I watched carefully the launching of the campaign, its serious side. Except the polls (and the visible controversies related to the withdrawal of Andrei Nastase), the only relevant move - in this campaign that begins to stagnate - is undoubtedly, the common launching of the candidate Maia Sandu. At least in Chisinau, if not in other communities. Even if, as I already said, the gesture is a belated one, unconvincing and still ambiguous.

Last week, the campaign brought us in series: the interview of Vladimir Plahotniuc elements related to governmental activity with electoral relevance, the Gorbuntsov episode - an incident clearly announcing the self-imposed exile of Balti mayor to avoid the deserved arrest for involvement in acts of organized crime. Over all, the only important point and notable one with direct relevance for the campaign, stays the promise of several candidates, if not the threat of a future arrest of one or another candidate or political actors. Alternatively, we have a more nuanced variant linked to the assignation of a prosecutor general to carry out such arrests.

Here, it is worth making the necessary enlightening observations. Thus, the democracy, the Europeanism and the rules of the constitutional state involve strict instruments, respect for the Constitution and the laws of country and, especially, the strict tracking of procedures and rules of the game inclusively, or firstly the separation of powers in the state. Therefore, the above allegations are shocking and moving things toward an artificial voluntarism and ignorance presumption of the democratic rules by the ones who prefer to collect votes by such promises. 

Indeed, a President always follows the constitutional provisions, which sets strictly the limits of his movements and duties. Anything that is beyond this status is deserving condemnation. Therefore, a Democratic president should avoid in his promises such elements that refer to duties that do not belong to him or that are part of a completely different state power, justice.

It's why I decided to exclude the promise of organizing early elections simply because a president cannot determine such a process. Furthermore, it is unrealistic to promise something like this when it is a long-term perspective, moreover, almost impossible in a country with a stable majority and a stable government. Early elections according to the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova can only be held if at least two appointments of a Prime Minister fail to meet the majority votes in Parliament.

And then, in such circumstances, the responsibility for instability and inability to form a government could return partly to the President, if there are no right arguments and explanations, because the President hasn't identified and hasn't chosen correctly, after consultations, a suitable candidate for the position of premier to form a majority. The presumption that a president would nominate a prime minister who fails in government formation and getting the vote of investiture twice, just in order to hold early elections, is fundamentally against the rules of the game and deeply reprehensible as a political game, which would disqualify the President.

President Timofti managed to play such a game in special circumstances, when the nomination of the second candidate for prime minister, was followed by the absence of a formal majority and the absence of a proposal from the parties for an acceptable candidate. As soon as such a majority was stated, was used a different candidate than Vladimir Plahotniuc of that majority, but complying with the newly formed coalition. It's about the only limit of movement of the President. And I want to reiterate what I already said; the President Nicolae Timofti will be regretted regardless of who will take the office after November 13.

Regarding the arrest of a politician, businessman, ordinary citizen, criminal or notorious oligarch who stole billions, this step cannot be done by the president, not even a politician, even not the prosecutor general. I get over the procedure for appointing the prosecutor general that does not give a president him discretionary powers over that person, unless he has the consent of the majority. However, even so, the arrest in a rule of law with pretensions of being serious on a European path is done only by the court, judges, and that with the defendant's right of appeal.

Moreover, the biggest serial killer in a rule of law has procedural guarantees and his procedural rights and individual rights for an honest defense are respected. So, the approach to arrest someone in a presidential campaign is punishable in terms of the rules of democracy, because the President has no role in the field, even the prosecutor general that is appointed, admitting that he passes all procedures, but the court, after two levels of jurisdiction, compliance to the rules and a final and irrevocable court decision.

On the contrary, as a defender of the Citizen and most important a state official, once elected, the President of the Republic of Moldova must ensure and guarantee the abidance of right to a fair trial for all the citizens of the state that he leads. Yes, that is a duty of a State President, and that we expect to be provided in the electoral programs and electoral debates between the two candidates with real chances.

Someone was saying that due to so much desire to get Andrei Nastase's electorate and demonstrate that she is sufficiently determined, Maia Sandu risks to lose her own electorate. I do not think like that, but surely the segment and the real advantage of a single candidate of the pro-European right wing opposition is respecting and declaring human rights, respect for the rule of law, knowledge and application of strictly constitutional provisions, laws and provisions of other subsequent legislation and framing strict duties that belong to a head of State. In this way she will win the Democrat, Liberal and European electorate of Moldova.