrier - HOW MUCH, DO YOU THINK, CAN FIT IN A IL-76?

Political parties and their proetsters "dealt with", EU wants the opposition to accept the frauded elections, for over one year I feel we are too much Eastern trouble for someone's attention, we make people in comfortabl offices really annoyed - just like "what do they want?" - giving them one more trouble, creating a strong and sustained impression that is very bad that we are not silent and obedient to "modern communism" - hence, I wonder, atfer all that "trouble" what's next?...

What should actually happen in Moldova for West to react properly?


President Voronin grateful to Russia for support

Vladimir Voronin - the Moldovan president in office - met Russian ambassador to Moldova, Valery Kuzmin. The President thanked Russia for its support after April 5, Info-Prim Neo reports.

Info-Prim Neo, 24 April 2009, 17:59

2009-04-24/15:50/ Chisinau (IPN) According to the Moldovan presidential press service, Vladimir Voronin and Valery Kuzmin exchanged views about the Moldovan realities after the April 5 parliamentary elections.

The president highly appreciated Russia's and its president's moral and political support. Vladimir Voronin insisted this backing matches the spirit of centuries-old friendship relations and the strategic partnership established between those two countries and peoples.

Another topic was the price of the hydrocarbons Moldova receives from Russia, and the opportunity of Russia's offering Moldova a loan to repair roads.

Earlier, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev called 'monstrous' the events occurring in Moldova after the results of the parliamentary elections had been announced. "What happened in our close neighbor, in Moldova, is unfortunately an example of how events can develop in an absolutely unconstitutional way. The footage we saw looked monstrous, when there were attempts to hang flags of another country on the main state buildings, the symbols of a state," Medvedev said in a TV interview.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

The communist are not communists?

Well, see the reality below.

There are two news - one about Czech Prime-Minister Topolanek, in his capacity of EU presidency, and far below another one - Moldovan Communist President celebrating Lenin's birthday.

Now, if "Communists are not really Communists" in Moldova then see that this Lenin's celebration happened right before the meeting with EU Czech Presidency Topolanek today.


Topolanek said, according to the local news portal Unmimedia - I am translating from the parts of the news that were printed in Romanian - quotation:

„The political crisis in Moldova is unsettling for the European Union. We are not indifferent to what is happening in the Republic of Moldova. At today's meetings I have presented the instruments that exist to solve the crisis - resumption of the dialogue, ensuring a functioning rule of law state, ensuring and respecting freedoms, stop to the attacks and violence, establishing a monitoring commission, in which oposition and international organisations shoould be present. For us the european orientation of the Republic of Moldova matters.”

„Eastern Partenership offers us the posibility to finance different projects, that You consider important. We've also discussed the relations between the Republic of Moldova and Romania. We opt for the resumption of good neighbourly relations. I hope to obtan the normalisation of the relations between these two countries. Between April 27 – 28 there will be an important meeting of the EU Foreign Ministers, where we will discuss the situation in the Republic of Moldova.”


What I would, personally, note is that I can not understand why is there such an excessive focus on Romania. It is rather frustrating here. It is not Romania that actually made things worse in Moldova, let's face it for once.

And to put it even in a blunter way - what's EU interest is, really? The more Communists see that everyone deals with them with soft gloves, the more impertinent they feel. That is a Sovet time legacy, one can still oberve in Russia, to a certain extent.

Now lets just try to see the things through another angle, detach from who takes over whom, lets try one not that usual thought - imagine the EU indeed cares about Moldova, and that it genuinely wants Moldova in the EU, and it also is concerned about Communists' tortures and intimidation of its own populace - well recorded by the human rights activists and lawyers. The more Romanian citizens are in Moldova, the more actually there are EU citizens in Moldova - the argument that with more Romanian citizenship there will be more Moldovan immigrants in EU is rahter a misunderstanding of democraphic realities here. Out of 3.800.000 population of the country, including young and elderly, between 400.000 and 1.000.000 are already working abroad. How can Moldova "produce" more people for migration over night? Moreover, most of those who remained in Moldova are unable to go to Europe, as they have some sort of jobs, not to mention that they will not leave for Europe in times of crisis, when other Moldovans come back spreeading the word about the lack of jobs in times of crisis - the Moldovans are not that stupid.

So if Romanian citizenship is also EU citizenship, and EU indeed cares about the democratic values and is against systemic torture, wants free and fair elections as a wholle, not only on electoral day, why some in the EU would be so concerned about Romanian citizenship and so soft on actual culprits? The Romanian citizenship would b at least the EU citizenship after all. There are other ways to discuss with Romania anyway. That is if EU genuinely wants Moldova to be a part of the EU one day when Moldova is ready, whenever that happens. It is of course an simplified aproach, however I think you all get the picture and under current circumstances, you know, this is just... true.

Why not stopping all the criticism to Romania and concentrating on the causes of the problem - Moldovan leadership that resorted to crashdown on democracy - EU meanwhile concentrating on the need to instate the rule of law in Moldova, insist that Moldova is IMPLEMENTING the European integration - the EU complained about that laready, complaining is good, although ineffective - what about EUs assistance and direct local presence via a specialised mission of support and oversight. Genuinely. Sounds like where are the Moldovans? Think again - the Communists don't care. They proved they don't care about civil society, about any other parties, they are ready to split and antagonise the entire society in the country. They don't care. The only reaction they had was to the EU and US.

Financial assiatnce to them is an intersting thought - however the experience sais that they will milk both West and East for their own needs. Stating that EU can give more money than Russia, which would request obedience from Moldova, is unrealistic in the case of the President who celebrates Lenin, whose son is the most "successful" bunsinessman in Moldova, whose banks are used to transfer salaries for public services, who is alleged to "purchase" sucessful businesses in Moldova through "offers they can't refuse", and finally whose family members publicly stated they would not live in Moldova at the end.

So do they really care about what EU will offer, do they care about Moldova? Or probably their own incentives are more important? Do the math youselves. And finally let's ask ourselves, would it be their first time "milking", promising reform and... lying? Well, surprise - no it wouldn't. See, they did exactly that during 2005-2009. Leasons learned on the EU side - none. After another four years one would say in the West - sorry the results were not as we expected, and what would Moldovans will have to say to that?

See below hte news about the Moldovan not-so-communists - are they not communist? Or perhaps the question is are they Moldovan, in fact? Do their intersts lie with this country?


Chisinau Communists mark Lenin's birthday

Communist leaders and ordinary citizens, mainly elderly, marked Vladimir Lenin's birthday on April 22 in Chisinau. Lenin was the leader of the Socialist Revolution from Russia in 1917, Info-Prim Neo reports.

Info-Prim Neo, 22 April 2009, 11:47

2009-04-22/10:46/ Chisinau (IPN) The participants gathered to Lenin's monument from the exhibition center Moldexpo, where they were met with Soviet songs.

The meeting was attended by president Vladimir Voronin, the leader of the Moldovan Communists, Communist parliamentarians and officials.

Vladimir Voronin gave a speech criticizing the Moldovan opposition parties, saying they were like criminal gangs. He condemned the devastation of the headquarters of the parliament and the presidency.

Voronin assured the third victory of the Communists in Moldova will continue their work for the development of the country. He says the key strategic points for the country's development are the European integration, the democratization of society and building a social state.

Deputy premier Victor Stepaniuc has told journalists the Socialist system has proven its political, social and economic viability. The system also had certain drawbacks, but it happened later, in the second half of the 20th century, he said. He says Lenin was a key figure of the left-wing doctrine and his life and works deserve being studied.

Traditionally, Vladimir Voronin handed party-membership cards to several youths, and the participants laid flowered to Lenin's monument.

Friday, April 17, 2009


Comunistii au gasit un "tag" pentru 7 aprilie pe care il promveaza insistent prin media si populatie, diseminand minciuna si dezinformarea despre realitatile de martea trecuta.

Adresarea televizata a presedintelui in exercitiu Voronin a fost contradictorie - critica vehement si ameninta opozitia dupa care ii chema la impcare, in acelasi fel s-a purtat fata de Romania - ca si cum ai spuipa pe cineva in fata dupa care sa il acuzi ca nu-ti este amic/prieten.

Tratatele nesemnate, mentionate de Voronin, au fost ultima data discutate in iunei 2008 - MAEIE al RM urma sa invitate colegii sai romanai la urmaotoarea runda. Autoritatile de la Chisinau asa si nu au adresata aceasta invitatie. Textul tratatului de baza nici macar nu este negociat pana la capat, iar Romania deja propusee Chisinaului ca acest Tratat sa fie unul EUROPAN, o alta "absenta" acuzata de Voronin. Tratele de frontiere - Romania a recunoscut RM in calitate de succesor al frontierei URSS s trataelor cu aceasta, astfel incat recunoaste frontierele acesteia asa cum au fost, dea ceea sugerand sa seneze un Tratat privind REGIMUL de frontiere. Deci o chestiune tehnica, nu politica, cum vrea sa o prezinte Chisinaul. Iata adevarul.

De "prietenia" PCRM fata opozitie si intimidari nici nu mai spun - comunistii intentionat au intins proceseul de verificare, renumarare, etc ca sa ajungem in Pasti - este o tactica veche URSS, vezi si faptul ca Rusia a planificat atacul asupra Georgiei folosind aceiasi logica.

Deci "martea neagra" - e timpul sa spunem lucrurilor pe nume, despre instigatorii "negasiti" sau eliberati, despre vandalii "intamplatori" - deja stim totul - sa spunem lucrurilor pe nume 7 Aprilie este "Martea Rosie".

Обращение Украинского Хельсинского союза по правам человека о ситуации в Молдове

Обращение Украинского Хельсинского союза по правам человека
о ситуации в Молдове

16 апреля 2009г

Украинский Хельсинский союз по правам человека выражает свое беспокойство в связи с массовыми грубыми нарушениями прав человека после событий, случившихся в Кишенеу 7 апреля 2009 года.

Мы никоим образом не одобряем какие-либо проявления насилия в ходе политического процесса. Мы также можем понять сложность ситуации, в которой оказались власти Молдовы в ходе событий 7 апреля 2009 года, и сложность решений, которые необходимо было принять для стабилизации этой обстановки.

Однако нельзя найти оправдания той лавине жестокости и насилия, которые обрушила власть на представителей оппозиции, возможно, и перешедших допустимые пределы выражения протестных настроений.

