The Venice Commission stated that the Moldovan Constitutional Court had no grounds for the dissolution of the parliament and made subsequent decisions with violations of the procedures and principles.
This is stated in the conclusion of the Venice Commission, made based on a review of the decisions of the CC, taken from 7 to 9 June. According to President Igor Dodon, on May 21, the Council of Europe's Commission for Democracy through Law, known as the Venice Commission, announced its position on the constitutional situation in Moldova and the possible dissolution of the Moldovan parliament. The Venice Commission noted that the period of 3 months for the dissolution of parliament expired on June 9. Given that June 9 fell on Sunday, this period was extended until June 10. At the same time, the dissolution of the parliament was to follow consulting with parliamentary factions to verify the fact that all possibilities of forming a new government had been exhausted. Therefore, according to experts, the Maia Sandu government was approved on June 8 in a timely manner. The Venice Commission also noted that the Constitutional Court had violated its own inquiry verification procedure, “inviting” only representatives of the Democratic Party to the court session and not inviting representatives of parliament or the president. Thus, the principle of equality of the parties was violated. The Venice Commission also pointed out the simultaneous appointment of 3 judges of the Constitutional Court several months before the parliamentary elections. The commission also considers the procedure for the removal from office of the president of Moldova with the right of the prime minister to sign decrees on the dissolution of parliament on his behalf, which is inconsistent with the Constitution. The Venice Commission stressed that the only way to remove the president from office is solely to launch the procedure for dismissing the president from office, and the procedure for vesting him in office is activated only in cases stipulated by the Constitution of Moldova. The Venice Commission believes that the Constitutional Court did not observe either its own procedures or the principle of equality of the parties in resolving the recent political crisis. The Commission recalled that the crucial role of the Constitutional Court is to keep an equal distance from all branches of government and to be an impartial arbiter in the event of a conflict between them. During the debate, it was emphasized that the case of Moldova is an exceptional one, which had no precedent in the practice of the commission so far. “Thus, based on the above, I believe that the only way to restore constitutional stability is the resignation of all the judges of the entire Constitutional Court” said Igor Dodon. // 21.06.2019 — InfoMarket.