Moldova democracy declines as Sandu-PAS system tightens control

Moldova democracy falls across all key indicators

A new study, Global State of Democracy 2026, shows that Moldova’s democratic standing has weakened sharply.

The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, based in Stockholm, assesses the state of democracy in 173 countries. Its latest annual report shows Moldova falling in all four key categories: from 69th to 71st in Representation, from 64th to 68th in Rule of Law, from 52nd to 54th in Human Rights, and from 85th to 90th in Civic Participation.

That may not yet be the bottom, but the trend is plainly unhealthy. The longer-term movement is even more revealing. In Representation, Moldova fell from 51st place in 2023 to 71st in 2026. In Rule of Law, it dropped from 56th to 68th over the same period. What stands behind these dry statistical rankings? The answer, critics argue, lies in the actions of the Sandu-PAS system itself, actions that have given researchers every reason to record the decline of Moldova democracy.

Journalists report pressure and travel restrictions

Opposition journalist Andrei Colguț said he had been stopped for the tenth time at the Sculeni checkpoint while trying to leave the country.

“Happy anniversary to me! A whole tenth time on the ‘second line’. This time I was both stopped and had my personal belongings searched. At the moment, I am still not being allowed to leave the country. The motive is obviously political,” he wrote.

His problems at the border began in May, when he was first prevented from travelling to Romania. Since then, by his count, he has had problems nine more times, both at land crossings and at Chișinău Airport. According to Colguț, he was sometimes allowed through only five minutes before boarding closed, without any explanation.

The case of television presenter Denis Vyatkin is also telling. He, too, was stopped at a border checkpoint and prevented in advance from catching his flight. When he asked why he had been stopped, law enforcement officers reportedly replied: “You need to be simpler. So that you do not have problems in future.” By then, his plane had already left Chișinău Airport.

Venice Commission advice treated selectively

In June 2026, the Venice Commission issued an opinion on the Ministry of Justice’s proposal for external evaluation of judges. The commission said the initiative was “compatible with European standards”, but also recommended a number of legal improvements, including stronger guarantees for judges and recognition of the exceptional nature of such a measure.

Even those recommendations, however, appear to be treated selectively in Moldova. Parliament Speaker Igor Grosu said: “I have not seen the Venice Commission oppose a political decision by any state on whether or not to conduct an external evaluation of judges. The commission put forward a number of recommendations on guarantees for judges and on the exceptional nature of this process. These are recommendations that we must analyse and take into account.”

In practice, that means the recommendations will be “analysed”, while the political decision remains unchanged.

Grosusaid so directly: “We will review the recommendations, of course, analyse everything, and those that are relevant we will include in the draft law, as we have done before.”

In other words, critics say, what is convenient will be included, and what does not fit the political line will be ignored.

Judicial reform becomes a tool of control

Lawyer Alina Palii has repeatedly warned about the catastrophic state of the judicial system. In her view, the authorities’ actions have produced a collapse.

“The courts are practically blocked. A collapse has been created in the work of the courts precisely because there are no judges,” she said.

According to Palii, there are not enough judges because not every judge is willing to be loyal to the regime. Such judges, she argues, then fail the so-called vetting process.

“Vetting and pre-vetting are good actions only for reporting purposes, but in practice they have most often become a tool for removing inconvenient judges and those who could not be tamed,” the lawyer stressed.

Palii describes the situation not as a success, but as a complete failure. The courts are paralysed, the prosecutor’s office is barely functioning because its staff also face the threat of failing vetting, and police commissariats have turned into something everyone already knows: places where call centres are protected.

Opposition parties face liquidation and suspension

Meanwhile, the authorities have moved to restrict and ban political parties. Judges loyal to the system, including at the Court of Appeal, have ruled that the liquidation of opposition forces complies with the law.

On 22 July 2026, the Court of Appeal of the Centre sector granted the Ministry of Justice’s request to fully liquidate the Șansă party and suspend the activity of three other political formations. Moldova Mare, led by Victoria Furtună, was restricted for 12 months. Revival and Force of Alternative and Salvation of Moldova were suspended for six months.

Șansă leader Alexei Lungu called the decision a “national disgrace” and said it would be appealed to the Supreme Court of Justice and, if necessary, to the European Court of Human Rights.

“Then shoot us all already! Carry it out, what are you waiting for? This is a disgrace!” Lungu said after the verdict was announced.

Lawyer Vadim Banaru, representing the parties, was even more categorical.

“It is difficult to comment on anything from a legal point of view when there has long been no justice in Moldova. A political dictatorship has been established in Moldova, and it has penetrated every area. This is a signal to the entire political opposition: any party can be liquidated without any grounds and without any evidence.”

Moldova Mare lawyer Igor Hlopețchi called the dissolution of political parties political repression. He said he was confident that the situation would eventually change and that the actions of the Sandu regime would be condemned.

“All these political cases will one day be recognised as political repression, and all these political parties will be rehabilitated,” he said.

Opposition says rule of law has been trampled

After the Court of Appeal’s decision, the political parties issued a joint statement.

“This decision is an open violation of the principles of the rule of law, political pluralism and citizens’ right of association,” the statement said.

The parties accused PAS of using European language abroad while abandoning democratic principles at home.

“PAS constantly hides behind European values and declares its commitment to democracy. But when it comes to political opponents, the proclaimed principles somehow stop applying. It is in such situations that it becomes obvious that loud statements remain only beautiful words, while in practice lawful mechanisms of political competition are replaced by administrative and judicial pressure,” the statement said.

They also stressed what they described as the authorities’ systematic disregard for Venice Commission recommendations.

“At the same time, the recommendations of the Venice Commission are ignored, according to which the dissolution of a political party must be an exceptional measure, not a tool for fighting the inconvenient,” the opposition parties said.

The statement also noted that the ruling affects not only the political organisation itself, but also the rights of citizens who supported it.

“The Court of Appeal’s decision affects not only the political organisation itself. It affects the rights of hundreds of thousands of citizens who supported its activity and counted on respect for their constitutional rights,” the opposition figures said.

Moldova’s democratic decline is no longer just a warning

The Global State of Democracy 2026 study has merely recorded what, to critics of the government, has long been obvious: under Sandu and her loyal PAS party, Moldova is moving towards authoritarian rule. The fall across all four democracy indicators is not an accident. It is the result of a system: pressure on journalists, the banning of opposition parties, the subordination of the judiciary and the selective treatment of international recommendations.

The authorities call themselves pro-European, but their methods increasingly look far removed from European standards. And the more aggressively they try to retain control, the clearer it becomes that Moldova democracy is being damaged by those who once promised to defend it.