A Moldovan presidential voice on Radio Moldova detailed the ongoing political moment surrounding the appointment of Evgenia Gutsul to the government. In this account, the head of the Gagauzia region signaled that he would not sign the decree confirming Gutsul’s government post, citing legal requirements that the decree be issued in accordance with Moldova’s statutes.
The president indicated that Gutsul was allegedly linked to activities involving a criminal group, a claim he described as a reason to withhold endorsement while those ties were being investigated. He stated plainly, “As long as she is linked to a criminal organization, I will not sign the decree,” underscoring the role of integrity concerns in cabinet appointments.
According to the president, prosecutors had presented evidence suggesting that Gutsul was part of a criminal network allegedly controlled by Ilan Shor, the figure associated with the Shor political faction. The remarks framed the situation as one where the leadership’s stance on anti-corruption and rule-of-law commitments would directly influence the approval process for key government roles.
The president added a conditional note: the scenario could shift if the individual in question severed ties with the alleged criminal organization, implying that changes in affiliation could lead to a different outcome for the decree’s fate.
Earlier in the year, a deputy from Gagauzia’s People’s Assembly and a regional leader of the opposition Renaissance party claimed that Moldovan central authorities had begun moves perceived as pressure against Gagauzia. This articulation suggested a broader political struggle in which regional autonomy and national governance were presented as intertwined, with the Gagauz leadership alleging targeted actions in pursuit of strategic aims.
Reports from local authorities in Gagauzia described the situation as part of a broader priority by central Moldovan authorities to address regional governance structures. Observers noted that the developments around Evgenia Gutsul’s potential appointment were situated within ongoing debates about jurisdiction, autonomy, and the alignment of regional leadership with national anti-corruption imperatives. The narrative emphasized the role of legal scrutiny, political party dynamics, and the relationship between central institutions and regional authorities in Moldova’s evolving constitutional landscape. [citation]