Массовые аресты в основном молодых людей, применение пыток к задержанным, исчезновение людей, осуждение без надлежащей процедуры, без возможности защищаться, под непрекращающимся давлением со стороны полиции - все это нельзя назвать мерами по предупреждению беспорядков.

Как стало известно, двое задержанных в ходе массовых арестов умерли от
пыток и у нас нет информации, что ведется расследование этих преступлений и виновные будут наказаны.

Сотни людей были осуждены судами за административные правонарушения,
не получив ни времени, ни возможности подготовить свою защиту.

Сотни людей были арестованы, и официальные данные в разы отличаются от
тех, которые предоставляют общественные организации. Шестеро людей исчезли бесследно.

Нет оснований не доверять этим данным, особенно на фоне многочисленных
решений Европейского суда по правам человека, который устанавливал
ответственность Молдовы за ту практику нарушений прав человека,
которая в эти дни приобрела концентрированный и массовый характер.

Нас также беспокоят поспешные заявления о политическом заговоре, который якобы лежит в основе событий 7 апреля. Это создает для задержанных еще больший риск
подвергнуться пыткам и жестокому обращению в полиции из-за естественных
попыток власти найти доказательства такого заговора.

Размах массового и организованного государственного насилия далеко превысил необходимость поддержания общественного порядка и напоминает попытки дать острастку всем, кто считает, что имеет право на выражение собственного мнения, на мирные собрания и на политический выбор.

Поэтому мы расцениваем такие действий как нарушение и этих
основополагающих прав.

Как стало известно, в настоящее время в Украине арестованы двое
граждан Молдовы, Габриель Стати и Аурен Маринеску, которых власти
Молдовы требуют выдать в Молдову для уголовного преследования в связи
с событиями 7 апреля 2009 года.

Мы полагаем, что выдача этих людей в Молдову будет означать поддержку
и оправдание властями Украины тех массовых нарушений прав человека,
который происходят в этой стране.

Украина, которая является членом Совета по правам человека ООН, не может
допустить, чтобы мир воспринимал ее как адвоката жестокости и насилия по отношению к инакомыслящим. Выдвигая свою кандидатуру в качестве возможного
участника Совета ООН по правам человека, Украина обязалась в своих уважать положения Всеобщей Декларации прав человека, избегать политики двойных стандартов при оценке ситуации.

Являясь представителем Восточной Европы в этом важном международном органе, Украина не должна хранить молчание при массовых нарушениях прав человека в одном из соседних государств.

Мы призываем органы власти Украины осудить массовые нарушения прав человека в Молдове, которые происходили и продолжают происходить после 7 апреля 2009 года, а также инициировать рассмотрение ситуации в Молдове на ближайшей сессии Совета ООН по правам человека.

Мы обращаемся ко всем органам власти Украины не предпринимать никаких действий, которые могут быть расценены как прямое или косвенное одобрение действиям властей Молдовы.

Мы обращаемся к органам власти Молдовы предпринять немедленные меры для прекращения практики пыток, массовых арестов и суммарных судебных разбирательств в связи с событиями в Кишинеу 7 апреля 2009 года.

Мы также требуем от властей Молдовы незамедлительно и тщательно расследовать любую информацию о пытках, произвольных арестах и нарушениях прав задержанных.

Мы обращаемся к международным организациям выступить с незамедлительным и решительным осуждением массового нарушения прав человека в Молдове.

Председатель правления Украинского Хельсинского союза
по правам человека

Аркадий Бущенко

Исполнительный директор
Украинского Хельсинского союза
по правам человека

Владимир Яворский


Stirea despre aceasta declaratie o gasiti in original, in limba ucraineana daca dati click pe Read More:

[16.04.2009 20:36]

Правозахисники закликають припинити порушення прав людини у Молдові

Українська Гельсінська спілка з прав людини виражає своє занепокоєння у зв`язку з масовими грубими порушеннями прав людини після подій, що сталися в Кишиневі 7 квітня 2009 року.

Про це йдеться у тексті заяви УГСПЛ, переданої агентству УНІАН.

«Масові арешти, в основному молодих людей, застосування тортур до затриманих, зникнення людей, засудження без належної процедури, без можливості захищатися, під безперервним тиском з боку поліції – все це не можна назвати заходами по запобіганню безладам», - говориться у заяві.

Як стало відомо УГСПЛ, двоє затриманих в ході масових арештів померли від тортур, і у правозахисників немає інформації, що ведеться розслідування цих злочинів і винні будуть покарані.

Також, за даними правозахисників, сотні людей були засуджені за адміністративні правопорушення, не отримавши ні часу, ні можливості підготувати свій захист; сотні демонстрантів були арештовані, при цьому офіційні дані в рази відрізняються від тих, які надають громадські організації; шестеро людей зникли безслідно.

Українські правозахисники заявляють, що у них «немає підстав не довіряти цим даним, особливо на фоні численних рішень Європейського суду з прав людини, які встановлювали відповідальність Молдови за ту практику порушень прав людини, яка в ці дні набула концентрованого і масового характеру».

УГСПЛ також стурбована поспішними заявами про політичну змову, яка нібито лежить в основі подій 7 квітня. «Це створює для затриманих ще більший ризик піддатися тортурам і жорстокому поводженню в поліції через природні спроби влади знайти докази такої змови», - йдеться у тексті заяви українських правозахисників.

Крім того, як повідомляв УНІАН, 9 квітня ц. р. в аеропорту Одеси співробітники міліції, СБУ, прикордонної служби затримали двох громадян Молдови – Габріела СТАТІ та Аурена МАРИНЕСКУ, які підозрюються в організації масових заворушень у Кишиневі. 16 квітня, за повідомленням Генпрокуратури, підозрюваних в організації заворушень в Кишиневі екстрадували з України.

«Видача цих людей до Молдови означає підтримку і виправдання українською владою тих масових порушень прав людини, яка відбуваються в цій країні. Україна, яка є членом Ради з прав людини ООН, не може допустити, щоб світ сприймав її як адвоката жорстокості і насильства по відношенню до інакодумців», - заявляє Українська Гельсінська спілка з прав людини.

Правозахисники закликають органи влади України засудити масові порушення прав людини в Молдові, які відбувалися і продовжують відбуватися після 7 квітня 2009 року, а також ініціювати розгляд ситуації в Молдові на найближчій сесії Ради ООН з прав людини. Також правозахисники звертаються до української влади з проханням не робити жодних дій, які можуть бути розцінені як пряме або непряме схвалення дій молдовської влади.

«Ми звертаємося до органів влади Молдови зробити негайні заходи для припинення практики тортур, масових арештів і сумарних судових розглядів у зв`язку з подіями в Кишиневі 7 квітня 2009 року. Ми також вимагаємо від влади Молдови негайно і ретельно розслідувати будь-яку інформацію про тортури, довільні арешти і порушення прав затриманих. Ми звертаємося до міжнародних організацій виступити з негайним і рішучим осудом масового порушення прав людини в Молдові», - йдеться у тексті заяви УГСПЛ.

Încă o familie îndurerată îşi înmormântează copilul


Vineri, 17 aprilie 2009, 11:28

11:28 // Încă o familie îndurerată îşi înmormântează copilul

Eugen Ţapu, cel de-al treilea tânăr despre care se spune că a fost omorât în bătaie după protestele violente din 7 aprilie, va fi înmormântat sâmbătă, 18 aprilie, la Soroca.

Primarul or. Soroca, Victor Său, a declarat pentru Info-Prim Neo că tatăl lui Eugen, Andrei Ţapu, a fost chemat la 16 aprilie la Chişinău pentru a lua cadavrul tânărului de la morgă. Tatăl băiatului este singurul care a reuşit să-l vadă pe Eugen, care a fost adus acasă într-un sicriu sigilat. El i-a spus primarului că trupul neînsufleţit era într-o stare avansată de putrefacţie. „Îl mâncau viermii”, a spus tatăl îndurerat. De asemenea, Andrei Ţapu susţine că pe trupul fiului său a văzut urme de bătăi.

În certificatul de deces figurează data de 7 aprilie. La morgă tatălui i s-a spus că tânărul s-ar fi spânzurat cu şireturile de la încălţăminte. Familia crede, însă, că Eugen a fost ucis în bătaie de poliţie. Avea 26 de ani.

„Este o tragedie mare în oraş”, a spus primarul de Soroca. „ Eugen era un tânăr vesel şi energic. Era sportiv, juca rugby la Chişinău. Îl cunoştea tot oraşul”, a mai spus Victor Său.

Anterior, presa a scris despre alţi doi tineri care au murit după ce au fost maltrataţi de către poliţie în urma acţiunilor de protest de la Parlament şi Preşedinţie.

Alexandru Tănase, avocatul familiei Ţapu a declarat pentru Info-Prim Neo că va începe procedura de judecată internă după sărbătorile de Paşti, solicitând deschiderea unei anchete. „Noi ne vom judeca cu Guvernul R. Moldova, care este obligat în baza Convenţiei Europene a Drepturilor Omului şi în baza Constituţiei R. Moldova să asigure dreptul la viaţă a cetăţenilor săi. Este puţin probabil ca un băiat de 26 ani, sportiv, să se sinucidă”, a spus Tănase.

„Familia este în drept să tragă la răspundere Guvernul R. Moldova şi să obţină compensaţii atât morale, cât şi materiale”, a mai s pus avocatul. Potrivit lui, dacă nu vor obţine câştig de cauză în R. Moldova, vor formula o cerere la Curtea Europeană Drepturilor Omului. (IPN)

Monday, April 13, 2009

Moldova: Urgent Letter of Concern on ongoing human rights violations

To: Terry Davis, Secretary General of the Council of Europe

Thomas Hammarberg, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights
Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture

Javier Solana, EU High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy,
Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union

José Manuel Barroso, President, European Commission

Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Commissioner for External Relations and European
Neighbourhood Policy

Karel Schwarzenberg, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Czech Republic

Manfred Nowak, UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

Margaret Sekaggya, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders

Frank La Rue Lewy, UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression
Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment of the Committee against Torture

Cc: All diplomatic representations in Moldova

Ambassador Philip N. Remler, Head of OSCE Mission to Moldova

Vladimir Ristovski, Special Representative of the Council of Europe General Secretariat to Moldova

Kalman Mizsei, EU Special Representative to Moldova

Ambassador Cesare de Montis, Head of Delegation of the European Commission to

Marianne Mikko, Member of the EU Parliament, Chairwoman of the Delegation to the
EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee

13 April 2009

Chişinău, Republic of Moldova

Your Excellencies,

We are writing to you to draw your attention to the recent and ongoing abuses of the rights of persons arrested in relation to the events of 6 – 8 April 2009 in Chişinău, Republic of Moldova.

