Yerevan Upbeat On Prospects For Peace Deal With Baku Ազատություն Ռադիոկայան
Day: October 30, 2024
On October 30, the Georgian Prosecutor General’s Office reported that it had opened an investigation into the alleged rigging of the parliamentary elections on the basis of the address of the CEC under Article 164 (Interference with the work of election or referendum commissions) of the Criminal Code. It also noted that Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili was summoned for questioning on October 31 on the basis of the CEC’s statement and information disseminated online indicating that she had evidence of fraud.
“The Prosecutor’s Office of Georgia will carry out all necessary investigative and procedural actions, as indicated in the directive of the CEC, in order to examine the facts reported by the President of Georgia, individual political parties, and representatives of observer missions. Among them, within the framework of the investigation, all those who may have information related to the alleged criminal act will be questioned,” reads the Prosecutor’s statement.
The Office also announced that law enforcement agencies are already actively conducting a number of criminal investigations into the particular violations identified during the pre-election period and on election day. “The Prosecutor’s Office will regularly inform the public of the results of the investigations.”
The Central Election Commission announced on October 29 its decision to ask the Prosecutor’s Office for an investigation into the “unfounded accusations” the CEC is facing after the announcement of the election results, saying that despite the OSCE/ODIHR also assessing the elections “positively” and the work of the CEC “at the highest level, ” and an American auditing company “not finding any flaws” in the technology used, the Georgian President and some political parties are still “attacking and baselessly criticizing” the work of the CEC in an attempt to “cause reputational damage” to the institution.
The CEC stated that it was considering the complaints it had received, but that the allegations being spread required “a complex and objective investigation,” which was not within the CEC’s purview. “On the basis of the above, we appeal to the Prosecutor’s Office of Georgia to open and conduct an investigation into the above statements. For our part, we express our readiness to cooperate with the investigation and to provide the institution with interesting and necessary information for the investigation,” the statement concludes.
Earlier, on October 28 the Deputy Chair of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev called for the the arrest of President Salome Zurabishvili on his Twitter (X) account: “The puppet president of Georgia refused to accept the election and went against the Constitution by calling for a coup. The standard practice in such cases is removal from office and arrest.”
Also Read:
- 29/10/2024 – Int’l Watchdog Detects Signs of Alleged Wide-Scale Elections Rigging
- 28/10/2024 – Georgian Opposition, Observers Collect Evidence to Reveal Alleged Vote Fraud Scheme
- 28/10/2024 – Observer Mission Talks of Main Scheme of Large-Scale Election Fraud, Seeks Annulment of Results from 189 Polling Stations
- 27/10/2024 – BREAKING: President Zurabishvili Rejects Election Results
Referendum in Moldova
Material provided by JAMnews partner NewsMaker.md
In a recent referendum on European integration, supporters of Moldova’s EU aspirations faced a less-than-optimistic outcome, with the number of votes in favor barely exceeding 50 percent. Brussels congratulated Moldova on what it deemed a victory, but the referendum did not reflect the anticipated broad support for EU integration; instead, it highlighted a significant societal divide.
This article from NM explores how this will affect Moldova’s Euro-integration efforts and negotiations with the EU.
50/50
On October 20, Moldova held the first round of presidential elections alongside a referendum initiated by President Maia Sandu to amend the constitution in favor of Euro-integration. The ruling Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) actively backed the referendum, and an informational campaign began months before the vote. Polls indicated that more than 50 percent of respondents were inclined to support the referendum.
Ultimately, however, the “yes” option narrowly edged out the “no” option, with 50.35 percent of voters in favor of the constitutional amendments and 49.65 percent opposed.
Notably, in most districts of Moldova, the majority of voters cast their ballots “against,” with only a few central regions and Chișinău showing a majority in favor. Additionally, a significant portion of supporters for the constitutional amendments on Euro-integration live outside Moldova.
On the night after the referendum, preliminary results indicated that the “against” option was winning, but the situation began to change as the ballots from the diaspora were processed.
