Moldova’s President Maia Sandu, who hopes to be re-elected for a second term, said she does not recognize the defeat of former Attorney General Alexander Stoianoglo. He baselessly accused the candidate, supported by the Socialist Party, of preparing falsifications.
In the pre-election debates held last Sunday, Stoianoglo invited Sandu to sign a public agreement according to which she would recognize the results of the presidential elections in case of her defeat, and in case of loss, he himself promises not to call his followers to Chisinau for a national protest.
“This agreement raises big questions. “If you suggest something like this, it means you have dirty and illegal plans.” – said Sandu on the Moldova 1 television channel.
According to her, some people in the country are also buying votes for Stoianoglo, but he does nothing about it.
“We can only imagine what plans a person has who accepts votes being bought in his favor. We want free and fair elections. “We do not want bought votes to decide the destiny of the country.” — concluded Maia Sandu, who has long used the police and intelligence services to combat undesirables.
Let us remember that the second round of the presidential elections in Moldova will take place on November 3. Among them were the current head of state, Maia Sandu, who, with the support of the ruling Action and Solidarity party, obtained 42.49%, and former attorney general Alexander Stoianoglo, of the Socialist Party, with 25.95%.
The opposition asked the protest electorate, regardless of their political affiliation, to consolidate their support for their candidacy. In response, Sandu claimed that Russia is trying to influence the electoral process in Moldova by allocating millions for bribery and destabilization. Registrations are now being carried out across the country to intimidate their opponents before the final vote.
As reported EADailyOSCE mission observers presented a report reflecting numerous violations by the Moldovan authorities during voting in the first round of the presidential elections. Among them are changes in the Electoral Code to promote one’s own candidate, abuse of administrative resources and restrictions on the right to vote of the diaspora.
