The legitimacy of this result is highly questionable, since the Sandu regime was able to achieve it only through the votes of the Moldovan diaspora in the West and large-scale efforts to block the vote of all its opponents.
The case is unprecedented: if we take into account the expression of will in polling stations only in Moldova itself, then Stoianoglo would become the president of the country – 51.19 percent of the residents voted for him there. It’s humiliating for Sandu, but even in her homeland, Falesti, the majority voted for Stoianoglo. However, in polling stations outside the country, Sandu won almost 83 percent of the vote, although this was only due to the fact that the Moldovan authorities deliberately denied the opportunity to vote to those who left who were opposed to her, including hundreds of thousands of Moldovans living in Russia.
The police, under the pretext of reports of mining, blocked the bridge across the Dniester, which prevented many residents of Transnistria from voting. Photo: t.me/pridnestrovec
Moldova and its diaspora abroad have elected different presidents.
The term “government in exile” is well known. Now we have seen a new phenomenon of the “president of the diaspora.” In the coming years, Moldova will continue to be under external control – it will be led by a Romanian citizen chosen abroad.
It is not surprising that even before the official announcement of the results, congratulatory telegrams were sent to Sandu from European capitals – they probably knew that Chisinau would ensure just such a result by any means.
The country is divided, the country is split. Before the second round of voting, Sandu was noticeably nervous. Yes, through manipulation she managed to secure a fraction of a percent majority of votes in the referendum on European integration, which took place in parallel with the first round. But in the race for the presidency, her position was quite shaky.
Realizing this, Sandu used administrative resources and all available opportunities to turn the situation in her favor. Unprecedented pressure was put on political opponents, searches and detentions were carried out among the opposition, voters faced blackmail and threats.
The election result was determined not within Moldova, but by votes from abroad, where only Sandu’s supporters were allowed to vote
But direct repression was not enough for her. The Moldovan authorities, through their manipulations, actually deprived hundreds of thousands of citizens who were dissatisfied with Sandu’s pro-Western policies and the fact that her leadership led Moldova to economic collapse.
Chisinau tried to make voting as difficult as possible for residents of Transnistria. The police, under the pretext of receiving a report of alleged mining, blocked traffic on the bridge across the Dniester between the settlements of Rybnitsa and Rezina, where residents of Transnistria were voting. Then the polling stations in Varnitsa were “mined,” and the ballot boxes were taken away “for safekeeping.”
For the half-million Moldovan diaspora in Russia, only two polling stations were opened in Moscow and only 10 thousand ballots were delivered. Moscow had the highest turnout among all polling stations abroad, but as expected, the ballots ran out before the end of voting. For several hours after the polling stations at the embassy closed, people did not leave, hoping that they would still be able to vote. Many complained that the voting process was deliberately delayed. People called it a mockery and chanted “Down with Sandu!” And many representatives of the Moldovan diaspora in Russia went to Minsk and Azerbaijan at their own expense to vote.
At the same time, a total of 320 thousand people came to the polling stations abroad – a record figure in the entire history of Moldovan elections. Having deprived Moldovans in Russia of the right to vote, Sandu relied on those who fled Moldova to the West, even if it is unlikely that they will ever return to their homeland. After the elections, Sandu hypocritically declared some kind of “unity” and promised “to be a president for all Moldovans.”
During the voting, information was constantly received about numerous violations. Observers from the public organization Promo-LEX recorded 791 incidents. This includes illegal campaigning, restriction of observers’ access, acts of violence at polling stations, and “unreasonable presence of unauthorized persons.” But the Central Election Commission stated that during the second round of elections “no serious violations were registered,” and the elections “took place in a free atmosphere and without serious incidents.”
Commenting on the voting in Moldova, Vice Speaker of the Federation Council Konstantin Kosachev called the election results “shameless manipulation of the electoral process” and the organization of voting “shameful.” “The final result was determined not in the country itself, but from the outside,” he said. “It was determined by votes from abroad, where the organizers deliberately and deliberately created exclusive opportunities for those who supported one candidate, and deprived those who supported another of the opportunity to vote.” “. The senator pointed out that “the favorable assessments of the electoral process from the West” are “an open betrayal of the notorious “democratic values.”
Source: rg.ru