We are deeply concerned by the widespread violations of human rights, particularly of arrested persons, specifically the right to life, the right not to be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the right to liberty and security, the right to a fair trial and the rights to freedom of assembly, association and expression. In response to the demonstrations in Chişinău, which started on 6 April, and included acts of violence and vandalism that took place on 7 April, the government authorities have begun an ongoing campaign of mass-arrests, in particular discriminating against individuals of student age.

According to lists published on 12 April by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Moldova, by 11 April, 129 people had been arrested, out of which 88 people have been given between 2 - 15 days of administrative detention, 22 people have been fined, 4 people have been released and there is no information regarding the current status for 15 people. Additionally, according to the same source, criminal investigations have been opened on a further 86 detained people, the status of which is unknown. There is sufficient evidence to assert that the published lists of those detained are incomplete, including a number of individuals whose whereabouts have not been communicated to their relatives in due time.

There are repeated and consistent reports that the rights of many of those being detained are being violated. We have collected information regarding approximately 100 individuals, arrested between 7 – 11 April. From the statements of their lawyers, relatives or friends, and from our own observations, the following systematic violations are occurring:

- Individuals are not informed of the reasons for their arrest

- They are usually arrested by unidentified men in plain clothes

- Family or next of kin are frequently not being informed of the whereabouts of those detained

- Regarding access to lawyers:

~ Detained persons are not being given access to a lawyer in due time and there are reports that people have been beaten for requesting a lawyer

~ There are reports that people have been questioned without the presence of a lawyer

~ There are reports that lawyers are not present during court proceedings

~ Private meetings with a lawyer are not ensured

- Many people, including minors, have reported beatings and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment when being detained and during police custody

- Regarding criminal proceedings:

~ Many pre-trial arrest hearings are taking place in district police commissariats

~ Lawyers report that they are usually denied access to their clients before court hearings about pre-trial arrest

~ Prosecutors are submitting unsubstantiated requests for pre-trial arrest

~ Investigative judges are issuing unsubstantiated decisions about pre-trial arrest

~ There is no public information about the place and time of these hearings

~ Court hearings about pre-trial arrest are lasting no longer than 10-15 minutes per person and individuals are not given sufficient time or opportunity to provide their own arguments to defend themselves

~ Decisions of 30 days of pre-trial arrest are being made as a rule, rather than an exception, and people are not being informed of their right to appeal against these desicions

~ Other procedural rights violations.

- Regarding administrative proceedings:

~ Lawyers or relatives are being given no information about these hearings or are being denied access to them

~ Administrative detention is predominantly used

On 11 April members of the Consultative Council for the Prevention of Torture (National Preventive Mechanism), accompanied by the UN Human Rights Advisor to Moldova and a criminal defence lawyer tried to visit several police stations and penitentiary institutions in Chişinău, where individuals were reportedly being detained or ill-treated. By law, the Consultative Council for the Prevention of Torture must be given access to any place of detention at any time with no prior warning. Nonetheless, the General Police Commissariat of Chişinău refused to give access and gave no reason for this refusal. The Central District Police Commissariat also refused access, stating that there were no detainees there, although the Supervising Prosecutor later confirmed that there were 5 people being held there. Access was only granted to the penitentiary institution No.13 after 3 hours of negotiations and with the intervention of the Ombudsman. (See Annex 1 for more information about this visit).

As a state party to numerous international human rights standards, including the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights, as well as according to the Moldovan Constitution and other domestic legislation, the government of Moldova is obliged to respect and protect the rights of its citizens. As indicated above, and documented in Annexes 1 and 2, large scale and systematic human rights and procedural violations are taking place currently in Moldova. We are deeply concerned that these violations will continue.

We ask Your Excellencies to call on the Moldovan authorities to respect human rights and comply with their obligations under international law. We urge Your Excellencies to make an official visit to Moldova as soon as possible to assess the situation “on the ground” and demand that the Moldovan authorities stop all human rights violations and respect the rule of law in the country.


Igor Dolea, Director, Institute for Penal Reform of Moldova

Evghenii Goloşceapov, Lawyer, civil society activist

Igor Grosu, Independent expert, civil society activist

Vlad Gribincea, President, Public association Lawyers for Human Rights

Vanu Jereghi, Vice President of the Consultative Council for the Prevention of Torture (OPCAT National Preventive Mechanism), Director of Moldovan Human Rights Institute

Nadejda Hriptievschi, Lawyer, civil society activist

Vlad Lupan, Independent expert

Ion Manole, Director, Promo-Lex Association

Sergiu Ostaf, Director, Centre for Human Rights Resources, CReDO

Ludmila Popovici, Director, RCTV Memoria (Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims)

Veaceslav Ţurcan, Defence lawyer and civil society activist

Victor Ursu, Executive Director, Soros Foundation – Moldova

Victor Zaharia, Lawyer, Institute for Penal Reform, State University of Moldova

Annex 1

Observations made by members of the Consultative Council for the Prevention of Torture (OPCAT National Preventive Mechanism) on the visit to the penitentiary institution No.13, Chişinău, on 11 April 2009

Penitentiary institution No.13 had received 68 detainees on 9 April and 22 detainees on 10 April.

The overwhelming majority of detainees were between 18 – 23 years old, allegedly with no prior criminal record.

Many detainees were allegedly processed through district police stations prior to being further processed through the General Police Commissariat and then on to penitentiary institution No.13. Through the initial two processing points, detainees were allegedly beaten, both in and outside of investigation rooms by plain-clothed law enforcement officers.

Evidence as to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was abundantly evident with regard to the majority of those interviewed. Detainees described beatings, administered using clubs, full, plastic water bottles, fists and feet. Video images of injuries sustained are available. All detainees claimed that not only they were beaten but that they had witnessed others also being beaten.

One group of detainees referred to two badly beaten women currently being held at the General Police Commissariat. The Consultative Council for the Prevention of Torture have still not been granted access to verify these allegations.

Detainees also claimed that they had been held in inhuman conditions with 25 – 28 individuals in a single cell, measuring 8 metres square and that they were denied food for 2 days and only had limited access to water and basic sanitary facilities.

A small number of detainees said that they had been forced to sign confessions, and/or other documents, which they were not allowed to read.

Detainees were brought before a judge in groups of 6 and were collectively charged although each had been given an individual charge sheet through a template document (copies of these template documents are available). At no point were the detainees granted access to a lawyer.

A list provided by penitentiary institution No.13 identifies 246 detainees and states where they will be detained. Those originating from the north of Moldova will be imprisoned in the south of the country and vice versa.

Annex 2

List of individual cases. Further information on all these cases is available.

• On 12 April ( and Jurnal TV ( published information about the death of a 23-year old man, Valeriu Boboc, in police custody. The victim’s brother stated that although the victim died on 7 April, the family was only informed on 10 April. The family and the lawyer noted that the victim’s body was covered in bruises while the official medical report cites the cause of death as intoxication from unknown gas during the violence on 7 April.

• On 10 April, at approximately 19.30, two lawyers witnessed police severely beating 2 people in front of the Criuleni Police Commissariat, who had been brought there by bus. The beatings stopped after the lawyers called the General Prosecutor’s office, but all the individuals were then taken inside the police station. To date, no further information about their status has been made available.

• On 10 April several lawyers were unable to ascertain the whereabouts of their clients, whose initial detention terms were expiring. The lawyers were supposed to be representing their clients during pre-trial arrest hearings or hearings about administrative detention. One lawyer waited for 3 hours in court only to find out later that the judge had left through the back door and held hearings directly in a police commissariat. Although hearings outside the court accord with the Criminal Procedure Code, information must be made public about the time and place of the hearing and all fair trial guarantees must be upheld. Since Moldova declared independence in 1991, there have been no registered cases of hearings being held outside the court.

• Eight students have claimed that they were taken during a break at university and were severely beaten upon arrest and during detention in Chişinău. Two of them told their lawyer that they were forced to sign three documents stating: 1) they participated in the protests of 7 April; 2) they will not participate in future protests; 3) they were not beaten/ no force was used against them while in detention. Several lawyers confirmed that their clients were forced to sign similar documents.

• Parents and pupils from Chişinău and Orhei reported that police have been to senior schools, checking attendance registers, and detained some older pupils (from 11 and 12 classes, aged 17-18) directly from the schools. Two lawyers have stated that their clients, who are minors, showed clear signs of having been beaten.

• The media has reported several cases where people have been severely beaten upon arrest or while in detention in Chişinău. In one case a 23-year old Moldovan student, who studies in France, was severely beaten by police after being arrested for participating at the protests on 7 April. He claims he was only a witness during the protests and believes he was followed by police because he was translating for some Swedish journalists during the protests. He further stated that he believes he escaped death after informing the police he was a French citizen (information in Romanian and pictures available at:

• The mother of one arrested man stated that her son was severely beaten while in police custody. His lawyer complained about the beatings, after which the man was beaten again because of his lawyer’s complaint. Another lawyer stated that his clients were scared to say they had been beaten, particularly as the interview with the lawyer took place in very close proximity to a police officer. The clients, trembling, said that they were beaten “only a bit”, but that others have suffered much more.

• Many of those being detained, are charged under Article 285 (1) or (2) of the Criminal Code (mass disorder), which carries a sentence of 3 to 7 years’ imprisonment. Others are charged under Article 164 of the Code of Administrative Offences (medium hooliganism), which is punishable with a fine or administrative arrest of up to 15 days.

• Ordinary people that participated in the protests on 7 April, and are currently being sought by police, report being too afraid to appear before police for the fear of being subjected to torture and inhuman treatment.

• One man who was detained, and released the next day, stated that while being interviewed, police had checked his personal information using the internal database of the Ministry of Information Development.


