Parliament did not violate Constitution when it modified law on election of head of state

The Constitutional Court ruled that the Parliament did not break the Constitution when it amended the law on the procedure for electing the President of Moldova in October last year and that the legislative body can be dissolved not earlier than one year from the last dissolution. The Court examined the issue at the request of Communist MPs Maria Postoiko and Vadim Misin. At Tuesday's hearing of the Court, the representative of the Communists Party Sergiu Sarbu said they do not challenge the content of the modified law, but the fact that the Parliament reserved the right to interpret the Constitution instead of the Constitutional Court. Stefan Creanga, the Parliament's representative at the Constitutional Court, said the law on the procedure for electing the head of state was modified in order to overcome the political crisis. Immediately after the decision was pronounced, Sergiu Sarbu said that by it the Constitutional Court undermined its authority. “This decision is a dangerous precedent for the Court,” Sarbu said. “It is not so. If the Court had established that the Parliament acted not within its competence, the decision would have been different,” the Court's president Dumitru Pulbere said after the hearing. According to him, Sergiu Sarbu drew conclusions only after he listened to the summary of the decision. He recommended Sarbu to read the whole text of the decision that will be published soon in the Official Gazette. The Constitutional Court asked the Venice Commission to pronounce on the issue. The European experts agreed that the Parliament should be dissolved one year after the last dissolution.