Press Release
on the organization of the debate “The relationship between the branches of government under the new circumstances”. Developing Political Culture through Public Debates”. Public debates series held by the news agency IPN in its conference room with the support of the German Foundation “Hanns Seidel”
Held on January 30, debate 69 brought together the following speakers: Ion Ceban, adviser and Press Secretary for President Igor Dodon; Maxim Lebedinschi, presidential adviser; Anatolie Zagorodnîi, deputy chair of Parliament’s Legal Commission; Nicolae Eşanu, Deputy Minister of Justice; Rodica Secrieru, Secretary General of the Constitutional Court; and Ion Dron, president of the Center for Monitoring Public Authorities.
Why this subject and why this format?
This format – because it brings together representatives from all three branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial, but also representatives of civil society.
This subject – because it seems to be the hottest topic in the last 2 or 3 weeks and it could further increase in intensity in the future, which might result in serious social unrest and street protests, with or without violence. To avoid this, it is crucial for the branches of government to communicate among them and involve society in these discussions as well.
The participants in the debate argued when all the provisions of the Constitution are observed, there should be no blockages between the branches of power. The representatives of some of the state institutions consider the President has bigger legitimacy when he is elected by the people, while those of other institutions think the powers of the Head of State remain the same, even if the method of election was modified and this fact does not reduce the legitimacy and does not give greater legitimacy to one of the powers.
Ion Ceban, the trustworthy person of President Igor Dodon, said the Head of State, from legal viewpoint, is the person with the biggest legitimacy, including because this was elected by direct vote, by a large number of voters. Attempts are now being made to limit the powers of the President, including by the initiative concerning the State Guard and Protection Service, which now is no longer under the President’s management. Igor Dodon was elected because he implemented the electoral program that he presented to the people and what he said in the election campaign was within the law. The presidential administration wants the relations between the powers of the state to be legitimate.
Anatolie Zagorodnyi, deputy chairman of the Parliament’s commission for appointments and immunities, said the majority of voters include not only those who supported the current President, but also those who argued for direct elections and these were instituted by the Constitutional Court and such a move was backed by most of the MPs. The elections took place and the people chose their President. It was known from the start what powers the President has, while the candidates, especially those who reached the runoff elections, said they will dissolve Parliament. This is a lie told to the people because the President does not have such powers. The current President promised the voters things that he cannot do if he does not enjoy the support of a parliamentary majority. The Head of State should have a dialogue with the Government and parliamentary alliance so as to discuss his proposals and start to implement them. But Igor Dodon from the very beginning said he will be in opposition to the government.
Maxim Lebedinski, adviser to the President on legal matters and international relations and the President’s representative in the relations with the Government and Parliament, said that in the meeting with journalists, Igor Dodon called on the Government and Parliament to unite within a platform so as to solve the existing problems. Also then, the President requested reciprocal inter-institutional respect, regardless of personal sympathies. A President elected by the people has greater legitimacy than the Government because this has the power given by the people. The President is the one who is to sensitize to or block particular actions, if they are not in the people’s interests. The Head of State is not a power in the state, but is a mediator between the other powers.
Deputy Minister of Justice Nicolae Esanu, who specified that he states his personal opinion, said the powers of the President do not depend on his legitimacy or on the way this was chosen, either he was voted by 100% the people or by a majority of people. The mandate of the President is another problem as the Constitution provides that the Head of State must be apolitical and cannot be the representative of a political current. When this is elected to office, he must obey the legislation and must not promote the agenda of a party. Despite the existing questions, we now cannot speak about an institutional crisis.
Rodica Secrieru, secretary general of the Constitutional Court, said that if all the provisions of the Constitution are observed, blockages between the branches of the power should not exist. The President’s remit is rather related to the remit of the executive power. The Constitution stipulates that a person with the same legitimacy is elected. Therefore, in the case of Parliament and of the President, we cannot speak about bigger or lesser legitimacy. In the case of the President, the voice is greater, but this does not mean that the legislature’s legitimacy is smaller. At the same time, Parliament is elected by 100% of the votes, while the President by 50%+1 and the two institutions cannot be treated equally.
Rodica Secrieru also said that the Constitutional Court’s judgment of March 4, 2016 changed only the method of electing the Head of State, but didn’t create new conditions in which this mandate can exist. When the powers are represented by different parties, there is a political culture that envisions that the interest of society prevails, while the narrow political interests are left aside. The powers must abide by the Constitution, including the President, from the moment he is sworn in.
Ion Dron, chairman of the Center for Initiatives and Public Authorities Monitoring, said the presidential administration is used to promote party interests. There is particular rhetoric in the election campaign and there is different rhetoric when the person starts to serve in a state institution. The problem now resides in the fact that the President didn’t adjust his electoral promises to his duties. The presidential administration is used as a party instrument, including when the President paid a visit to Moscow, while the Government can be criticized for approving the composition of the delegation proposed by the Head of State. Debates will yet exist and the President, Prime Minister and Speaker of Parliament should sign publicly a pact to show a mature decision, not only to demonstrates their power.
The Agency published 7 news stories on the debate (see the English version of www.ipn.md): on 30.01.17, „Observance of Constitution ensures lack of blockages in relations between powers, IPN debate” - http://www.ipn.md/en/special/81836; „Presidential administration is used to promote party interests, IPN debate” - http://www.ipn.md/en/special/81838; „President must not accept everything parliamentary alliance suggests, Ion Ceban” - http://www.ipn.md/en/politica/81842; on 31.01.17, „President elected by people does not have bigger authority than Speaker of Parliament, Rodica Secrieru” - http://www.ipn.md/en/politica/81843; „Candidates who promised to dissolve Parliament lied, Anatolie Zagorodnyi” - http://www.ipn.md/en/politica/81844; „Government and President should reach consensus, Maxim Lebedinski” - http://www.ipn.md/en/politica/81845; „President’s powers do not depend on method by which this is elected, Nicolae Esanu” - http://www.ipn.md/en/politica/81846.
Valeriu Vasilica, director of IPN