Către: Terry Davis, Secretarul General al Consiliului Europei
Thomas Hammarberg, Comisarul pentru Drepturile Omului al Consiliului Europei şi Comitetul pentru Prevenirea Torturii al Consiliului Europei
Javier Solana, Înaltul Reprezentant al UE pentru Politica Externă şi de Securitate Comună, Secretarul General al Consiliului Uniunii Europene
José Manuel Barroso, Preşedintele Comisiei Europene
Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Comisarul pentru Relaţii Externe şi Politica Europeană de Vecinătate
Karel Schwarzenberg, Ministrul Afacerilor Externe, Republica Cehă
Manfred Nowak, Raportorul special ONU pentru tortură şi alte forme crude, inumane sau degradante de tratament sau pedeapsă
Margaret Sekaggya, Raportorul Special ONU pentru apărătorii drepturilor omului
Frank La Rue Lewy, Raportorul special ONU pentru promovarea şi apărarea dreptului la opinie şi liberă exprimare
Subcomitetului pentru Prevenirea torturii şi tratamentului sau pedepsei cu cruzime, inumane sau degradante al Comitetului împotriva torturii

Copie: Toate misiunile diplomatice în Republica Moldova
Ambasadorul Philip N. Remler, Şeful Misiunii OSCE în Moldova
Vladimir Ristovski, Reprezentantul Special al Secretarului General al Consiliului Europei în Moldova
Kalman Mizsei, Reprezentantul Special al UE în Moldova
Ambasadorul Cesar de Montis, Şeful Delegaţiei Comisiei Europene în Moldova
Marianne Mikko, Membru al Parlamentului UE, Preşedintele Delegaţiei în Comitetul Cooperării Parlamentare UE-Moldova

13 aprilie 2009
Chişinău, Republica Moldova

Excelenţele voastre,

Vă adresăm acest apel pentru a vă semnala abuzurile recente, mai continuă încă, ale drepturilor persoanelor arestate în legătură cu evenimentele care s-au produs în perioada 6-8 aprilie 2009 la Chişinău, Republica Moldova.

Suntem foarte îngrijoraţi de încălcările masive ale drepturilor omului, în special ale persoanelor arestate şi anume încălcarea dreptului la viaţă, dreptului de a nu fi supus torturii, pedepsei sau tratamentului crud, inuman sau degradant, dreptul la libertate şi securitate, dreptul la o judecată corectă şi drepturile la libera întrunire, asociere şi exprimare. Ca răspuns la demonstraţiile care au avut loc la Chişinău începând cu data de 6 aprilie şi care au fost însoţite de acte de violenţă şi vandalism la 7 aprilie, autorităţile guvernamentale au lansat o campanie de arestări în masă, de discriminare, direcţionată preponderent împotriva tinerilor, studenţilor, represiuni care mai continuă încă.

Conform listelor publicate la 12 aprilie de către Ministerul Afacerilor Interne al Moldovei, până la data de 11 aprilie au fost arestate 129 de persoane, dintre care 88 de persoane au fost condamnate la detenţie administrativă de la 2 la 15 zile, 22 de persoane au fost amendate, 4 persoane au fost eliberate şi nu există nicio informaţie cu privire la situaţia celorlalte 15 persoane. De asemenea, conform aceleiaşi surse, au fost iniţiate investigaţii penale în cazul altor 86 de persoane reţinute, situaţia cărora rămâne a fi necunoscută. Există suficiente dovezi pentru a afirma faptul că listele publicate cu numele celor reţinuţi sunt incomplete şi includ un număr de persoane, locul aflării cărora nu a fost comunicat rudelor la timpul cuvenit.

Există rapoarte repetate şi consistente precum că drepturile multor dintre persoanele reţinute sunt încălcate. Au fost colectate informaţii cu privire la situaţia celor aproximativ 100 de persoane arestate în perioada din 7-11 aprilie. Din declaraţiile făcute de avocaţii, rudele sau prietenii acestora, precum şi în urma observaţiilor noastre, putem să afirmăm că au loc următoarele încălcări sistematice:
- Persoanelor nu le sunt aduse la cunoştinţă motivele arestării
- De obicei, acestea sunt arestate de persoane care nu se legitimează, în civil
- Deseori, familia sau rudele apropiate nu sunt informate despre locul aflării celor reţinuţi
- Cu privire la accesul la asistenţa juridică a avocaţilor:
o Persoanele reţinute nu au acces la asistenţa juridică a avocatului la timpul cuvenit şi există rapoarte precum că persoanele arestate au fost abuzate fizic, pentru că au solicitat asistenţa unui avocat
o Există rapoarte precum că persoanele au fost interogate în absenţa unui avocat
o Există rapoarte conform cărora avocaţii nu asistă la şedinţele de judecată
o Nu sunt asigurate întâlniri private cu avocatul
- Multe persoane, inclusiv minori, au declarat că au fost abuzate fizic şi tratate cu cruzime, inuman şi degradant în perioada în care au fost deţinute şi când se aflau în arest la poliţie
- Cu privire la urmăririle penale:
o Multe audieri pentru eliberarea mandatului de arestare preventivă au loc la comisariatele raionale de poliţie
o Avocaţii declară că deseori le este interzis să se întâlnească cu clienţii lor, înainte de desfăşurarea audierilor de judecată cu privire la arestarea preventivă
o Procurorii prezintă reclamaţii neîntemeiate pentru arestarea preventivă
o Judecătorii emit decizii neîntemeiate cu privire la arestarea preventivă
o Nu există informaţii publice cu privire la locul şi timpul desfăşurării acestor audieri
o Durata audierilor în instanţele de judecată cu privire la arestările preventive nu depăşesc 10-15 minute pentru fiecare persoană, iar deţinuţilor nu li se acordă timp suficient sau oportunitatea de a aduce propriile argumente în scopul apărării
o Deciziile de arestare preventivă pentru un termen de 30 de zile au devenit o regulă şi nu o excepţie, iar persoanele nu sunt informate despre dreptul de apel împotriva acestor decizii
o Alte încălcări ale drepturilor procedurale.
- Cu privire la procedurile administrative:
o Avocaţii şi rudele nu sunt informate despre aceste audieri sau le este interzis accesul la acestea
o De cele mai dese ori, este aplicată detenţia administrativă

La 11 aprilie 2009, membrii Consiliului Consultativ pentru Prevenirea Torturii (Mecanismul Naţional de Prevenire), însoţit de către Consilierul ONU pentru Drepturile Omului în Moldova şi de un avocat al apărării au încercat să viziteze câteva comisariate de poliţie şi instituţii penitenciare din Chişinău unde, potrivit unor surse, erau deţinute sau maltratate aceste persoane. Conform legii, Consiliul Consultativ pentru Prevenirea Torturii trebuie să aibă acces în orice loc de detenţie, în orice moment, fără a fi necesar un aviz prealabil. Cu toate acestea, Comisariatul General de Poliţie din Chişinău a refuzat să permită accesul, fără a-şi motiva refuzul. Comisariatul de Poliţie din Sectorul Centru de asemenea a refuzat să permită accesul, afirmând că în incinta acestuia nu sunt persoane reţinute, deşi, mai târziu, Procurorul de Supraveghere a confirmat că erau 5 deţinuţi. A fost permis accesul doar la instituţia penitenciară Nr.13, după 3 ore de negocieri şi în urma intervenţiei Ombudsmanului. (Pentru mai multă informaţie cu privire la această vizită, vezi Anexa 1).

În calitate de stat semnatar al numeroaselor standarde internaţionale cu privire la drepturile omului, inclusiv Convenţia Internaţională asupra Drepturilor Civile şi Politice, Convenţia Europeană a Drepturilor Omului, precum şi în conformitate cu Constituţia Moldovei şi a altor prevederi ale legislaţiei naţionale, guvernul Republicii Moldova este obligat să respecte şi să apere drepturile cetăţenilor. După cum este indicat mai sus şi documentat în Anexele 1 şi 2, actualmente în Moldova au loc încălcări sistematice ale drepturilor omului şi ale drepturilor procedurale. Suntem foarte îngrijoraţi de faptul că aceste încălcări vor continua.

Rugăm Excelenţele Voastre să solicite autorităţilor moldoveneşti să respecte drepturile omului şi să se conformeze tuturor obligaţiilor care decurg din dreptul internaţional. Solicităm Excelenţelor Voastre să întreprindă o vizită oficială în Moldova cât mai curând posibil, pentru a estima situaţia “la faţa locului” şi a cere autorităţilor moldoveneşti să înceteze toate încălcările drepturilor omului şi să respecte norma de drept în acest stat.

Cu stimă,

Igor Dolea, Director, Institutul de Reforme Penale din Moldova

Evghenii Golosceapov, Avocat, activist al societăţii civile

Igor Grosu, Expert independent, activist al societăţii civile

Vlad Gribincea, Preşedinte, Asociaţia “Juriştii pentru Drepturile Omului”

Vanu Jereghi, Vice-Preşedintele Consiliului Consultativ pentru Prevenirea Torturii (OPCAT Mecanismul Naţional de Prevenire), Directorul Institutului pentru Drepturile Omului din Moldova

Nadejda Hriptievschi, Avocat, activist al societăţii civile

Vlad Lupan, Expert independent

Ion Manole, Director, Asociaţia Promo-Lex

Sergiu Ostaf, Director, Centrul de Resurse pentru Drepturile Omului, CReDO

Ludmila Popovici, Director, RCTV Memoria (Centrul de Reabilitare pentru Victimele Torturii)

Veaceslav Ţurcan, Avocat al apărării şi activist al societăţii civile

Victor Ursu, Director Executiv, Fundaţia Soros-Moldova

Victor Zaharia, Avocat, Institutul de Reforme Penale, Universitatea de Stat din Moldova

Anexa 1

Observaţiile făcute de către membrii Consiliului Consultativ pentru Prevenirea Torturii (OPCAT Mecanismul Naţional de Prevenire), cu privire la vizita efectuată la Instituţia Penitenciară Nr.13, Chişinău, la data de 11aprilie 2009

În cadrul Instituţiei penitenciare Nr.13 au fost aduşi 68 de deţinuţi la data de 9 aprilie şi 22 de deţinuţi la data de 10 aprilie.

Marea majoritate a persoanelor reţinute aveau o vârstă cuprinsă între 18 şi 23 de ani şi, după cum se pretinde, fără antecedente penale.

