The foreign players have nothing to do with the conflict between the presidential administration and Parliament, which expert Igor Boțan describes as behavioral induction. He reminded that the divergences appeared after the first round of consultations with the parliamentary groups, after which President Maia Sandu reached the conclusion that no parliamentary group wants a Government to be voted in and they all want snap parliamentary elections. This was the beginning and what influenced the further behavior of the presidential administration in this conflict, the standing expert of IPN’s project said in the public debates held by IPN.
The expert noted the CC clearly said that the period of 90 days during which a Government could have been formed expired as the CC’s case law specifies that no factor is taken into account after the period of 90 days and Parliament should be dissolved. “The CC combined two factors so as to respect the own case law. If the CC had ruled in favor of Parliament, Moldova would have experienced a much more dangerous crisis that would have gone against the Court’s case law of 2013, which says that a Government cannot be interim endlessly. I consider this situation is a compromise one and the CC provided a solution to a situation that didn’t exist earlier: two failed attempts to vote in a Government and three months of the start of the crisis,” said Igor Boțan.
As to the alleged attacks on the Court, including by the protest, Igor Boțan said the problem resides in the people’s perception that depends on how the CC communicates with society. For example, in the case of the Decision of April 15, it should have explained the difference form this and the similar Decision of 2019 and the current one.
According to the expert, those who attacked the Court did it for political reasons. “They are now building their campaign and electoral message on the fact that the CC is at someone’s beck and call. If the CC judges were named for a six-year term, they hold this term throughout the period if they do not commit crimes and are not caught red-handed,” said Igor Boțan, noting the Decision of April 15 and those of April 27 and 28 are in accordance with the Constitution and the case law of the Court that was built in time.
As to the people’s perception of the recent events, the expert said society is divided and confused. “The people wonder: How could the CC rule in favor of the Party of Socialists that insisted on snap elections through the Government’s resignation and even provided arguments, but in a month started to insist on a parliamentary majority that would govern the county? The ordinary people do not understand this and do not understand why the Court should rule in favor of those who resort to stratagems. We see that the Socialists struggled, resigned themselves to the situation, entered the election campaign and now started to accuse the West, NATO of involvement. We realize that these are shows as the Socialists knew the fate of their approaches, but now we see that they reap the harvest of what they sowed: have a campaign, prepared messages,” stated Igor Boțan.
The public debate “About state of emergency in the country and at the Constitutional Court: motives, players, solutions” is the 184th installment of IPN’s project “Developing political culture through public debates” that is implemented with support from the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
