The opposition in Moldova is often not allowed to genuinely participate in the legislative process. To fix this, it is important that a separate chapter be dedicated to parliamentary opposition in the new Parliamentary Code. The recommendation is made by the study “Regulation of the parliamentary opposition status in the Republic of Moldova”, developed by the NGO Promo-LEX in partnership with the Parliament’s Secretariat, and presented today in a public event.
Promo-LEX expert Igor Bucătaru noted that, according to international practice, the opposition should be given access to leadership positions by law. For example, if there are deputy speaker positions in the legislature, they should be reserved for the opposition. The Moldova legislation does not explicitly guarantee this, although the opposition often receives deputy speaker positions by custom.
As for the role of the opposition in setting the agenda, there is the example of the Council of Europe, where a qualified minority, for instance, a fourth of the opposition, may include items on the agenda. Another practice is to organize “opposition days”, and also to offer the right to demand plenary debates. Moldova does have “opposition days”, but more guarantees are needed for this to become an effective mechanism.
Internationally, participation and appointment to office is practiced to the maximum extent possible by a broad consensus between the government and the opposition, based on the proportionality of representation in the parliament, or quotas are provided for the opposition. In Moldova, in most cases the real participation of the opposition is not ensured, in this context, it is recommended to introduce quotas according to the model of appointing members of the Central Electoral Commission.
At the international level, the opposition or a minimum number of MPs are allowed to set up an inquiry commission. In general, representation depends on proportionality, but there are cases when it is also about equal representation or even offering the position of chairperson to the opposition. In Moldova, the opposition is not legally guaranteed proportional representation in inquiry commissions. Regarding the protection of the opposition against abuses, in Council of Europe member states there is a common tradition aimed at ensuring an official protection for the deputies in the form of parliamentary immunity. Such rules do not only refer to the opposition, but to all deputies. In Moldova, in principle “parliamentary immunity” is provided, but the development of a procedural guarantee is required.
The opposition, added Igor Bucătaru, should also be given a say in the approval of legislative drafts, because it is important for the opposition to be involved in an institutionalized manner in all stages of lawmaking.
Mariana Kalughin, of Transparency International Moldova, says that in terms of offering positions, a clear distinction must be made between positions of political interest and those of public interest. Appointments in positions of political interest could be made without competition procedures; it is important that there are clear eligibility conditions and that the candidates meet them, and in the case of positions of public interest, such as the directors of ANRE, CNPF, the Competition Council, that the opposition’s contribution to the appointments made in this sense by the Parliament be ensured.
The parliamentary opposition did not respond to the organizers' invitation to the event.