Se presupune că mulţi dintre deţinuţi au fost interogaţi mai întâi în cadrul comisariatelor raionale de poliţie, apoi - în cadrul Comisariatului General de Poliţie, după care - reţinuţi în Instituţia Penitenciară Nr.13. De asemenea, se mai presupune faptul că în cadrul primelor două instituţii tinerii au fost abuzaţi fizic de către colaboratorii de poliţie, îmbrăcaţi în civil, atât în interiorul, cât şi în afara camerelor de interogare.

Dovezile privind tratamentul şi pedepsirea cu cruzime, inumană sau degradantă a majorităţii persoanelor interogate sunt foarte evidente. Deţinuţii au comunicat că au fost loviţi cu bâte, sticle din plastic pline cu apă, cu pumnii şi picioarele. Sunt disponibile înregistrările video ale leziunilor provocate. Toţi deţinuţii pretind faptul că nu doar ei au fost bătuţi; aceştia din urmă au fost martori cum alte persoane, la rândul lor, au fost abuzate fizic.

Un grup de deţinuţi au amintit de două femei care au fost bătute cu cruzime şi care acum se află în Comisariatul General de Poliţie. Consiliului Consultativ pentru Prevenirea Torturii, până acum, nu i-a fost permis să verifice aceste declaraţii.

Cei reţinuţi, de asemenea, au pretins că, împreună cu alte 25-28 persoane, au fost ţinuţi în condiţii inumane într-o singură celulă, cu o suprafaţă de 8 metri pătraţi, nu au fost hrăniţi timp de 2 zile, fiindu-le asigurat doar accesul limitat la apă şi la facilităţile sanitare de bază.

Un număr mic de reţinuţi au afirmat că au fost forţaţi să semneze mărturisiri şi/sau alte documente, fiindu-le interzis să citească conţinutul acestora.

Deţinuţii au fost aduşi în faţa unui judecător în grupuri de 6 persoane şi au fost acuzaţi în mod colectiv, deşi fiecare dintre ei a primit o listă de delicte model (copiile modelelor acestor documente sunt disponibile). Persoanelor reţinute le-a fost negat accesul la asistenţa juridică a unui avocat pe tot parcursul detenţiei.

O listă oferită de Instituţia Penitenciară Nr.13 conţinea numele a 246 de persoane arestate, fiind indicat şi locul detenţiei acestora. Cei originari de la nordul Moldovei vor sta la închisoare la sudul ţării şi viceversa.

Anexa 2

Lista cazurilor individuale. Mai multă informaţie cu privire la toate aceste cazuri este disponibilă.

• La 12 aprilie ( şi Jurnal TV ( au publicat informaţia cu privire la decesul unui tânăr în vârstă de 23 de ani, Valeriu Boboc, care se afla în detenţie la poliţie. Fratele victimei a afirmat că deşi victima a decedat la 7 aprilie, familia a fost informată abia la 10 aprilie. Familia şi avocatul au observat că cadavrul victimei era acoperit de vânătăi, în timp ce raportul medical oficial a stabilit că decesul a survenit în urma intoxicaţiei cu un gaz necunoscut, în timpul actelor de violenţă din 7 aprilie.

• La data de 10 aprilie, aproximativ la orele 19.30, doi avocaţi au fost martori cum câţiva colaboratori a forţelor de ordine au abuzat fizic 2 persoane în faţa Comisariatului de Poliţie din Criuleni; acestea au fost transportate acolo cu autobuzul. Bătăile au încetat atunci când avocaţii au sunat la oficiul Procuraturii Generale; toate persoanele însă au fost duse în interiorul comisariatului de poliţie. La momentul respectiv, nu este disponibilă nicio informaţie cu privire la situaţia acestora.

• La 10 aprilie 2009, câţiva avocaţi nu au putut stabili locul aflării clienţilor lor, a căror termeni de detenţie, stabiliţi iniţial, expiraseră. Avocaţii preconizau să-şi reprezinte clienţii în timpul audierilor pentru eliberarea mandatului de arestare preventivă sau audierilor cu privire la detenţia administrativă. Un avocat a aşteptat 3 ore în sala de judecată doar pentru a afla mai târziu că judecătorul a ieşit prin uşa din spatele clădirii şi că a desfăşurat audierile chiar la comisariatul de poliţie. Deşi desfăşurarea audierilor în afara curţii de judecată nu este interzisă de Codul de Procedură Penală, informaţia cu privire la timpul şi locul desfăşurării audierilor trebuie anunţată în prealabil, de asemenea fiind respectate toate garanţiile că judecata va fi corectă. Începând cu anul în care Moldova şi-a declarat independenţa, 1991, nu au fost înregistrate cazuri de desfăşurare a audierilor în afara curţii de judecată.

• Opt studenţi au pretins că au fost arestaţi în timpul pauzei de la universitate şi au fost bătuţi cu cruzime în timpul arestării şi detenţiei în Chişinău. Doi dintre aceştia au comunicat avocatului lor că au fost forţaţi să semneze trei documente precum că: 1) au participat la protestele din 7 aprilie; 2) nu vor participa în viitor la proteste; 3) nu au fost abuzaţi fizic/ nu a fost aplicată forţă împotriva acestora în timpul detenţiei. Câţiva avocaţi au confirmat faptul că clienţii lor au fost forţaţi să semneze documente similare.

• Părinţii şi elevii din Chişinău şi Orhei au declarat că poliţia a fost pe la câteva şcoli medii, verificând prezenţa elevilor în registre şi au reţinut câţiva elevi mai mari (din clasele 11-12 cu vârsta de 17-18 ani) chiar în şcoli. Doi avocaţi au afirmat că clienţii lor, minori, au demonstrat semne evidente survenite în urma abuzurilor fizice.

• Mijloacele de informare în masă au făcut publice câteva cazuri în care oamenii au fost bătuţi cu cruzime în timpul arestării sau reţinerii în Chişinău. În unul dintre aceste cazuri, un student moldovean, în vârstă de 23 de ani, care îşi făcea studiile în Franţa, a fost bătut cu cruzime de poliţie după ce a fost arestat pentru că a participat la protestele din 7 aprilie. Acesta pretinde că a fost doar martor al protestelor desfăşurate şi consideră că a fost urmărit de către forţele de poliţie doar pentru faptul că în timpul acestor evenimente însoţea un jurnalist suedez în calitate de translator. Mai tîrziu, acesta a afirmat că consideră că a scăpat de la moarte doar pentru că a declarat că este cetăţean al Franţei (informaţiile în limba română şi imaginile sunt accesibile pe pagina:

• Mama unui tânăr arestat a declarat că feciorul ei a fost bătut cu cruzime în timpul detenţiei. Avocatul lui a depus reclamaţii cu privire la abuzurile fizice, după care deţinutul iarăşi a fost bătut din motivul reclamaţiilor avocatului. Un alt avocat a afirmat că clienţii lui au fost ameninţaţi să nu declare că au fost bătuţi, mai ales atunci când avocatul a dat un interviu în apropierea unui poliţist. Aceşti clienţi, tremurând de frică, au afirmat că au fost bătuţi „doar puţin”, în timp ce alţii au avut de suferit mai mult.

• Mulţi dintre cei care au fost reţinuţi, sunt acuzaţi în conformitate cu prevederile Articolului 285 (1) sau (2) al Codului Penal (dezordine în masă), care prevede o pedeapsă de la 3 la 7 ani de închisoare. Alţii sunt acuzaţi în conformitate cu Articolul 164 al Codului de Contravenţii Administrative (huliganism nu prea grav), care prevede pedeapsa cu amendă sau o detenţie administrativă de până la 15 zile.

• Cetăţenii simpli care au participat la protestele din 7 aprilie şi care acum sunt urmăriţi de poliţie au declarat că sunt îngroziţi de faptul că trebuie să apară în faţa poliţiei, de teama să nu fie torturaţi sau trataţi inuman.

• Un bărbat care a fost reţinut şi eliberat a doua zi a declarat că în timp ce a fost interogat, poliţia a verificat datele personale folosind baza de date internă a Ministerului Dezvoltării Informaţionale.

Era instabilitatii comuniste

Era instabilitatii comuniste

Nicu Popescu

Receptionat direct prin e-mail de la autor, 10 aprilie 2009

Timp de opt ani Partidul Comunistilor a incercat sa asigure o anumita stabilitate politica care se baza pe trei piloni: crestere economica, centralizare politica si rolul presedintelui Voronin. Paradoxal, dar toti acesti factori se transforma rapid in cauze ale destabilizarii. Timp de 8 ani Vladimir Voronin a contribuit la consolidarea statului Republica Moldova, dar locul sau in istorie va fi decis de comportamentul sau de acum inainte. Restrangerea spatiului democratic este ca o bomba cu ceas pusa sub viabilitatea Moldovei ca stat.

Iluzia stabilitatii

Majoritatea statelor post-sovietice au trecut prin faze de politica
violenta: Rusia in 1993, Georgia in Noiembrie 2007, Ucraina in timpul
scandalului casetelor in 2002, si Armenia in martie 2008 cand 10
persoane au decedat un urma unor proteste indreptate impotriva
alegerilor prezidentiale fraudate. In Belarus si Asia Centrala –
violenta ca factor politic a fost si mai sistematica.

Pe acest fundal post-sovietic, politica nonviolenta din Moldova era o
realizare importanta. In Moldova majoritatea absoluta a protestelor
din cei 18 ani de independenta au fost pasnice (cateva exceptii sunt
protestele din fata primariei in 1998 si dispersarea violenta a
jurnalistilor de la Moldova 1 de catre politisti deghizati in civil in
2004). Protestele au fost nonviolente atat din cauza protestatarilor,
cat si datorita restrangerii manifestate de institutiile de stat,
inclusiv politia. Insa si mai importanta pentru stabilitatea Moldovei
era existenta unui sistem politic relativ democratic care permitea
canalizarea tensiunilor politice in crize politice. Aceste crize se
rezolvau in parlament, prin modificari constitutionale sau caderi de
guvern, dar nu violente stradale.

Restrangerea spatiului politic din ultimii ani a creat bazele unei
instabilitati de fond, deghizata de iluzia unei stabilitatii. In
realitate stabilitatea autoritara suprima procesele normale de
competitie politica. Cu cat mai centralizat si autoritar devenea
sistemul politic din Moldova in ultimii ani, cu atat mai mult crestea
potentialul pentru instabilitate. In conditiile in care sistemul
politic este rigid si centralizat, politica normala si pasnica se
transforma treptat in politica de protest. Si Uniunea Sovietica in
1987 parea stabila, iar peste patru ani nu mai exista.

