The conflict between the presidential administration and Parliament is political in character and has repercussions for a number of areas. There are no permanent winners in politics. The presidential administration said it clearly that the parliamentary majority is toxic and covers corruption. The parliamentary majority lays emphasis on the fight against the pandemic, while the presidential administrator places emphasis on the fight against corruption. This conflict between the presidential administration and Parliament can be solved if the legislation clearly defines the duties of the presidential administration, of Parliament, including of a parliamentary majority, Ion Duminica, doctor of political sciences, of the Cultural Heritage Institute, stated in IPN’s public debate “Constitutional Court’s judgment: what happened and what will happen in Moldova?.
According to Ion Duminica, the CC analyzed the formal part and took a decision abiding by the provisions of Article 85 of the Constitution, but the High Court didn’t go into details, namely that there is a majority in Parliament. “On the one hand, the investing of a Government was mimicked. On the other hand, the negotiations between the presidential administration and the parliamentary groups were mimicked. This mimicking of political actions leads to a political crisis. For the Republic of Moldova, the current constitutional provisions are not enough. If the presidential administration and Parliament realize the repercussions of this dispute, including on society, the conflict between the two institutions can be resolved. We need to finalize the constitutional system, the political system or we will have the same situation in the next legislature of Parliament,” stated the doctor of politician sciences.
In another development, Ion Duminica said that confidence in the state institutions is close to the lowest limit and opinion polls that showed the people have the biggest confidence in the church confirmed this. “All the state institutions lost credibility during 30 years of the declaring of the independence of the Republic of Moldova. These institutions should be reset, while the presidential administration and Parliament should come to terms. The current conflict between the presidential administration and Parliament is a struggle for power and this struggle always existed,” he stated.
“The political activity should not be based only on the decisions of the Constitutional Court. A dialogue platform should be initiated for the future political class and this dialog should involve not only the parliamentary parties, but also the extraparliamentary parties, national and international experts, officials of the Constitutional Court, representatives of civil society. As a result of this dialog, the politicians should come up with solutions so that there is political stability between the presidential administration and Parliament. The people want the living standards to be improved.”
The public debate “Constitutional Court’s judgment: what happened and what will happen in Moldova?” is the 183rd installment of IPN’s project “Developing Political Culture through Public Debates” that is supported by Germany’s Hanns Seidel Foundation.
