DETERMINATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

of July 30, 2002 No. 4

About suit abatement about control of constitutionality of syntagma "except the prices of socially important goods" from Items 2, 3 and 4 Orders of the Government No. 547 of August 4, 1995 "About measures for streamlining and state regulation of the prices (rates)" and appendices No. 3 to this resolution

Constitutional court in structure:

Victor PUSKAS is chairman, the judge-speaker

Mihai KOTOROBAY is judge

Mircha of the SOUTH - the judge

Konstantin LOZOVANU is judge

To Dumitr PULBERE - the judge-speaker

Elena SAFALERU is judge with the assistance of Corinna of Pop, the secretary of meeting, Galina Kirinchuk, the permanent representative of the Government in the Constitutional court, in the absence of the author of the address invited in accordance with the established procedure, being guided by Art. 135 of h (1) the item and) Constitutions, Art. 4 of h (1) the item and) the Law on the Constitutional court, Art. 4 of h (1) the item and) and Art. 16 of the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction, considered in open plenary meeting case on control of constitutionality of syntagma "except the prices of socially important goods" from Items 2, 3 and 4 Orders of the Government N547 of August 4, 1995 "About measures for streamlining and state regulation of the prices (rates)" and the Appendices N3 to this resolution.

The address of the deputy of Parliament Mark Tkachuk provided on April 18, 2002 according to Art. 24 and 25 of the Law on the Constitutional court, Art. 38 and 39 of the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction formed the basis for consideration of the case.

The address is accepted determination of the Constitutional court of May 20, 2002 to consideration on the merits and is included in the agenda.

During preliminary consideration of the address the Constitutional court requested the points of view of Parliament, the President of the Republic of Moldova, the Government, the Prosecutor General's Office, the Ministry of Justice, the Highest trial chamber, the Ministry of Economics, the Industry ministry, the Ministry of ecology, construction and development of the territories, the Ministry of Agriculture and the food industry.

Having considered case papers, having heard the message of judges-speakers, the Constitutional court established:

On August 4, 1995 the Government accepted the Resolution N547 "About Measures for Streamlining and State Regulation of the Prices (Rates)" * (further - the Resolution N 547).

Item 2 of the resolution prudusmatrivat that according to the Law N 342-XIII of December 22, 1994 "About the government budget for 1995" ** to the physical persons and legal entities occupied with business activity irrespective of type of property and form of business, is allowed, since January 1, 1995, when forming free retail prices on goods to apply the free trade allowance, except the prices of socially important goods.

Item 3 of the resolution establishes procedure for pricing for the socially important goods determined by the Law on the government budget for 1995 (according to appendix N 3), and dry mixes for baby food.

The item 4 of the resolution obliges all legal entities and physical persons in case of realization of socially important goods to reflect in invoices free selling price of acquisition and the trade allowance, and in case of realization of construction materials - and transportation expenses in the territory of the republic.

The appendix N3 to the Resolution N547 contains list of the socially important goods realized at free prices using the trade allowance in the amount of 20% to free selling price.

According to the author of the address, having accepted the Resolution N 547, the Government exceeded the authority and broke Art. provisions 6, 9 and 126 Constitutions about separation of the authorities, property and market economy.

The author considers that provisions of the Resolution N547 were subject to application only to the current of 1995 - the period of operation of the relevant law on the budget.

On June 27, 2002 the author withdrew the address to the Constitutional court, having made inquiry about suit abatement.

According to Art. 41 of h (1) and Art. 60 of the item and) the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction the address can be withdrawn by the applicant at any stage of consideration of the case, and in case of withdrawal of the address the Constitutional court makes the decision on suit abatement.

Based on Art. 140 of the Constitution, Art. 26 of the Law on the Constitutional court, Art. 60 of the item and) and Art. 64 of the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction the Constitutional court DETERMINES:

1. Stop proceeedings about control of constitutionality of syntagma "except the prices of socially important goods" from Items 2, 3 and 4 Orders of the Government N547 of August 4, 1995 "About measures for streamlining and state regulation of the prices (rates)" and the appendices N3 to this resolution.

2. This determination is final, is not subject to appeal, becomes effective from the date of acceptance and is published in "Monitorul Oficial al Republicii Moldova".

____________________________

* M.O., 1995, N53-54, of Art. 426.

** M.O., 1995, N 10, Art. 99.

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info