Violenta genereaza violenta

Cu cat mai restrans devenea spatiul public in Moldova, cu atat mai
mare devenea instrainarea dintre institutiile statului, politie si
cetatenii de rand. In timpul campaniei electorale recente politia a
recurs la o serie de abuzuri impotriva mai multor partide politice si
protestatari individuali. Sigur cea mai mare parte al Ministerului de
Interne isi facea serviciul de asigurare al ordinii publice. Dar
anumite parti ai Ministerului de Interne s-au vazut vizibil implicate
in campania electorala prin intimidarea actorilor electorali.
Atacurile violente asupra unor protestatari pasnici, arestrurile si
intimidarea opozitiei, deschiderea dosarelor penale impotriva
majoritatii liderilor politici de opozitie au transformat forta sau
amenintarea cu forta in element de politica electorala. Drept
rezultat, pentru o buna parte din societate politia devenise un agent
electoral al Partidului Comunist, nu o institutie de stat menita sa
asigure ordinea publica.

In conditiile in care nivelul de incredere al populatiei in politie si
asa este foarte mic, implicarea politiei in campania electorala a
accelerat si radicalizat instrainarea dintre politie si o buna parte
din cetateni. In special tinerii activi politic. Violenta ca noul
factor in politica, cuplata cu limitarile accesului la mass-media si
perceptia ca batalia politica cinstita nu are sorti de izbanda – a
generat sentimentul ca schimbarea se poate face doar prin a raspunde
la violenta cu violenta. Astfel a fost lansata spirala violentei care
are toate sansele sa duca la o degradare rapida, si probabil
ireversibila, al sistemului politic din Moldova. Cu cat mai multa
violenta va aplica politia si statul in zilele urmatoare, cu atat mai
multa violenta va vedea Moldova in urmatorii ani.

Presedintele Voronin ca factor de instabilitate

Timp de 8 ani presedintele Voronin a fost perceput drept un simbol al
stabilitatii. Insa astazi el devine principalul factor care
polarizeaza societatea. Adevarata scanteie care a provocat prezenta
spontana si masiva a protestatarilor in piata (si nu neaparat a
violentele acestora) este persoana lui Vladimir Voronin. Mai exact –
perspectiva ca victoria PCRM la alegeri va duce o situatie in care
Vladimir Voronin va ramane sef de stat de facto pentru inca 4 ani.
Protestele de la Chisinau nu sunt niste proteste anti-comuniste la
propriu zis. Moldova este guvernata de un partid care se numeste
comunist, dar care nu este comunist. In fond protestele nici macar nu
au fost indreptate impotriva comunistilor ca Marian Lupu, Zinaida
Greceanii, Andrei Strata sau chiar Marc Tcaciuc, ci impotriva
mentinerii la putere al lui Vladimir Voronin. Spre deosebire de
Vladimir Voronin, ceilalti lideri ai PCRM nu polarizeaza societatea
atat de mult.

Iesirea din aceasta situatie este descrisa de Constitutia RM care nu
permite unei si aceleasi persoane sa detina sefia statului mai mult de
doua termene la rand. Ramanerea lui Vladimir Voronin drept sef de stat
de facto – fie ca seaker, prim-ministru sau deputat de rand –
contravine spiritului constitutiei RM si va destabiliza si mai mult
situatia pe viitor.

Necesitatea unui consens politic

Pericolul instabilitatii va fi agravat si de criza economica. Un
guvern care nu mai genereaza crestere economica, este neacceptat de
aproape o jumatate de populatie, are tentatia de a recurge la
strivirea oricarei opozitii politice va genera si mai multa

Protestele violente de la Chisinau simbolizeaza mai mult ca orice ca
era stabilitatii comuniste a trecut. Moldova va avea in fata o
perioada turbulenta in care instabilitatea economiei mondiale,
clivajele politice interne si persoana lui Vladimir Voronin ar putea
sfarama statalitatea fragila a Moldovei. Fara o democratizare a
sistemului politic, si revenirea (chiar si treptata) la sistemul de
guvernare prevazut de Constitutia Moldovei, riscul violentelor pe
viitor va fi mai mare. Iar cu acestea va veni si izolarea
internationala crescanda a Moldovei, care o va lasa mult mai
vulnerabila in fata oricaror presiuni din partea Rusiei.

Speranta ca Rusia ar putea compensa izolarea internationala a Moldovei
sunt desarte. Experienta unor state ca Belarus arata ca cu cat mai
izolate sunt acestea in plan international, cu atat dura este Rusia cu
ele. Belarusul a fost nevoita pana la urma sa ceara credite de la FMI.
Ucraina a fost ademenita de promisiunea desarta a unui credit rusesc
de 5 miliarde timp de aproape jumatate de an. Alinierea excesiva a
politicii externe a Moldovei la Federatia Rusa va reduce si mai mult
spatiul de manevra al PCRM.

In aceste conditii Moldova are nevoie de un nou consens politic, care
ar rezulta din negocieri dintre guvern si opozitie cu medierea UE. O
solutie politica a crizei ar trebui sa prevada stoparea imediata a
oricaror violente atat din partea protestatarilor cat si a politiei,
numararea din nou a voturilor si verificarea listelor electorale,
recunoasterea noilor rezultate electorale, masuri de liberalizare a
mass-media, exinderea licentei PRO TV, reforma politiei si invitarea
unei misiuni de consilieri europeni plasati la presedintie, parlament,
ministerul de interne, justitie si economie. In contextul crizei
politice actuale acest lucru pare utopic. Dar aceasta utopie este
singura cale de iesire pasnica si democratica din criza politica

Declaration regarding the escalation of social and political situation in Moldova after the parliamentary elections of April 5, 2009

Declaration regarding the escalating social and political situation in Moldova after the parliamentary elections of April 5, 2009

Chisinau, April 9, 2009

Expressing our concern regarding the worsening social and political situation after April 5, 2009’ parliamentary elections and, being worried that inadequate interpretations of these events serve as justification for decisions and actions that threaten to further polarize the Moldovan society, we declare:

On April 7, 2009 spontaneous and peaceful demonstrations took place in the center of Chisinau. This generally peaceful event was used to provoke violent and criminal acts resulting in the devastation of the Parliament and Presidential buildings. The law enforcement bodies through their actions were not capable to prevent the acts of violence and vandalism.

We categorically condemn such outrageous acts of violence and vandalism. However, we consider it inadmissible to present all protests through the prism of these criminal acts. In particular, it is utterly unjustified to shift responsibility from a small group of violent persons onto a far larger gathering of peaceful protesters or onto the political leaders, some of whom have tried in fact to stop the violence. The peaceful protests didn’t have an anti-state nature.

While the acts of violence cannot be justified in any way and should be investigated by the competent authorities, we believe that those peaceful protests were fueled by doubts regarding the fairness of elections and distrust in public institutions, including those that administrated the electoral process. Those events were largely triggered by the dissatisfaction of young people with the social and economic situation and the feeling of uncertainty about their future prospects in the Republic of Moldova.

The post-election statements made by the head of state have only contributed to inflaming such suspicions and provided an extra motivation for people to get onto the streets.

These regrettable acts of violence and vandalism are now fully exploited by the authorities to intimidate the opposition and civil society and further restrict the already fragile fundamental rights and liberties of the citizens. The authorities have further restricted access to the public radio and TV, Internet and other media. The authorities have launched a massive brain-washing campaign to discredit the participants of the peaceful protests, the opposition and those having different opinions.

The head of state is making extremely grave accusations against some political leaders, describing their actions as a “coup d'etat”, “anti-constitutional plot” etc., even before any investigations or court rulings in this regard. Such statements tend to further heighten the tensions and polarize the Moldovan society. By placing all the responsibility for the recent events on the political opposition and Romania, the authorities are creating an internal and external enemy, which may be used to justify the government's failures.

We believe that preconditions are being created for the establishment of a police and dictatorial regime in the Republic of Moldova.

A reversal of the current disturbing trends is absolutely essential in order to avoid any further exacerbation of the political and economic crisis, prevent the international isolation of the country similar to that of Belarus and avoid compromising the European future of Moldova . It will be impossible for the country to get out of the crisis without the engagement of a broad spectrum of political actors and stakeholders, civil society and international organizations.

The authorities of Moldova have a special role to play in overcoming this crisis and therefore, we ask them to:

- Refrain from any actions or declarations which could deteriorate the situation further;

- Give up any virulent messages, as necessary to create an enabling environment for political dialogue to help overcome this conflict situation;

- Act strictly within the limits of the law in order to prevent any new acts of violence;

- Make public the lists with names of arrested persons and, provide these persons with access to lawyers and human rights organizations;

- Avoid any politically-motivated persecutions;

- Initiate a comprehensive and transparent investigation, with international participation, into the causes that led to the acts of vandalism: identify persons who have maneuvered a part of the otherwise peaceful protesters towards the Presidency and the Parliament compound; identify persons who have instigated the acts of violence and crime; review whether the actions of law enforcement troops were proportionate to the situation and in accordance with their mandate;

- Safeguard the freedom of movement for the citizens;

- Assure the freedom of opinion and speech, safeguard the inviolability of individual freedoms, personal safety and security;

- Actively contribute to the elimination of all suspicions related to the fairness and accuracy of election results.

We call on all media institutions, and particularly on the Public Broadcasting Company „ Tele-Radio Moldova ", to cover correctly and impartially the political and social developments after parliamentary elections of April 5, with the equal and non-discriminatory participation of all parties concerned.

