Expert Igor Boțan said the Constitutional Court’s decision by which the law for which the Government assumed responsibility was declared unconstitutional does not affect the executive’s intention to solve the existing problems as a part of the provisions of that law were adopted by the Commission for Exceptional Situations. By the April 13 decision, the CC clarified its case law concerning the assumption of responsibility by the Government and this is something positive, the expert stated in a public debate titled “Assumption of responsibility by the Government: controversies, effects, solutions”, held by IPN News Agency.
The IPN Project’s standing expert noted the whole procedure showed that there are a lot of things that can unite the efforts of the opposition and the government. Experience of such crises is absent even in the developed states. As the Premier came to the MPs to consider the necessity of decreeing a state of emergency, it was impossible for the executive to come up with the plan of action required by the opposition. The opposition provided arguments over particular things, as did the government.
Igor Boțan said the only thing that is absent to ensure harmony in this regard is the precondition for all these proposals to be included in a program, as the Constitution requires, and for the Government to assume responsibility for it.
According to the expert, what the Constitutional Court did yesterday means more order in its case law concerning the procedure for assuming responsibility by the Government and this is very useful. The Court’s decision does not frustrate the executive’s intention to solve the existing problems as a part of the provisions of the April 2 law that was annulled by the CC were adopted by the Commission for Exceptional Situations and solutions thus existed. The CC’s judgment underlines the necessity of ensuring parliamentary control, including in crisis periods.
Igor Boțan said the CC judges prepared well before examining the challenges filed by the opposition MPs and independent MP Alexandr Oleinic. Such a conclusion derives from the questions that were put during the debates. The CC based all its arguments on the challenge lodged by MP Oleinic. “I think that if Mister Oleinic hadn’t gone to the Constitutional Court, the other challenges wouldn’t have probably deserved to be taken into account as the Court’s judgment is actually based on Mister Oleinic’s challenge concerning the procedure for assuming responsibility by the Government”.
The expert also said that following such a situation, society should understand that during a state of emergency, all the elements should work in unison for the crisis to be overcome. “But this does not mean that we should not look into the future and that the democratic procedures should be ignored. When the Government has all the instruments to take all the measures to support the population and businesses, such aspects as those to which the Constitutional Court referred should not appear,” stated Igor Boțan.
The debate “Assumption of responsibility by the Government: controversies, effects, solutions” was the 128th installment of the series of debates “Developing political culture through public debates” that are supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
