The agreement on the provision of a €200 million loan by Russia to Moldova, which was ratified by Parliament, was declared unconstitutional following challenges filed by MPs Sergiu Sîrbu, Dinu Plângău and Sergiu Litvinenco. This way, the three MPs said they are satisfied with the decision taken by the Constitutional Court on May 7, IPN reports.
“This decision is favorable not to us, but to the Republic of Moldova, the citizens, as the conditions of the lending agreement were drastic and unfavorable for the people and the country. Everyone probably spoke about this disadvantageous loan. We are glad that the law triumphed today. We are glad that the unprecedented pressure, threats against the Constitutional Court and its judges didn’t have an effect. We thank the High Court for that courage, for resisting, for its force to defend the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova,” Sergiu Sîrbu stated in the talk show “In Depth” on Pro TV channel.
The MP of the Pro Moldova group said they filed the application to the CC in order to see an objective examination in strict compliance with the supreme law, but they are not against the Russian law or the Russian Federation.
“The Russian Federation is not a predictable country. As long as Igor Dodon is in power, the government has a good relationship with Chisinau, but when Dodon leaves, the Russian Federation could have an entirely different approach in the case of a pro-European government. What happened in the case of Ukraine could happen in our case too. That’s why it is good that this agreement was declared unconstitutional,” said MP of the Party “Action and Solidarity” Sergiu Litvinenco.
He presumed that the CC declared the agreement unconstitutional because the legal procedures weren’t respected when the accord was initiated and signed.
Dinu Plîngău, MP of the Party “Dignity and Truth Platform”, noted the representatives of the Government tried to present letters between the Government of Russia and the Government of Moldova, but these letters cannot serve as evidence at the CC as there is the official decision of the Government by which negotiations were initiated and the signing was ordered, which is against the legal procedures.
As to the pressure exerted on the constitutional judges, Dinu Plîngău said such an act is liable to criminal liability.
“On the one hand, it was confirmed that we have an independent Constitutional Court that does not yield to pressure. On the other hand, the law, the principle of legality and the rule of law triumphed as the accusations made over this agreement were very plausible. As to the pressure, public pressure definitely existed and this is against the law, including the criminal one. This pressure exerted by high-ranking officials, accompanied by harsh accusations, is direct interference in justice,” he stated.
The authors of the program said the Party of Socialists refused to delegate representatives to the talk show to state their viewpoints on the CC judgment.
