From legal viewpoint, the Constitutional Court (CC) underestimated the Constitution when it endorsed the bill to amend Article 13 of the supreme law. But the judges didn’t have another way out as a similar judgment was passed by the CC in 2013. The issue was developed in the talk show “Key issue” on NTV Moldova channel, IPN reports.

Law expert Sergey Misin said that by approving of the bill to amend Article 13 of the Constitution so as to replace the phrase “Moldovan language” with “Romanian language”, the judges underestimated the Constitution, making reference to the Declaration of Independence. “In this case the Declaration of Independence is only a paper because it served as a reason for the appearance of the Constitution and for this state to start to exist. If the supreme law of the state was adopted, all the other legal acts are subordinate to the Constitution,” stated Sergey Misin.

Political analyst Corneliu Ciurea said constitutional law can be not only the Constitution, but also other important statements that can be connected to the Constitution and this enables the High Court to interpret. “I would not accuse now the Constitutional Court of adopting an incorrect decision. From my viewpoint, the CC didn’t have another way out. The Court triggered difficulties in December 2013, when it passed that judgment and had now to be consistent,” stated the analyst.

According to him, the decision is not definitive and this means that the CC didn’t want to assume overall responsibility and shifted a part of it onto Parliament, leaving a window open.

On October 31, the Constitutional Court endorsed the bill to amend Article 13 of the Constitution so as to replace the phrase “Moldovan language” with “Romanian language” following a request made by a group of MPs. By its judgment of 2013, the CC ruled that the Declaration of Independence forms part of the “constitutional set”.