Home > 2.6 Campaign finance > MOLDOVA - Joint Opinion on the Legal Framework of Governing the Funding of Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns
 
 
 
Download file    
 
 
Paragraph 70
 

In this connection, the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR note that the above-mentioned bodies would seem to be supplementary supervisory mechanisms only, since tax authorities have a different control function, and may not always have the necessary information and skills to adequately oversee political financing, while court proceedings may take a long time and the National Anticorruption Center will take action only in very specific cases. In sum, the situation is largely the same as before the reform, i.e. there is no authority which would take the lead in supervising party and campaign financing and coordinate the work of the different bodies involved. It therefore appears necessary to make it even clearer in the law – both in the EC and the LPP – that this leading role is assigned to the CEC, notwithstanding the fact that active and effective collaboration between various institutions will still be required. This must necessarily include substantial checks of financial reports as well as the possibility to initiate investigations; ideally, the CEC itself would be entrusted with certain investigative functions. These kinds of competences are in line with international standards, as also stressed by the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR in previous Joint Opinions as well as by GRECO in its evaluation report on transparency of party funding in the Republic of Moldova. In the terms of the Guidelines, “legislation should grant regulatory agencies the ability to investigate and pursue potential violations. Absent such investigative powers, agencies are unlikely to have the ability to effectively implement their mandate.“