In a recent television interview, Moldovan President Maia Sandu said the government would do whatever it takes to maintain peace. Unfortunately for the Moldovan people, these measures have led to severe media censorship and democratic backsliding. Using emergency powers introduced after Russia invaded Ukraine, the Committee on Special Situations (CES) was given unprecedented, unrestricted powers to censor media in Moldova. This resulted in the unexplained blocking of 13 TV stations, more than 50 websites and online portals, with another 7 TV stations and 2 radio stations to follow. These anti-democratic actions have rightly caused concern among media NGOs around the world and should serve as a warning sign to EU officials currently involved in accession negotiations with Moldova. The Moldovan public must be protected and educated against disinformation without infringing on freedom of expression.
There is no denying that Moldova faces a threat from Russian disinformation. Reports of cyberattacks and illicit funding should be taken seriously – but if Moldova is to join the EU, it must learn to counter these threats while safeguarding freedoms. Moldova must be reminded that it is not the only country facing Russian disinformation campaigns.
For example, Finland, which has similar concerns about Russian military and disinformation threats, has implemented anti-fake news initiatives, working with experts to implement critical thinking courses in schools to train children how to identify fake news. Moldova’s neighbor Romania has similarly launched a dedicated online platform aimed at empowering and educating its citizens to identify and combat disinformation. As a country that shares a common culture and language and is integrated into the EU, Romania should serve as a shining example to Moldova on how to effectively combat fake news without trampling on press freedom. If Moldova chooses to combat Russian disinformation by censoring the media, they will ultimately fail. Instead, the key to combating fake news lies in increasing transparency within the media and, most importantly, increasing education and awareness.
Ironically, CES’ actions actually resulted in a government monopoly on the media sector, a practice that has also been repeatedly criticized by Moldovan pro-EU parties and EU institutions in authoritarian regimes such as Russia. Not surprisingly, the situation in Moldova has gone beyond a mere media ban, with more than 120 cases of threats and direct attacks against journalists and media personnel recorded between 2020 and 2022. Groups closely linked to influential government figures dominate, undermining independent media, resulting in an overall media landscape filled with patronage and fear.
The government’s attack on Moldova’s liberal media landscape is troubling in its own right, especially when viewed as part of a broader crackdown on civil society. The CES decision to ban all candidates of the Opportunities Party from running in the local elections held last November was a clear illegal infringement of electoral rights and has since been overturned by the Supreme Court. Both the Council of Europe and the OSCE publicly criticized the ruling, urging Moldova to reassess the broad powers held by the Council of Europe. Banning opposition parties from participating in free democratic elections will silence a large segment of Moldovan society that is already dissatisfied with the government, denying them the opportunity to express their voices and opinions. Such repression could ultimately destabilize Moldova’s social and political framework, potentially inciting unrest among opposition and minority groups, and jeopardizing the country’s stability and cohesion.
Ultimately, Moldova must resist the temptation to fight fire with fire. The ability to criticize government and engage in fair political competition is fundamental to democracy, and limiting these freedoms can have adverse long-term consequences. Instead, greater steps and investments must be made to educate the Moldovan public about the dangers of disinformation. It is also crucial for the future stability of Moldova, as the EU will not condone such behavior. In a country already divided, unity will be harder to achieve if the EU is seen to be squarely on the side of liberals.
The Commission for Special Situations has a long history of abuse of power, and with Moldova’s autumn elections approaching, the legitimacy of Sandu’s government depends on an open, free and fair democratic process.
The author is not aligned with any political movement inside or outside Moldova, and he is running a campaign with his recently announced NGO to raise awareness of the widespread corruption in Moldovan affairs. He outlined some of these views in an interview with Forbes and published opinion pieces in EUObserver and EU Reporter.
Further reading on electronic international relations
