‘State capture’ of Moldova: Definitions and current trends

According to IMF, this was the state capture situation in 1999 with Azerbaijan and Moldova holding the highest position in the top, Ukraine being on third place (See the Figure bellow).

The IMF defines the ‘state capture’ as follows: ‘the efforts of firms to shape the laws, policies, and regulations of the state to their own advantage by providing illicit private gains to public officials’. IMF’s explanation of capture state for transition economies (as it is Moldova) says that ‘corruption has taken on a new image — that of so-called oligarchs manipulating policy formation and even shaping the emerging rules of the game to their own, very substantial advantage.’

Interestingly, but we started to talk about state capture in Moldova only 1–2 years ago. This means that the level o state capture in Moldova is much higher than 17 years ago (in 1999).

Surely, Ukraine’s state capture situation reached its maximum acceptable by the Ukrainian society in 2013–2014, when we had the ‘dignity revolution’ triggered by the president Viktor Ianukovici decision not to initiate the Association Agreement with EU.

In conclusion, the question of ‘state capture’ is on the top of the public agenda in Moldova. We have voices who say that we are facing a movement of protest of ‘dignity’ too.

Let’s see how the ‘state capture’ will end and if this can be ended for good in Moldova.