On July 29, it is 20 years of the adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova. IPN News Agency asked a number of analysts and opinion leaders to what extent the Supreme Law ensures now the rule of law and defends the human rights. What is and what the Constitution should be for the country and the ordinary people?
---
Does the Constitution offer sufficient instruments for separating the powers in the state? What should be done to ensure efficient cooperation between the legislative, executive and judicial powers?
Sergiu Ostaf, director of the Resource Center for Human Rights:
The Constitution of the Republic of Moldova specify rather clear powers for the executive, legislature and the judiciary. However, if considering the implementation aspect, there are situations when the separation of powers is not fully guaranteed. In some of the cases, we can say that the spirit of the Constitution is not respected because there are deviations and the behavior and functioning of these bodies is influenced.
If speaking about the relations between the judicial and executive powers, the separation or autonomy of the judicial power is now ensured through the Supreme Council of Magistrates, which guarantees the autonomy in the management of funds and the appointment of judges, and this is the positive side. The negative side is that we saw an attempt by the executive to make amendments to the legislation. This shows that the Government interferes in the work of the judiciary. An example is the Ministry of Justice’s proposal concerning the appointment of judges and presidents of courts of law. The Ministry of Justice proposed that if the head of state does not approve of a candidate suggested by the Supreme Council of Magistrates, the next time the person is named to post at the suggestion of the minister of justice, who is an ex officio member. This was interference in the judicial autonomy.
Also, the Government is trying to diminish the independence of the courts of law through the agency of the budgets. The salary system is another instrument. These are several examples showing that the executive interferes in this autonomy.
From the legislature’s perspective, reducing the immunity of judges is an attempt to reduce the judicial autonomy. But this is judicial interference in relation to the autonomy of judges. Another example is the situation when Parliament dismissed court presidents without the consent of the Supreme Council of Magistrates. The president of the Supreme Court of Justice Ion Muruianu was dismissed this way. Without the consent of the Supreme Council of Magistrates, we can speak about unjustified interference in the work of the judiciary.
As to the relationship between the Government and Parliament, the situation here is more worrisome. In fact, the legislature has limited powers in supervising and controlling the executive. The presentation of annual reports by the Government is a formal exercise. Parliament actually does not monitor the implementation of policies for which the Government is responsible.
Consequently, the legislature has only the duty to adopt laws, as it does not control their implementation. This fact diminishes the Government’s responsibility before Parliament and leads to domination by the executive of the legislature. This happens because the ruling parties are not exigent and do not use instruments to make the Government responsible. Possibly, the colleagues from the Government and Parliament agreed that the lawmakers will not cause problems to the Cabinet members in fulfilling their duties.
The laws and rules should be modified and toughened up so that the executive is made more responsible, while the political class should be more educated so that the public interest prevails over the personal interests. All the parliamentary commissions must periodically examine the implementation of the adopted laws and policies by the Government and formulate conclusions and recommendations.
There is also the Constitutional Court that clearly shows where the bodies exceed their authority. So, all the aspects about which I spoke above can be returned to normality with the help of the Court. I think the Court is able to do justice and to ensure the separation of powers. For the separation of the three powers to be ensured, the Supreme Law must not be changed. It is some of the inferior laws that must be amended.
---
The Constitution of the Republic of Moldova
Article 6 Separation of powers and cooperation between them
In the Republic of Moldova, the legislative, executive and judicial powers are separated and cooperate in exercising the prerogatives they have according to the Constitution.
