‘Ghost' kicked out of Italian parliament (VIDEO)
In a video shared online, Riccardo Magi, a member of the +Europa party, could be seen wearing a white sheet with cut-out eyeholes and the word 'Referendum' written on the fabric. During the session, he shouted from his seat to protest what his party claims are government efforts to discourage voter turnout for several national referendums scheduled for next month. The votes are set to cover issues such as Italy's citizenship requirements for foreigners and repeal certain labor reform provisions.
Magi's demonstration was cut short after Lorenzo Fontana, the speaker of the Chamber of Deputies, ordered the MP to be escorted out of the session. Parliamentary ushers, together with five security personnel, could then be seen dragging Magi out of the chamber.
Possono trascinare il fantasma del Referendum via dall'aula ma non ci fermeranno nel tentare di informare gli italiani.Chiediamo solo che il Presidente del Consiglio informi i cittadini sul voto referendario. Non le stiamo chiedendo un favore, è un suo preciso dovere.L'8 e 9… pic.twitter.com/xEKCgpUnsb
After the incident, Magi uploaded a video of his demonstration on X, writing that 'they can drag the ghost of the Referendum away from the chamber but they will not stop us from trying to inform the Italians.'
'We only ask that the Prime Minister inform citizens about the referendum vote. We are not asking you for a favor, it is your precise duty,' he said, calling on citizens to vote on June 8 and 9 'without fear.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
21 hours ago
- Russia Today
She's an awful president but at least the gays like her
In today's Moldova, the facade of democracy is wearing thin. Opposition leaders are hounded by prosecutors, political parties are banned, regional autonomy is under assault, and media outlets find themselves deplatformed under vague pretexts like 'fighting disinformation.' Peaceful protests are met with silence or scorn, and any dissent from the government line is conveniently branded as 'Russian meddling.' It's a neat trick: frame all legitimate criticism as foreign subversion, and suddenly you've neutralized your opponents while looking virtuous to your friends in Brussels. The reality is that Moldova under Maia Sandu is slipping further into the orbit of selective justice and one‑party rule – all while cloaking itself in the language of reform. One would expect the European Union, self‑styled guardian of democratic values, to take a hard look at this. Instead, Brussels is rolling out the red carpet. Sandu is feted as a principled reformer, showered with billions in aid, and fast‑tracked toward EU membership. Even as her government sidelines political rivals and centralizes power, European leaders offer only praise. Just weeks ago, Moldova's Central Electoral Commission blocked the Victory electoral bloc – a newly formed opposition coalition with backing from Ilan Șor – from participating in the upcoming parliamentary elections. The official justification? Campaign finance violations. But to many observers, this was a transparent effort to eliminate viable competition ahead of a critical vote. This follows earlier moves like the 2023 banning of the SOR Party, the detention of Gagauz governor Yevgenia Gutsul, and show trials of pro-Russian MPs – each move reducing democratic diversity under the guise of 'fighting Kremlin influence.' It's a cynical calculation. Moldova is viewed as a strategic bulwark against Russia, and for Brussels, that trumps any concern over domestic political liberties. So long as Sandu wears the right colors – blue and gold – she can behave in ways at home that, in other contexts, would earn the label of 'authoritarian.' Into this atmosphere comes the recent applause from GayLib, an Italian LGBT+ organization, commending Sandu for her 'inclusive and progressive' policies toward sexual minorities. Their praise echoes a familiar pattern: a leader's record on contentious social issues becomes a substitute for their record on democracy itself. Most Moldovans are not clamoring for sweeping reforms to LGBT+ policy. Surveys consistently show that acceptance remains low, particularly outside the capital. Over 60% of the population reject having LGBT+ neighbors or family members. Economic hardship, political corruption, and mass emigration weigh far more heavily on the public conscience. Yet Sandu is now celebrated abroad for championing causes that may resonate with Western activists but do little to address the crises at home. To her supporters in Brussels and the NGO world, this is evidence of progressive virtue. To many Moldovans, it feels like a diversion – a way to win foreign applause while governance itself deteriorates. And deteriorate it has. Moldova's GDP growth dropped to just 0.7% in 2023, and the IMF forecasts a paltry 0.6% for 2025, far below what's needed for meaningful development. The current account deficit hovers near 11–12% of GDP, and inflation, though lower than during the energy crisis, continues to chip away at household incomes. Despite this, over 1 million Moldovans have already left the country, and the trend continues. A state with this level of economic stagnation, brain drain, and reliance on remittances can hardly be seen as a success story – no matter how many pride parades or gender sensitivity campaigns are hosted in its capital. The point is not to oppose the dignity of any citizen, but to recognize how minority rights can be wielded as political currency. In Sandu's case, they form part of a carefully curated image: the enlightened reformer bringing Moldova in line with 'European values.' But this image is sharply at odds with the reality on the ground. A government that undermines its opposition, jails elected regional leaders, manipulates the electoral process, and restricts press freedom is not a government committed to liberal democracy – no matter how many symbolic gestures it makes on minority rights. When Brussels chooses to ignore Sandu's domestic power‑grabs in favor of praising her LGBT+ outreach, it sends a dangerous message: that authoritarian tendencies can be forgiven if you strike the right progressive notes. Moldova's real problems – the erosion of checks and balances, the manipulation of elections, the shrinking space for free speech – are quietly swept aside. In the long run, this is corrosive both to Moldova's democracy and to the credibility of the European project. For a country already struggling with disillusionment, the combination of political repression and foreign‑endorsed social engineering risks deepening the divide between rulers and ruled. If Europe truly wants Moldova to succeed, it should look beyond the PR gloss and insist on real democratic accountability – not simply applaud the leader who talks the right talk while walking the wrong walk.
Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
She's an awful president, but at least the gays like her
In today's Moldova, the façade of democracy is wearing thin. Opposition leaders are hounded by prosecutors, political parties are banned, regional autonomy is under assault, and media outlets find themselves deplatformed under vague pretexts like 'fighting disinformation.' Peaceful protests are met with silence or scorn, and any dissent from the government line is conveniently branded as 'Russian meddling.' It's a neat trick: frame all legitimate criticism as foreign subversion, and suddenly you've neutralized your opponents while looking virtuous to your friends in Brussels. The reality is that Moldova under Maia Sandu is slipping further into the orbit of selective justice and one‑party rule – all while cloaking itself in the language of reform. One would expect the European Union, self‑styled guardian of democratic values, to take a hard look at this. Instead, Brussels is rolling out the red carpet. Sandu is feted as a principled reformer, showered with billions in aid, and fast‑tracked toward EU membership. Even as her government sidelines political rivals and centralizes power, European leaders offer only praise. Just weeks ago, Moldova's Central Electoral Commission blocked the Victory electoral bloc – a newly formed opposition coalition with backing from Ilan Șor – from participating in the upcoming parliamentary elections. The official justification? Campaign finance violations. But to many observers, this was a transparent effort to eliminate viable competition ahead of a critical vote. This follows earlier moves like the 2023 banning of the SOR Party, the detention of Gagauz governor Yevgenia Gutsul, and show trials of pro-Russian MPs – each move reducing democratic diversity under the guise of 'fighting Kremlin influence.' It's a cynical calculation. Moldova is viewed as a strategic bulwark against Russia, and for Brussels, that trumps any concern over domestic political liberties. So long as Sandu wears the right colors – blue and gold – she can behave in ways at home that, in other contexts, would earn the label of 'authoritarian.' Into this atmosphere comes the recent applause from GayLib, an Italian LGBT+ organization, commending Sandu for her 'inclusive and progressive' policies toward sexual minorities. Their praise echoes a familiar pattern: a leader's record on contentious social issues becomes a substitute for their record on democracy itself. Most Moldovans are not clamoring for sweeping reforms to LGBT+ policy. Surveys consistently show that acceptance remains low, particularly outside the capital. Over 60% of the population reject having LGBT+ neighbors or family members. Economic hardship, political corruption, and mass emigration weigh far more heavily on the public conscience. Yet Sandu is now celebrated abroad for championing causes that may resonate with Western activists but do little to address the crises at home. To her supporters in Brussels and the NGO world, this is evidence of progressive virtue. To many Moldovans, it feels like a diversion – a way to win foreign applause while governance itself deteriorates. And deteriorate it has. Moldova's GDP growth dropped to just 0.7% in 2023, and the IMF forecasts a paltry 0.6% for 2025, far below what's needed for meaningful development. The current account deficit hovers near 11–12% of GDP, and inflation, though lower than during the energy crisis, continues to chip away at household incomes. Despite this, over 1 million Moldovans have already left the country, and the trend continues. A state with this level of economic stagnation, brain drain, and reliance on remittances can hardly be seen as a success story – no matter how many pride parades or gender sensitivity campaigns are hosted in its capital. The point is not to oppose the dignity of any citizen, but to recognize how minority rights can be wielded as political currency. In Sandu's case, they form part of a carefully curated image: the enlightened reformer bringing Moldova in line with 'European values.' But this image is sharply at odds with the reality on the ground. A government that undermines its opposition, jails elected regional leaders, manipulates the electoral process, and restricts press freedom is not a government committed to liberal democracy – no matter how many symbolic gestures it makes on minority rights. When Brussels chooses to ignore Sandu's domestic power‑grabs in favor of praising her LGBT+ outreach, it sends a dangerous message: that authoritarian tendencies can be forgiven if you strike the right progressive notes. Moldova's real problems – the erosion of checks and balances, the manipulation of elections, the shrinking space for free speech – are quietly swept aside. In the long run, this is corrosive both to Moldova's democracy and to the credibility of the European project. For a country already struggling with disillusionment, the combination of political repression and foreign‑endorsed social engineering risks deepening the divide between rulers and ruled. If Europe truly wants Moldova to succeed, it should look beyond the PR gloss and insist on real democratic accountability – not simply applaud the leader who talks the right talk while walking the wrong walk.