Chisinau, 9 April 2009

Signed by:

Arcadie Barbăroşie, Director, Institute for Public Policies (IPP)

Igor Boţan, Director, Association for Participatory Democracy (ADEPT)

Viorel Cibotaru, Director, European Institute of Political Studies (IESPM)

Nadine Gogu, Interim Director, Center of Independent Journalism (CIJ)

Vlad Lupan, Independent Expert

Ion Manole, Director, Promo-Lex

Igor Munteanu, Director, Institute for Development and Social Initiatives (IDIS-„Viitorul”)

Sergiu Ostaf, Expert, CREDO

Andrei Popov, Executive Director, Foreign Policy Association (APE)

Valeriu Prohniţchi, Economic Expert

Victor Ursu, Executive Director, Soros Foundation Moldova

Alexandru Canţîr, Director, Committee for Freedom of Press

Vitali Catană, Expert, Institute for Public Policies (IPP)

Victor Chirilă, Programs Director, Foreign Policy Association (APE)

Antoniţa Fonari, Director, „Young and Free”

Mircea Eşanu, Anticorruption Alliance

Veaceslav Ioniţă, Expert, Institute for Development and Social Initiatives (IDIS-„Viitorul”)

Vlad Gribincea, Lawyer

Iurie Pintea, Program Director, Institute for Public Policies (IPP)

Eugen Revenco, Programs Director, Foreign Policy Association (APE)

Alexei Tulbure, Director, „ Helsinki ” Citizens Assembly

*Those who wish to subscribe to this Declaration are kindly asked to send a message to the following e-mail address:, indicating their complete name and contact details

Saturday, April 11, 2009

Nu admit sa ne fure votul, nu admit sa ne fure LIBERTATEA !

In sfarsit!


PLDM, PL şi AMN vor organiza duminică proteste contra represaliilor

Cele trei partide de opoziţie anunţă că vor organiza mâine, la ora 11:00, în Piaţa Marii Adunări Naţionale, proteste contra represaliilor începute zilele trecute de autorităţi împotriva participanţilor la mitigurile din 6-7 aprilie, curent., 11 aprilie 2009, 13:09

La manifestaţiile de duminică vor participa membri şi simpatizanţi ai PLDM, PL şi AMN din toate raionale republicii. Protestul este autorizat de Primăria Chişinău.

Friday, April 10, 2009

Declaraţia unui grup de experţi cu privire la escaladarea situaţiei social-politice din R. Moldova

Declaraţia unui grup de experţi cu privire la escaladarea situaţiei social-politice din R. Moldova

9 aprilie 2009

Exprimându-ne îngrijorarea faţă de agravarea situaţiei social-politice in urma scrutinului din 5 aprilie 2009 si fiind preocupaţi de faptul că interpretările inadecvate ale acestor evenimente servesc drept justificare pentru decizii si acţiuni de natura să polarizeze si mai mult societatea, declarăm următoarele:

In ziua de 7 aprilie, in centrul Chişinăului au avut loc manifestări spontane şi paşnice care au fost folosite pentru a provoca acţiuni violente şi criminale rezultate în distrugerea clădirilor Parlamentului şi Preşedinţiei. Acţiunile întreprinse de forţele de ordine nu au fost de natură să prevină actele de violenţă şi vandalism.

Condamnând in mod categoric acţiunile de violenţă şi de vandalism, considerăm inadmisibilă prezentarea tuturor acţiunilor de protest doar prin prisma acestor acţiuni criminale. In particular, este complet nejustificat transferul de responsabilitate şi de imagine de pe acţiunile grupului violent pe grupul mult mai numeros şi reprezentativ de protestatari paşnici sau pe liderii politici, unii din care, de fapt, au încercat stoparea violenţelor. Protestele paşnice nu au avut un mesaj antistatal.

In timp ce actele de violenta ce s-au produs nu pot avea nici o justificare si trebuie investigate de organele competente, considerăm că protestele paşnice au izbucnit pe fundalul suspiciunilor legate de corectitudinea alegerilor şi neîncrederea in instituţiile publice, inclusiv cele care au administrat procesul electoral, şi, fiind cauzate , în context mai larg, de nemulţumirea tinerilor faţă de situaţia social-economică, de incertitudinea într-un viitor al lor în Republica Moldova.

Declaraţiile post-electorale ale şefului statului doar au contribuit la inflamarea acestor suspiciuni şi au catalizat ieşirea in strada a cetăţenilor.

În prezent aceste acte de violenţă şi vandalism sunt exploatate din plin de către autorităţi pentru a intimida opoziţia şi societatea civilă, pentru a restricţiona libertăţile şi drepturile fundamentale ale cetăţenilor, şi aşa firave; autorităţile au continuat restricţionarea accesului la posturile publice de radio si TV; au restricţionat accesul la Internet, la sursele de informare. Este lansată o campanie masivă de spălare a creierilor, de compromitere a participanţilor la protestele paşnice, a opoziţiei, a purtătorilor de opinii diferite.

Folosirea de către şeful statului a unor acuzaţii extrem de grave la adresa unor lideri politici, şi calificarea acţiunilor acestora drept „puci", „lovitură de stat", „răsturnare anticonsituţională", etc. înainte de orice investigaţii şi decizii ale instanţelor de judecată escaladează şi mai mult situaţia şi polarizează societatea. Prin plasarea responsabilităţii pentru cele întâmplate asupra opoziţiei politice şi a României se creează un duşman intern şi altul extern care ar putea fi utilizaţi pentru îndreptăţirea eşecurilor guvernării.

Considerăm că în Republica Moldova se creează premisele pentru instaurarea unui regim poliţienesc şi dictatorial.

Pentru a evita aprofundarea crizei politice şi economice, a preveni izolarea internaţională a ţării similară celei în care se află astăzi Belarus şi a nu compromite viitorul european al Republicii Moldova, tendinţele actuale trebuie inversate. Ieşirea din criză este imposibilă fără antrenarea unui cerc larg de actori politici, a societăţii civile şi organizaţiilor internaţionale.

Un rol aparte pentru depăşirea crizei le revine autorităţilor cărora le cerem:

- Să se abţină de la orice acţiuni şi declaraţii care vor avea drept efect deteriorarea situaţiei;

- Să renunţe la mesaje virulente în scopul creării unui cadru de dialog politic pentru depăşirea conflictului apărut.

- Să acţioneze strict în limitele legii pentru ca să nu admită noi violenţe;

- Să facă publice listele celor arestaţi şi să asigure accesul la aceştia a avocaţilor şi a organizaţiilor de protecţie a drepturilor omului;

- Să evite persecuţiile pe motive politice;

- Să pornească o investigaţie plenară, transparentă, cu participare internaţională a cauzelor care au condus la declanşarea actelor de vandalism: identificarea persoanelor care au deturnat o parte din masa de protestatari paşnici spre Preşedinţie şi Parlament; identificarea persoanelor care au provocat acţiunile violente si criminale; în ce măsură acţiunile forţelor de ordine au fost adecvate situaţiei şi conforme misiunii acestora.

- Să asigure dreptul cetăţenilor la libera circulaţie.

- Să asigure libertatea opiniei si a exprimării, inviolabilitatea libertăţii individuale şi a siguranţei cetăţenilor.

- Să contribuie activ la eliminarea tuturor suspiciunilor cu privire la corectitudinea rezultatelor alegerilor parlamentare.

Ne adresăm tuturor instituţiilor de presă, dar în mod special Companiei „Tele-Radio Moldova", să reflecte corect şi imparţial evoluţiile social-politice după alegerile din 5 aprilie cu participarea egală şi nediscriminatorie a părţilor implicate.

Chişinău, 9 aprilie 2009


Arcadie Barbăroşie, Director IPP

Igor Boţan, Director ADEPT

Vitali Catană, expert IPP

Viorel Cibotaru, Director IESP

Victor Chirilă, Director programe APE

Antoniţa Fonari, Director, „ Tineri şi Liberi"

Mircea Eşanu, Alianţa Anticorupţie

Veaceslav Ioniţă, expert, IDIS-„Viitorul"

Vlad Gribincea, avocat

Vlad Lupan, expert independent

Ion Manole, Director Promo-Lex

Igor Munteanu, Director IDIS „Viitorul"

Sergiu Ostaf, expert, CREDO

Iurie Pintea, Director programe IPP

Andrei Popov, Director executiv APE

Valeriu Prohniţchi, expert economic

Eugen Revenco, Director programe APE

Victor Ursu, Director executiv, Fundaţia Soros Moldova

*Persoanele care doresc să subscrie la această declaraţie sunt rugate să trimită un mesaj la adresa:, indicînd numele complet şi datele de contact

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Moldova elections - street and party chronicles

- I am a former Moldovan diplomat
- former Head of NATO Directorate, former Deputy General Director of Euro-Atlantic Security Department.
- I was dealing with Transnistrian separatist conflict in Moldova
- I am a former negotiator in both Conflict resolution commissions.
- Three times member of OSCE Missions.

I am a democrat. I write these notes from the streets of Moldovan capital, Chisinau. We are protesting the communist frauded elections. Here are my chronicles:

Moldova: Chronicles of a Post-Electoral Day

April 8, 2009; 14.00hrs Moldovan time

Vlad Lupan, Independent expert ( GSM +373 79 372020)

This is an extended chronology of the events viewed from the street and from conversations with the opposition party high-ranking officials


Protests, clashes and destruction are the result of the Moldovan elections. The citizens are divided and antagonized. The opposition is threatened and allegedly blackmailed. The events that unfolded are presented as coup d’etat by one side or as a planned destabilization scenario to discredit the opposition by the other. The evolution of the events was an important indicator that supports some of these scenarios.

Background and developments up to devastations

On April 5th, 2009, Moldova voted in the elections. Some opinion polls showed that the popularity of the communist ruling party was high, of about 35 per cent, while the three Moldovan liberal parties were supposed to come close to the same figure. The announced result of the elections were strikingly different –the Central Electoral Commission, presumed to be supporting the communists, announced 50 per cent of the vote went to the communists and they gather enough votes to get exactly 61 places in the new Parliament. This figure of 61 seats was the exact number of places they needed to elect the President and then form the new government without liberals blocking it.

The Liberals announced that they believe that these figures are a fraud. They brought to the attention of the local and international community that on the very day of the elections there were certain irregularities. From the point of view of the voting procedures themselves, those irregularities were less visible. However, they stated that a number of people were issued by the state authorities the necessary papers to vote repeatedly, dead people were on the voting lists and allegedly some of them “voted”, a number of ballots were printed ahead of the elections and then allegedly destroyed, while citizens were rumoring that a number of election officials in poor rural areas were bribed by the communists with as much as 60-70Euros.

Parties also reminded about the fact that the so-called public media – apart from Russian public channel, the only media with national coverage and credibility in the entire country – worked for years to support exclusively the ruling communists. The communists managed to build a Kremlin-like “vertical of power” legally prohibiting their future rivals to form a pre-electoral coalition, raising the electoral threshold, managing to ensure a tight grip over the judicial system, police, prosecution, initiated criminal cases against the liberal opposition leaders, state budget was used for the purposes of electoral campaigning. Communists were opening schools and presenting road repairs, announcing them as achievement of communist “stability” that should be supported and voted again in the next elections. Local administration units, where people voted in 2007 for non-communists, were cut off from the budget and did not receive such incisions.

Through all these actions and long-term preparations the elections, liberals say, were stolen from the outset. This brought to massive protests that started these days in Moldova and had some unfortunate side-effects that are supposed to be possibly also triggered by the Communists.

Yesterday, two of these protests overlapped. A number of youth NGOs and movements went out in the streets at the same time with the Liberal Democratic Party, one of the most vociferous protesters of the election results. A massive youth presence generated a lot of energy and desire to actively protest in the masses. From the Governmental building they were suddenly suggested by a number of unknown people, some of them had their faces covered, to move to the nearby Presidency and Parliament – the two institutions, which after eight years of governance, were widely associated with the communists.

In front of the Presidency and Parliament, two buildings facing each other, the same face-covered people started to instigate the youth to storm the buildings. Liberal-Democrat leaders moved quickly from the Government to the Presidency to temper the crowd that left their protests. The masses were already heated up, their repulsion towards the communists reached in the streets the climax, and despite the desperate attempts by the liberal-democrats the politicians were swept away.

What followed was, in fact, revealing to the intentions and possible scenarios muted by the local politicians and observers. After a brief and relatively sluggish response, the police withdrew and basically ceded the control of the Presidency. The same instigators suggested to overheated youth to smash the offices and shouted pro-Romanian slogans, popular with this segment of Moldovan population. They also waved the Romanian flag. One of these flags was quickly raised over the Presidency, in such a manner, as raising questions of how the person knew how to reach the top of this labyrinth style building. The Parliament was next, there was more police including special intervention forces. However, the response of the police was not very different. The law enforcement withdrew as “effectively” as in the case of the Parliament.

Most of the people between Parliament and Presidency were onlookers and not participants in the attacks. They were shouting anti-communist slogans. Political parties were constantly trying to stop the attackers and appealed to demonstrators to return to the main square.

Liberal-communist negotiations and first conclusions in the afternoon, April 7, 2009

After those provocations that lead to the incitement of the youth, and the ease with which police withdrew and finally to devastation of the Presidency, the Communists announced that all three liberal parties that disagreed with the results of the elections are “putchists” provoking a coup d’etat and will be held legally responsible. One should understand that from the legal viewpoint such an accusation has no cassation limit, being unlimited in time and presuming long term detention.

Until that moment, the other two liberal parties (Liberal Party and Our Moldova Alliance) were practically absent from the protests. In the afternoon the leaders of all three liberal parties appeared at the peaceful protests in front of the Government (including Liberal Democrats that was the only force that tried to tame the problematic situation). They declared they will enter negotiations with the Communist leadership.

Their requests were to finally obtain free access to the Moldovan Public TV, check the voters list and recount the votes, establish a day of new elections and to obtain guarantees that the communists will renounce to accusations against liberals for alleged organised coup d’etat. After hours of discussions, none of those conditions were met – it is important to note that the President was very intransigent to the fact that the liberals will not obtain any access to the national public media. He only stated that he might think of withdrawing his accusations, without giving any hint that he will actually do so. As for the other requests he directed the parties to the Central Electoral Commission.

Immediately after the negotiations the Speaker of the Moldovan Parliament, present at the discussions with the liberals, declared that the liberals are “putchists” – thus confirming that the communists were determined to quash the opposition leadership.

At that point the liberals left for a coordination meeting. While they counselled, the communist controlled media that has a great number of media posts, well funded and with good coverage, was propagating the idea that the liberals are responsible for devastations. The idea ended up flying over the crowd in the centre. In reality the Parliament and Presidency were already abandoned and a very few offenders were roaming free there right in the sights of a few police officers. Behind the Parliament there were at least two hundred policemen making no move. A few instigators were directly suggesting to a number of minors that appeared in the area to enter and destroy the offices, smash computers.

In the centre of the town, in absence of the liberal leaders, protesters from the peaceful crowd were less and less clear of what they should expect. Officials from the political parties confirmed that the entry in the town is prohibited – army and police brought up armoured vehicles and blocked the exit and entry in the Moldovan capital. People coming with buses to support the peaceful protest, not only younger public this time, was stopped and not allowed to enter the town. There was clear and credible information that people from various regional centres of Moldova are ready to come to the Moldovan capital, Chisinau. Liberals did not seem to react. They did not even bring water to the peaceful protesters, at least.

At that time the author knew that that some western embassies informed the liberal leaders that they disapprove the destruction, while supporting the right for the liberty of expression. That was understood as – no support.

Under these circumstances it became clear that the political parties wanted to dissociate themselves from the destruction – however, they managed to dissociate themselves from the peaceful protest as well. This was the protest that they wanted, but it turned out that at the end of the day the protesters wanted them close, while the liberal leaders became so over-cautious that

Second layer party members stated that their leaders were contacted by the Prosecution and Security and Information Service and threatened with immediate arrests if they do not give up on their requests and if protests are not withdrawn, although at that time there was only one protest, the peaceful demonstration in front of the Government.

The fact that liberals and a number of mainly youth NGOs consulted on an antic-communist movement, proved that party leaders understood they need to stay on their course and contest the election result. The communists do not leave them another way out. However, they also felt compelled to dissociate themselves from the destruction. They were threatened and blackmailed with arrests. They did not obtain aces to the nation-wide public media.

At this point the minors set on fire an office in the Parliament and that was copiously filmed on TVs. Two of the liberal leaders went to explain their actions and the situation to the third most popular TV station in Moldova, ProTV. This was around 21.00hrs. There were already less people in the crowd, their number closing to 2000, as compared to about 5-6 thousand in the morning.

The ProTV is a Romanian station that broadcasts local news bulletins and several local political shows that have a high popularity. Even pro-democratically and pluralist ProTV showed images of fire and of two political leaders seating in ProTV show. They felt for the image that someone wanted to create for those liberals – the image of people responsible for both devastation and now fire.

Exactly at this moment, the author of this lines was going behind the Parliament – there were six fire-machines standing there doing nothing to get in front of the building and fight the fire. No one already would have stopped them. They were waiting for the TVs to film enough dramatic footage. Although the ProTV finally managed to show the real situation with the fire-trucks, the damage was done. This further increased liberals’ predicament. They stated they will visit the crowd after the TV show.

After hours of expectations of a visible, well-known political person to lead them, the crowd was getting thinner. Liberal parties’ supporters started to grumble “they needed the TV more than they needed us”. The momentum of the street protest was lost, people started to leave the place.

At 22.50hrs, liberals were expected to appear in the centre – only Liberal Party officials appeared. They said the crowd “could” protest if it wishes. They returned again and again to the idea that the protests should be peaceful, if people wish to protest.

The author asked some of the party high ranks if they will only condemn the devastation, or will also confirm they continue to disagree with the elections results, further asking for their invalidation – will they protest these results, however clearly underlining them peacefully? They answered that they were concerned about the fact that the protests started by one liberal party would be blamed on another. They remembered the statements of the western ambassadors.

Instead of conclusions in evening of April 7, 2009 and morning of April 8, 2009
- The protests continue now, form 10.00hrs of April 8.

- Foreign journalists were allegedly banned from entering the country. Those who came by planes were asked to leave immediately with the same aircraft. Land-borders are blocked for the foreign journalists. It seems the only way through is via separatist Transnistria in the east of Moldova, although it might be that this is risky as well.

- The messages or conclusion coming from the latest events are clear:

1. The fact that the devastation occurred, showed that the liberals did have a role in it.

2. Their lack of clear action-plan proved they did not plan a coop d’etat. Their lack of coordination was just another clear signal on that.

3. The very well visible and organised provocative actions, were, instead, well organised. It is clear that despite the fact that the liberals did not have a development scenario, the communists did.

4. The liberals are cornered by the Communists. There is no outside support. They are alone against the communist machine – media propaganda, police, security services, professionally organised instigators; even army was brought in to block the entries into and out of town – clearly in defiance to the liberty of expression, so clearly asked by the Western ambassadors. Some people in other towns were beaten up and dispersed by the police, after they attempted similar protests in their locations.

5. The liberals also understood that the communists are not going to back down – the semi-autocratic regime in Moldova is not going to be softer than in Belarus with opposition.

6. At the end of yesterday the Anti-Communist Coalition announced it will further organise peaceful protests, in the name of teachers associations, student NGOs, political parties and citizens, subscribing to the Coalition demands – basically the same demands that party officials asked from the communists (fee media access, exclusion of “dead souls” that voted from the graves, recount of the electors, no coup d’etat accusations, etc).

Thus, the liberals are now in a dilemma – they want to dissociate themselves from the destruction, while in parallel they do not recognise the electoral results.

The fact that the Communist party increased pressure and is basically showing no mercy, reduces any illusion that the Communists will leave the opposition alone; or that the Communists will organise by free will fair elections.

A few days ago, ahead of the protests, the author of these lines was invited to speak in front of the EU Ambassadors in Moldova – they were told that the liberals might have three options – accept the election results that they believe were long-frauded, attempt a protest scenario as in “orange revolution” in Ukraine or protest and slowly fade away, like in Belarus. A good number of Ambassadors laughed when they’ve heard about Moldovan opposition organising protests like in Ukraine, diplomats basically showing there will be no support for such a scenario. Many of them, probably, are rethinking this scenario now – one thing is clear, they were far behind the events.

The signals of lack of support that the West is now giving to Moldovan liberals are read by the Communists in one simple manner – they feel their impunity to orchestrate any scenario and get away with it. Just like in the times when the West left the Belarus opposition alone.

The liberals are now feeling somehow abandoned, maybe even afraid. They want a rule of law Moldova, they do not want destruction and they wish no connection with it. However, they need to take a final decision and they understand that they are left with no way back. Its “or – or”. Its: Europe or Belarus.

Let’s hope that Europe will not be far behind the events at least this time.

I am going to a meeting of the civil society experts to make a joint NGO statement on the events. Wish us luck.