The Constitutional Court’s decision on neutrality cannot be called historic and is suitable to a number of political players from Chisinau, director of the Institute of Political Sciences and International Relations of the Romanian Academy, stated in the program “Place for dialogue” on the public station Radio Moldova, IPN reports.
“It would have been a historic decision if the CC had interpreted the article on neutrality in the same was as it interpreted Article 13 of the Constitution. Otherwise, it is a decision that suits many players and distresses no one, except for those who submitted the challenge and expected another interpretation, probably the modification of this article,” said Dungaciu.
He also said that the CC’s interpretation about entry into military organizations is also irrelevant. “The CC said the Republic of Moldova can join different military organizations if it is attacked. But the Republic of Moldova has been already attacked, by the Russian Federation. I’m sure that no one will even try to politically use this decision, in the current conditions,” stated the expert.
Dungaciu considers the CC’s decision will change nothing in relation to Transnistria. “Nothing was said about Transnistria. Let’s be serious. This decision will not affect the games. Nothing will change,” he noted.
On May 2, the Constitutional Court decided that the country’s neutrality does not exclude cooperation with military alliances for the purpose of strengthening Moldova’s defense capacities, while the presence of Russian military troops on the left side of the Nistru violates the constitutional norms on independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and permanent neutrality.
The CC was asked by Liberals Mihai Ghimpu, Valeriu Munteanu, Gheorghe Brega and Corina Fusu to interpret Article 11 of the Constitution, which refers to permanent neutrality.
