RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MOLODOV

of January 13, 2006 No. 1

About approval of the Report on implementation of the constitutional jurisdiction in 2005

Name of the Republic of Moldova

Constitutional court in structure:

Victor PUSKAS is chairman, the judge-speaker

Alina YANUCHENKO is judge

Mircha of the SOUTH - the judge

To Dumitr PULBERE - the judge

Elena SAFALERU is judge

Ion VASILATI is judge with the assistance of Galina Pankratova, the secretary of meeting, the head of the Secretariat Victor Russu, based on Art. 10 and Art. 23 of the h. (2) the Law on the Constitutional court, Art. 5 of the item i) and Art. 80 of the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction the Report on implementation of the constitutional jurisdiction in 2005 considered in plenary meeting.

Being guided by provisions of Art. 26 of the Law on the Constitutional court, Art. 61 of the h. (1) and Art. 62 of the item f) the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction, the Constitutional court DECIDES:

1. Approve the Report on implementation of the constitutional jurisdiction in 2005 with appendices which are report component.

2. Send the report to Parliament, the President of the Republic of Moldova, the Government and the Supreme council of magistracy.

3. This resolution is final and together with the report is published in "Monitorul Oficial al Republicii Moldova".

Approved by the Resolution of the Constitutional court of January 13, 2006, No. 1

The report on implementation of the constitutional jurisdiction in 2005

I. STATISTICAL DATA OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL JURISDICTION IN 2005

Last year 32 addresses with request about control of constitutionality of regulations (15 laws, 4 orders of the Government and one resolution of Parliament), one address - about giving interpretation of the Constitution, 2 addresses - about review of the Constitution were brought into the Constitutional court. Also 2 addresses from 27 provided in 2004 are considered.

Deputies of Parliament provided 17 addresses. The special parliamentary commission made inquiry about recognition valid election of the president of the Republic of Moldova. The group of 44 deputies and the Government provided bills on change of Art. 24 of the h for making the conclusion. (3) Constitutions. 2 addresses arrived from parliamentary lawyers, 3 addresses about exceptional case of illegality - from the Highest trial chamber, one address - from the Attorney-General and 6 representations - from Central Election Commission about confirmation of election results of Parliament of the Republic of Moldova and about recognition of 10 mandates of the deputy of Parliament.

From 13 regulations subjected to the constitutional control were recognized 10 unconstitutional and 3 - constitutional. Unconstitutional 18 precepts of law and constitutional - 5 precepts of law are acknowledged.

The constitutional court accepted 25 resolutions, including 11 resolutions on the questions which are within the functional competence of court.

Two conclusions are drawn: under the bill on change of Art. 24 of the h. (3) Constitutions and about confirmation of election results of Parliament.

Determination and the resolution stopped two productions.

13 addresses, including 2 addresses - determinations are not accepted to consideration on the merits.

2 special opinions under the resolution accepted by the Constitutional court are stated.

2 representations are directed to parliament.

For January 1, 2006 there were unconsidered 3 addresses.

(Appendices N1-4)

1.1. Art. 135 of the h. (1) item and) Constitutions

(Control of constitutionality of the laws and resolutions of Parliament)

January 25, 2005 The constitutional court recognized constitutional provisions of Art. 5 of the h. (1) the item е) and Art. 17 of the Law N289-XV of July 22, 2004 "About temporary disability benefits and other benefits of social insurance" (the Resolution N 31).

According to the parliamentary lawyer who provided two addresses under this law, the benefit for each child shall be single irrespective of, are insured or not parents.

In the resolution the Constitutional court emphasized that the right to benefits of social insurance is performed through the state system of social insurance in case of approach of risks against which person was insured by vyplachivaniye of certain fees.

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