Article 36(1) provides that “the direct or indirect financing, material support in any form of electoral campaigns of candidates to elections as well as the support of electoral competitors by other states, foreign enterprises, institutions and organisations, international and mixed as well as by natural persons who are not citizens of the Republic of Moldova [… ? something is missing in the translation]. The pecuniary amounts received in this manner shall be seized and become budget revenue.” This article could be applied to prohibit many legitimate activities, such as the organisation of a roundtable on electoral matters or electoral training by an international (non-) governmental organisation, as well as other legitimate observation activities and support of domestic observer groups. In particular, the prohibition of “indirect” “foreign funding” could lead to excessively restrictive measures. Paragraph 10.4 of the Copenhagen Document provides that States commit to allow domestic observer groups “to have unhindered access to and communication with similar bodies within and outside their countries and with international organisations, to engage in exchanges, contacts and co-operation with such groups and organisations and to solicit, receive and utilise for the purpose of promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms voluntary financial contributions from national and international sources as provided for by law.” The Code of good practice in electoral matters goes in the same way (point II.3.2). It is recommended that paragraph (1) of Article 36 be amended to ensure that the prohibition on foreign funding cannot be applied to preclude international or domestic observer organisations from full engagement in observation activities, including the training of observers, deployment of personnel, compilation of data, fact finding, and subsequent analyses and reporting, and to ensure compliance with Paragraph 10.4 of the Copenhagen Document.
