The effects of the non-voting of the amendment of the Constitution by which the European integration is inserted in it are negative both at domestic level and at foreign level, Deputy Speaker of Parliament Valeriu Giletski, of the Parliamentary Group of the European People’s Party of Moldova, said in the public debate “European integration in Constitution and in life” that was staged by IPN News Agency and Radio Moldova.
By the rejection of this initiative, the division of the pro-European forces deepened further. This is an advantage for the Party of Socialists. It is absolutely wrong to vote or not to vote through the perspective of those who are in power and this is one of the biggest mistakes that can be made in politics because this aspect should be overcome when you think about the country’s interests.
The MP said he listened attentively to the arguments presented in Parliament by his colleagues who didn’t vote for amending the Constitution and convinced himself once again that none of these arguments is pertinent as they are only excuses and pretexts. “The PLDM and PL, when they decided to move to the opposition, specified that they will vote in Parliament any bill that concerns the implementation of the Association Agreement and that will support the European integration of the Republic of Moldova,” he stated.
“To my mind, the bill to amend the Constitution perfectly matches this context. The fact that the European integration stagnates now in parts from practical viewpoint and there are particular failures cannot serve as an excuse or an argument not to vote. We have an Association Agreement and a number of documents, but the inclusion of this phrase in the Constitution definitely wouldn’t have prevented us from continuing the implementation of the Association Agreement. When these things contradict each other, the approach is fully mistaken,” stated Valeriu Giletski.
He noted that it wasn’t a package of laws concerning financing or appointments. It was an idea. The people appreciate victories, not defeats that divide and history records deeds, not excuses. “It was suggested inserting a value in the preamble of the Constitution, not the European integration of the PDM or PPEM type,” he stated.
The MP said the Parliamentary European People’s Group approved of the idea of enshrining the European course in the Constitution and the proposal to amend Article 13 on the official language from the very beginning, but the Democratic colleagues decided not to vote on the two issues in a package. However, the non-voting of the amendment to Article 13 cannot be used as an argument for not voting the European integration. The PPEM is ready to vote the changes to Article 13 that are wanted by the PL and PLDM.
The Deputy Speaker said the initiative to amend the Constitution was aimed at reaffirming the development course of the country. During the past few years, the European integration has been promoted in election campaigns. The idea of European integration appeared before the Alliance for European Integration came to power and society during all these years has been looking for an idea that could be the best county development model. The initiative was necessary and is beneficial to society even if today there are voices that oppose the insertion of this phrase in the Constitution.
He noted he is convinced that the pro-European forces should support the inclusion of this phrase in the Constitution. “I regret we didn’t reach that consensus that would have brought us a good result,” stated Valeriu Giletski. According to him, the situation as to democracy, the rule of law and the European integration will never be ideal in Moldova. There were better situations and there is hope there will be even better situations in the future, but a pragmatic politician who sticks to the idea with which he came should be consistent before the eyes of voters.
The debate “European integration in Constitution and in life” forms part of the series of public debates held by IPN News Agency and Radio Moldova as part of the project “Developing political culture by public debates” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
