Tiraspol, 25 April. /Novosti Pridnestrovya/. The initiative of Moldovan President Igor Dodon about Pridnestrovie's members in the Moldovan parliament is populist, Vadim Krasnoselsky said during a meeting with members of the Council of War, Labour and Army Veterans of Pridnestrovie.
The president recalled that following his two meetings with Igor Dodon it had been agreed to start work on a package of economic and social issues without touching on the political sphere. «I made it a condition at once that we would avoid discussing any status of Pridnestrovie. Our status is determined by the people — it is independence," noted the president.
According to Vadim Krasnoselsky, to show a readiness to compromise, Pridnestrovie has taken a number of steps to solve a whole range of problems. «We have resolved the problems that have been politicised by Moldova for years Among them is the work of Romanian-language schools in Pridnestrovie… The issue of migration has been resolved with respect to all foreigners rather than only Moldovan citizens… The issue of land use in Dubossary District has also been settled," said the president.
Also, in order to resolve the problem of politically motivated prosecution, Pridnestrovie has discontinued as a gesture of goodwill 10 criminal cases against Moldovan officials and law enforcers, waiting for a response from Moldova.
However, according to Vadim Krasnoselsky, Moldovan representatives have not shown a readiness to engage in dialogue and seek compromise solutions and are continuing to violate previous arrangements. And in the meantime, Moldova intends to deploy its customs and border guard officers on the Pridnestrovian-Ukrainian border, which may significantly damage the Pridnestrovian economy and jeopardise the security situation.
«Along with all these problems that I have outlined, this [initiative of Dodon] is mere populism and dust in the eyes," said Krasnoselsky.
«We don't divide Pridnestrovians into the citizens of Moldova, Ukraine, Russia. We are the Pridnestrovian people. And in accordance with Moldovan laws, the Pridnestrovian people cannot take part in Moldovan elections. That's why we act strictly within the framework of our Constitution and Pridnestrovian legislation. And since under Moldovan laws the Pridnestrovian people cannot participate in elections, they won't participate. I believe it's fair," concluded the president.
That the interests of Pridnestrovie in the Moldovan parliament should be represented by «five or six» members — which is 5% of the total number of MPs — was announced by Igor Dodon at the end of last week on the RTR-Moldova TV channel when discussing the reform of Moldovan electoral legislation.
The Democratic Party of Moldova has submitted an initiative to move from a proportional to a majoritarian system of elections. Nearly all opposition parties have stood against this proposal.
Igor Dodon has proposed a compromise — a mixed system in which 51 MPs will be elected under a proportional system and another 50 under a majoritarian one, «five or six» of whom will represent Pridnestrovie's interests. According to the Moldovan president, this will allow Pridnestrovie to create its faction in the Moldovan parliament.
Meanwhile, the Liberal Party, which showed the worst result among all parliamentarian parties in the 2014 election, has gained 13 seats — double the number of seats that Dodon offers to Pridnestrovie.
In 1990 the number of MPs representing Pridnestrovie in the Supreme Council of the MSSR was more numerous — 60 of 394 members, which is 15% of the total number. However, they were unable to achieve the repeal of the previously adopted discriminatory law on languages, to prevent the adoption of the Declaration of Sovereignty and the proclamation of the Romanian tricolour as the national flag of Moldova. As one of the members of the last Supreme Council of the MSSR, and later the first president of the PMR, Igor Smirnov recalls, the majority of Moldovan MPs did not take into account the opinion of their Pridnestrovian colleagues.
«Everything had been decided beforehand in the session, I think, before the session began. We were not allowed to say a word. We tried to take the floor a couple of times and, after being rejected, we made further attempts. But they were, as a rule, in vain. And even if we managed to voice several statements, they were not taken into account during voting. Let alone the minority's opinion! What shall we do in such a parliament?» Igor Smirnov writes in his book Living in Our Land.