Referendum on Moldova’s EU membership
Voting results from polling stations
It is worth noting that, according to the same polls, more respondents were more willing to support Euro-integration rather than the constitutional amendments regarding the European course. Sociologist Alexander Barbarosie explained this hesitation by pointing out that people are wary of changing the country’s fundamental law. Additionally, many politicians who identify as pro-European called for a boycott of the referendum, viewing it as a political tactic to mobilize President Sandu’s electorate.
Lowest result so far
Before joining the EU, many countries held national referendums on support for Euro-integration. Moldova recorded the lowest results. A slight majority also supported Euro-integration in Sweden and Malta, with 52 percent and 53 percent, respectively. In Slovakia, however, 93.71 percent voted in favor in a similar referendum, while Hungary saw 83.76 percent support. Switzerland, following its 2001 referendum, ultimately rejected EU membership, with only 23.2 percent voting in favor and 76.8 percent against. That decision led Switzerland to enshrine its permanent and unchangeable status of neutrality in law.
Such a referendum is not mandatory for candidates seeking EU membership. For example, Cyprus, Bulgaria, and Romania joined the EU without holding a referendum.
Moldova, however, conducted its referendum just a few months after beginning negotiations with the European Union about membership.
Europe congratulates, opposition threatens
Despite the uncertain outcome, European officials congratulated Moldova on its “European choice.” Romanian Member of the European Parliament Siegfried Mureșan stated that the referendum results would encourage Europe to modernize the country. “The result of the referendum does not mean that Moldova is divided; it shows that, despite propaganda and the extensive involvement of the Russian Federation, people found the strength to choose Europe,” the MEP said.
European Parliament President Roberta Metsola wrote on social media platform X (formerly Twitter): “Bravo, Republic of Moldova, thank you for your courage.”
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen congratulated the people of Moldova and President Maia Sandu on their “European choice,” noting that “even in the face of hybrid tactics from Russia, Moldova has shown that it is independent, strong, and wants a European future.”
Meanwhile, former Prosecutor General Alexander Stoianoglo, who advanced to the second round of the presidential election alongside Maia Sandu, noted that the referendum results are so contentious that they are unlikely to be considered legitimate.
Stoianoglo identifies as a supporter of Euro-integration, despite running as a candidate for the pro-Russian Party of Socialists. He argues that the referendum had nothing to do with Euro-integration and was merely a PR stunt by Sandu.
Is a “Georgian scenario” possible?
The unexpectedly weak results of the referendum raise questions about the potential for a “Georgian scenario.” Georgia has long and consistently sought EU membership. However, the ruling party, Georgian Dream, has altered this trajectory. Tbilisi has begun to align more closely with Moscow and has enacted laws that Brussels criticizes, such as a “foreign agent” law similar to Russia’s. This shift has led to protests in Georgia.
Political analyst Dionis Cenușă believes that a “Georgian scenario” is unlikely in Moldova, as Georgia has an oligarchic regime while other political forces are pro-European. Moldova, he argues, is a more complex case, with a different balance of power among its political factions.
“First, the current government could declare all political forces linked to [fugitive oligarch Ilan] Șor unconstitutional or disqualify them, thereby excluding them from the upcoming 2025 parliamentary elections. Second, the ruling party could create ‘clones’ to attract disillusioned voters and divert them from pro-Șor factions.
Third, various political parties may gain seats in parliament after the elections, leading to a coalition government. This is another aspect that is atypical for Georgia, where one party has monopolized power, as is currently the case in Moldova,” the expert explained.
Cenușă added that one of the key factors influencing the dynamics of the 2025 parliamentary elections will be the future president. “If Sandu is reelected, she will try to help her party, PAS, gain a majority in parliament.
In contrast, a victory for Stoianoglo would mean a confrontation between the presidential administration and PAS, highlighting the government’s shortcomings before the West.
