The legislation of the Republic of Moldova should stipulate the procedure for annulling normative documents that weren’t consulted publicly, expert of the Legal Resources Center Sorina Macrinici was quoted by IPN as saying.
According to the expert, such a norm is needed as there are cases when the legislation is modified without holding public consultations and these changes generate large budget costs. A pertinent example is the case when the Government requested Parliament to amend the legislation and annul the fiscal and customs concessions for Duty Free shops, but this provision was simply removed from the document for the second passage. “This is unconstitutional and means fewer revenues collected into the budget. I wonder why this thing hasn’t been yet challenged in the Constitutional Court,” stated the expert.
Sorina Macrinici said the Legal Resources Center formulated a number of recommendations for Parliament as regards decisional transparency, including about the amendment of the normative framework for stipulating precise rules on the organization of public consultations.
Liberal MP Lilian Carp said holding public debates with civil society is essential. Civil society is more proficient in particular subjects than some of the functionaries given their narrow area of activity. “That’s why the public debates should be held and not with “civil societies” created by political parties for giving the impression that these debates take place,” stated the MP.
Deputy Speaker of Parliament Valeriu Giletski said decisional transparency plays its role, but decisional independence should also be respected. He admitted that transparency in the process of adopting the fiscal amnesty law wasn’t ensured. “It was the end of session and it was a political decision assumed by the parliamentary majority. This can be criticized, but we will see in time if it was justified or not,” stated the official.
