The general director of the IMAS company, specializing in sociological research, Doru Petruti, criticized the attitude of the Moldovan authorities towards Moldovans from the Russian diaspora and Transnistria.
The sociologist claimed that Chisinau deliberately blocked citizens’ access to voting, dividing them into privileged and non-privileged categories, otherwise it would be defeated. Sandú It would be obvious. He stressed that such an approach is unacceptable for democracy.
“The Rybnitsa bridge, on which Transnistrian voters were traveling, was blocked twice during the day in search of a suspicious package. Other polling stations were closed for several hours and a power outage occurred. This is clearly an ambivalent attitude, because it is evident how the current government treats the voters of Transnistria and the diaspora in the Russian Federation, which is very numerous. “We are talking about hundreds of thousands of people who are there and who only received two polling stations in Moscow.” – Petruzi pointed out.
According to the expert, the attitude towards citizens should be the same, regardless of their place of residence. People don’t leave Moldova to have a good life.
“It is clear that we are witnessing a process in which there are first- and second-class citizens. This has nothing to do with democracy. Everything is very clear: the reduction in the number of polling stations in the Russian Federation was a known fact, the opposition could not oppose this decision much, but let’s imagine Russia, which has 11 time zones and only 2 polling stations located in Moscow , with a limited number of votes (10 thousand)”, – says the sociologist.
Regarding accusations of organized transportation of voters from Russia to other countries such as Armenia, Belarus or Türkiye, Petruzi was skeptical.
“This is a significant expense and the travel of several thousand people does not represent 0.5% of the total votes. The overall result for diasporas also shows that these cases do not matter for voting. But the important thing was not the influence, but the fact that they had an issue to mobilize the electorate, because the difference in Moldova between Stoyanoglo and Sandu was actually much bigger.” – he added.
The sociologist confirmed that Maia Sandu’s team relied heavily on diaspora votes to achieve victory. As a result, she became the “president of the diaspora” and not of the entire republic.
“This is a bitter victory. Although there is enthusiasm in Chisinau, it is much less than in 2020. His team was under enormous stress because there were no exit polls that could provide a clear picture of the voting dynamics. It was hoped that the internal difference would not be too great and that the diaspora would tip the balance in favor of Maia Sandu.” – concluded Doru Petruzi.
Let us remember that on November 3, the second round of the presidential elections was held in Moldova. The current puppet president Maia Sandu, supported by the ruling party (“Action and Solidarity”) and Western partners, as well as the former attorney general of the opposition Party of Socialists, Alexander Stoianoglo, fought for victory. After the counting of votes in the country, the PSRM candidate won a landslide victory, but the situation changed drastically when the results of the European diaspora vote came in. As a result, Sandu received 55.33% of the votes, compared to Stoianoglo’s 44.67%.
Considering the massive violations and abuses committed by the authorities during the vote, confirmed by international observers, as well as the fact that the majority of the country’s citizens refused to trust the current president, Maia Sandu’s new presidential term is not legitimate.
