Vladimir Voronin – MP or head of state?
https://www.ipn.md/en/vladimir-voronin-mp-or-head-of-state-7965_975900.html
The procedure for electing the Speaker or the head of state is in fact not complicated. The procedure seems to be artificially complicated when there are persons with joint interests or when certain laws are interpreted, say experts in constitutional law. The holding by Vladimir Voronin of two important state positions – of MP and of outgoing president – is a controversial, but very interesting issue from constitutional viewpoint, according to experts.
[The principle of separation of state powers was not observed]
On May 12, Moldova’s outgoing president was elected as Speaker of Parliament with the vote of the 60 Communist MPs. Under the Constitution, the outgoing president cannot be elected and confirmed as Speaker as the two posts are incompatible.
Victor Popa, Doctor of Constitutional Law and expert of the Institute for Development and Social Initiative IDIS “Viitorul”, said that the MP permit of Vladimir Voronin should not have been validated by the Constitutional Court as the head of state is banned from holding any other paid post. “The 30-day period during which the MPs must decide if they remain MPs or keep the old job has already expired,” the expert said.
“We witness the paralysis of the central public authorities that exercise the national sovereignty. Such a situation was created gradually. In fact, this is the effect of the ticking bombs planted when the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova was adopted in 1994,” said Victor Popa.
When the Constitutional Court validated the MP permits, it should have stated: Mister President, if we now validate the permit, you will come into conflict with article 81 of the Constitution as the post of MP is paid. So, the validation of the permit means the violation of these conditions,” Victor Popa said.
By holding two posts, the President infringed the famous principle of separation of the powers in the state according to which the legislative and executive positions are incompatible.
[Moldova’s Constitution full of Dutch cheese holes]
Political analysts say that Moldova did not see such political crisis as the present one since 1991. The constitutional norms have not been explicitly formulated.
“The main question now is: when does the Parliament start work and close work? Article 64 says that the Parliament is elected for a four-year period. What does it mean if its session is extended for a week or two? Does this mean that the term in office of the MPs and of the head of state is extended? But we have another article, which says that the term can be extended only in case of catastrophe or war. This is the law. We cannot observe some of the laws and ignore the others, or interpret them as we want,” the IDIS expert said.
Under the law, the President holds office for a period of four years, after swearing an oath of office. Until a new head of state is elected, the outgoing President continues to hold the office.
The Constitution of the Republic of Moldova says that the post of head of state is incompatible with any other paid post. The post of outgoing president is also incompatible with any other paid position.
[The state is the king, not vice versa]
“The parliamentary majority in our country is permissible, but not everything that one wants is permitted. In fact, the Constitution is a document that limits the powers. If one breaks these elementary rules, they must provide an explanation for the society,” Victor Popa said. “By unreasonable acts that run counter to the existing norms, we throw the state into a political crisis and have no solutions for overcoming such a situation,” the expert said.
University lecturer Alexandru Arsene considers that Vladimir Voronin should have left the post of head of state before the start of the election campaign. Instead, he made use of this post.
The analysts contacted by Info-Prim Neo unanimously consider that the political crisis in Moldova is a consequence of the unwise constitutional development, permissive activity of those that rule the country and frivolous interpretations of the constitutional norms and other legal regulations.