The President of the Republic of Moldova has the right to check the compatibility of the candidate proposed by the Prime Minister for a post, but does not have the right of veto on the Premier’s proposal. The President’s refusal to fulfill his constitutional obligation to name the candidate proposed again by the Premier is a serious violation of the constitutional obligations and the oath and this can serve as a reason for Parliament to start the procedure for suspending the President from post, in accordance with Article 89 of the Constitution, IPN reports.
In its decision following the interpretation of provisions of Article 98, the Constitutional Court (CC) says the President’s refusal to fulfill his constitutional obligations represents temporary incapacity to carry out these duties and justifies the suspension from post. In such a case, the post of President is held on an interim basis by the Speaker of Parliament or the Prime Minister.
In this case, the CC ascertained that the institutional blockage was generated by the President’s deliberate acts and by the non-execution of the previous CC judgment. It held that the mechanism for dismissing the President is decided by Parliament, this being a complex and long-lasting procedure that does not promptly solve the problem of functionality of the fundamental institutions that were deliberately obstructed by the President.
The Constitutional Court was requested by the Government to interpret provisions of Article 98 of the Constitution after President Igor Dodon refused to sign the decree to name Eugen Sturza as minister of defense after this was fielded again by the executive.