In this case, the political standoff between different state institutions in Moldova would clearly benefit Russia, whose influence would grow in an atmosphere of destabilization,” Cenușă noted.
No problems expected
Experts believe that there should be no changes in Moldova’s relationship with the EU in the current situation. “They [European officials] are looking at the referendum results realistically. In Brussels and Strasbourg, there is an understanding of the level of hybrid threats directed against Moldova, which motivates them to quickly implement the ‘von der Leyen plan,’” noted WatchDog expert Andrei Curelaru.
He suggests that we may not see significant EU funding in Moldova’s budget before the parliamentary elections, as pro-European parties will need to prove to Brussels that they are capable of forming a government.
Dionis Cenușă contends that the contentious referendum results cannot affect the speed of negotiations for EU membership. He also believes that the constitutional changes resulting from the referendum will be contested by opposition forces and certain segments of the public. “With only 25 percent support [from all registered voters], of which 180,000 are diaspora members, confidence in the [constitutional] reform is shaky,” Cenușă noted.
He emphasized that “Brussels cannot afford to criticize the referendum results.” “If the EU adopts a critical stance, it will impact Sandu’s chances of reelection. Acknowledging that only 25 percent of Moldovans voted ‘yes’ for Euro-integration, including 180,000 from the diaspora, could damage the EU’s image in Moldova,” he added.
Negotiations for EU membership will continue, stressed former Moldovan representative to the UN and Council of Europe Alexei Tulbure. “It’s clear that different figures were expected, but the results were influenced by both Russian interference and the organizers’ mistakes. The EU is not discussing these mistakes and is focusing on Russian meddling. This shows their commitment to continue supporting Moldova in its European path.”
Tulbure believes that the referendum results may not be the issue, but rather the results of the second round of elections. “We could have surprises here: if Sandu is not reelected, I think this could have consequences for our European trajectory,” the expert concluded.
Referendum in Moldova
Armenia to host Turkish media representatives as part of campaign to promote” Crossroads of Peace” project Public Radio of Armenia – Official Web site
Sopo Gelava and Eto Buziashvili, two Atlantic Council researchers whose houses were searched by the financial police two days before the election, say they now have no access to their bank accounts, with banks citing no legal justification or court order for freezing their accounts.
The U.S. Helsinki Commission Chairman Joe Wilson has already reacted to the controversial news by condemning the unofficial freezing of the accounts of U.S. institution employees. “I believe it is a direct attack on civil society by the Georgian government. I also believe it is an attack on the United States institution that employs them. If this is indicative of things to come, it is clear the Georgian Dream government is quickly descending into Russian-style authoritarianism. The government should allow the researchers to do their work without the fear of reprisals. Our MEGOBARI Act will punish those in Georgia violating the rule of law,” he said.
The Bank of Georgia and TBC Bank, the two largest banks in the country, have not given any reasons for the apparent freezing of their bank accounts. All commercial banks usually operate under the instructions of the National Bank of Georgia (NBG). We are trying to get a comment from NBG on this matter and will update the news upon receiving a response.
“What is interesting is that our bank accounts are not officially frozen, and then when we ask what is the reason [for the problem], they tell us that there is some kind of technical problem, that the accounts are blocked, suspended,” Eto Buziashvili said, noting that banks do not clarify the reason for limited access to their accounts. “This is a very strange coincidence that me and Sopo, we are both researchers on Russian influence and we are both studying disinformation in Georgia. First, just two days before the elections, they [the financial police] came to search us, and now, after four days, we in fact have no access to our accounts,” she added.
Another Atlantic Council employee, Sopo Gelava, describes the same situation. She says the bank is telling her there is a “technical error,” even though the accounts are not officially frozen. “Due to the fact that the account of my colleague in a different bank, who was also searched like me, is also blocked and she is given the same reason… I connect this [restriction of access to bank accounts] with raids,” Gelava added, stressing that the two Atlantic Council employees were not provided with the legal basis for the banks’ decision, such as, for example, a court order.
Also Read: