Motion for a resolution - B8-0536/2017Motion for a resolution

MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Moldova

27.9.2017 - (2017/2848(RSP))

to wind up the debate on the statement by the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
pursuant to Rule 123(2) of the Rules of Procedure

Andrey Kovatchev, Cristian Dan Preda, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Sandra Kalniete, David McAllister, Dubravka Šuica, Laima Liucija Andrikienė, Michał Boni, Elmar Brok, Daniel Caspary, Lorenzo Cesa, Michael Gahler, Andrzej Grzyb, Tunne Kelam, Eduard Kukan, Siegfried Mureşan, László Tőkés, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Željana Zovko on behalf of the PPE Group


European Parliament resolution on the situation in Moldova


The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its previous resolutions on Moldova, in particular its resolution of 21 January 2016 on Association Agreements / Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine[1],

–  having regard to the Association Implementation Report on the Republic of Moldova of 10 March 2017,

–  having regard to its legislative resolution of 4 July 2017 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council providing macro-financial assistance to the Republic of Moldova[2],

–  having regard to the Joint Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission laying down political pre-conditions for granting macro-financial assistance to the Republic of Moldova annexed to the legislative resolution of 4 July 2017,

–  having regard to the vote of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova of 20 July 2017 implementing changes to the electoral system,

–  having regard to the statement by VP/HR Mogherini and Commissioner Hahn of 21 July 2017 on the amendments to the electoral legislation in the Republic of Moldova,

–  having regard to Rule 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the proposal to change the electoral system in the Republic of Moldova from a proportional to a mixed system raised serious concerns both internally and externally that it would lead to the backsliding of democratic standards and further consolidation of power;

B.  whereas the Venice Commission stated that the proposed changes to the electoral law in the Republic of Moldova were not advisable at this time and did not address either its earlier recommendations or those of the ODIHR;

C.  whereas the Venice Commission raised concerns about the risks of undue influence on candidates, the design of single-mandate constituencies, excessive thresholds for parliamentary representation in the proportional component and the risks of inadequate representation of minorities and women; whereas it underlined moreover that the existing polarisation around this legislative initiative was not a sign of meaningful consultation and broad consensus among key stakeholders;

D.  whereas the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed in their Joint Statement that ‘in light of the initiatives related to the changes of the electoral system in the Republic of Moldova [...] a pre-condition for granting macro-financial assistance is that the beneficiary country respects effective democratic mechanisms, including a multi-party parliamentary system and the rule of law and guarantees respect for human rights. The Commission and the European External Action Service shall monitor the fulfilment of this pre-condition throughout the lifecycle of the macro-financial assistance and will thereby pay utmost attention to the consideration by the authorities of the Republic of Moldova of the recommendations of relevant international partners (especially the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR)’;

E.  whereas the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, contrary to the negative recommendation made by the Venice Commission, decided to proceed with changing the electoral law;

F.  whereas macro-financial assistance from the EU should support the Republic of Moldova’s commitment to values shared with the Union, including democracy, the rule of law, good governance, an accountable, transparent and merit-based civil service, an independent judiciary, respect for human rights, the freedom, independence and pluralism of the media, sound public finance management, the fight against corruption and money laundering, and the de-politicisation of public administration;

1.  Regrets the decision of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova to change the electoral law despite the strong recommendation made by the Venice Commission;

2.  Expresses concern that the new legislation might have further detrimental effects on democratic standards in the Republic of Moldova;

3.  Demands that the implementation of the new electoral legislation be strictly scrutinised by the EEAS and the European Parliament through a specially designated working group of five Members;

4.  Supports the position that, following the decision of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, all payments of macro-financial assistance should be suspended until further notice;

5.  Demands that strict conditionality should be applied to any type of financial support, and that any financial assistance already agreed should be suspended until the impact of the legislative changes has been thoroughly assessed;

6.  Is seriously concerned about the further concentration of power in the hands of oligarchic elements, thus strengthening the very detrimental nexus of political and economic power that rests with them;

7.  Expresses its disappointment that support for the country’s European path, which was for many years so strongly advocated by its authorities, has fallen sharply due to persisting corruption, state capture, weak and ineffective institutions and the inability to address the basic needs and concerns of ordinary citizens;

8.  Takes note of the efforts made by the authorities to implement the very ambitious goals of the AA/DCFTA, but stresses the need to address all shortcomings as highlighted in the implementation report of 10 March 2017;

9.  Reiterates its concerns about the deterioration of the rule of law, democratic standards, respect for human rights, the lack of independence of the judiciary, particularly cases of selective justice being used as a tool to exert political pressure on political opponents, the excessive politicisation of state institutions, systemic corruption, financial sector governance, insufficient investigation of the 2014 banking fraud, and media pluralism;

10.  Recalls the importance of free, independent and pluralist media for the quality of the democratic process and debate to ensure the accountability of the executive, and highlights the fact that the current media concentration is a threat to political pluralism;

11.  Urges the authorities of the Republic of Moldova to focus on the implementation of the country’s Association agenda in order to unlock the opportunities it provides; reiterates the importance of genuine implementation of the abovementioned reforms for the future stability and development of the country and the wellbeing of its citizens;

12.  Urges the EEAS and the Commission to increase their outreach and public diplomacy efforts in Moldova in order to boost support for the EU, but also to put a distance between the EU and the shortcomings of the ruling elite which hamper the EU’s standing in the eyes of the Moldovan population;

13.  Expresses its strong support for civil society in the Republic of Moldova which plays a crucial role in safeguarding pluralism and the genuine exchange of ideas in political debate;

14.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR), the European External Action Service, the Council, the Commission and the Member States, as well as the President, Prime Minister and Speaker of the Republic of Moldova.