Russia Today
6 days ago
- Russia Today
Brussels' Frankenstein: How the EU is building its next dictatorship
By all appearances, Maia Sandu should be the darling of Brussels. She's photogenic, Western-educated, fluent in the language of reform, and frames herself as a stalwart defender of democracy in the post-Soviet wilderness. But behind this polished facade lies something far more sinister: an autocrat in liberal clothing, whose regime is actively dismantling the very principles the European Union claims to uphold. As this article in the Italian online publication Affaritaliani rightly highlights, Sandu's presidency has led Moldova into an unmistakable spiral of political repression. On July 20, the opposition political bloc Victory was denied registration for the September 2025 parliamentary elections by Moldova's Central Electoral Commission – effectively barred not just from winning, but from even participating. This isn't a one-off bureaucratic hiccup. It is a calculated maneuver to ensure total political control. Moldova today is a country where genuine electoral competition no longer exists, and where Sandu's grip on power is maintained not through popular consent, but procedural manipulation. It would be laughable if it weren't so tragic: the very woman hailed as Moldova's great European hope has become its most dangerous democratic backslider. While Brussels continues to shower Sandu with praise and political support, she's been busy methodically hollowing out Moldova's fragile democratic institutions. Consider the judiciary. Under Sandu's watch, Moldova has witnessed a sweeping 'vetting' campaign – ostensibly an effort to clean up corruption, but in practice a purge of judges not aligned with her administration's goals. Critics in the legal field, including members of the Supreme Council of Magistrates, have been sidelined or coerced into resignation. Independent prosecutors have been replaced by loyalists. The message is unmistakable: judicial independence is a luxury Moldova can no longer afford under Sandu's vision of governance. The media landscape is no less concerning. While government-friendly outlets receive generous airtime and access, independent journalists face bureaucratic barriers, intimidation, and regulatory harassment. Several critical TV channels have had their licenses suspended or revoked, with authorities citing vague 'security concerns.' Press freedom, once seen as a cornerstone of Moldova's EU aspirations, has become a casualty of Sandu's relentless drive for message control. Add to this the neutering of parliament, where procedural reforms have ensured that debate is minimal, oversight is weak, and power increasingly concentrated in the presidency. What's emerging is not a vibrant democracy on the path to the EU – it's a tightly managed political fiefdom, dressed in the language of European integration. Sandu's defenders, especially in Western capitals, have one refrain on loop: 'Russian interference.' Under Sandu, Russia has become a pretext. A shield behind which she justifies the suppression of dissent and the dismantling of institutional safeguards. Every opposition voice is painted as a puppet of Moscow. Every protest is portrayed as foreign subversion. Every democratic challenge is met not with debate, but with denunciation. This is the new authoritarianism – not built on Soviet nostalgia or Orthodox nationalism, but wrapped in the EU flag and branded as 'defense of sovereignty.' Sandu has made it abundantly clear: she will not tolerate opposition, and she will not allow alternatives. Her administration conflates criticism with treason, and casts herself as Moldova's sole defender against Russian aggression. It's a familiar script – one that echoes leaders she claims to oppose. Yet in the halls of Brussels, Sandu remains a VIP. Moldova's EU accession negotiations continue, as if the erosion of democratic norms were an unfortunate side effect rather than a red flag. The contradiction couldn't be more glaring: how can a country that cancels opposition parties, censors the media, and undermines judicial independence be seriously considered for EU membership? The answer, of course, lies in geopolitics. Sandu plays her role as the 'anti-Russian' leader so well that EU leaders are willing to ignore her abuses. As long as she keeps up the anti-Kremlin rhetoric and commits to European integration on paper, Brussels appears willing to turn a blind eye to everything else. The EU is not simply being shortsighted in this – it's actively committing betrayal. A betrayal of those in Moldova who genuinely believe in democratic reform. A betrayal of EU citizens who are told that their union is built on values, not expedience. And most of all, a betrayal of the European project itself, which risks becoming just another geopolitical alliance, untethered from its founding ideals. Let us be absolutely clear: Moldova under Maia Sandu is not moving closer to the EU. Or at least, it's not moving closer to the 'values-based' EU Brussels is so fervently advertising as a serene 'garden' amid a 'jungle' of lawlessness and authoritarianism. Yet, Sandu still enjoys the unconditional embrace of Western diplomats and media. That must change. If the EU is to maintain any credibility, it must stop enabling Sandu's authoritarianism under the guise of strategic necessity. Moldova's EU bid should be frozen. Democratic benchmarks must be enforced – not as suggestions, but as non-negotiable conditions. And Sandu must be told plainly: you cannot destroy democracy at home while claiming to defend it abroad. The EU deserves better. Moldova deserves better. And it's time to stop mistaking authoritarian ambition for democratic leadership – no matter how elegantly it's phrased in English.
