of July 18, 2008
According to the address about interpretation of the item and) h. (1) Art. 141 of the Constitution
Constitutional court in structure:
To Dumitr PULBERE - the chairman, the judge-speaker
Alina YANUCHENKO is judge
Elena SAFALERU is judge
Valeria SHTERBETS is judge
with the assistance of Victoria Botnaryuk-Trelya, the secretary of meeting, having considered the address based on Art. 44 of the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction is preliminary, established:
On June 24, 2008 the deputy of Parliament Vladimir Filat appealed to the Constitutional court with request about interpretation of the item and) h. (1) Art. 141 of the Constitution.
According to the item and) h. (1) Art. 141 of the Constitution the initiative of review of the Constitution can proceed from at least than 200 000 citizens of the Republic of Moldova having the right to choose. Citizens from whom the initiative of review of the Constitution proceeds shall represent at least a half of administrative and territorial units of the second level, in each of which at least 20 000 signatures in support of this initiative shall be collected.
The author of the address considers that these provisions contain semantic discrepancy which does them inapplicable, violating, thus, constitutional right of citizens to initiate review of the Constitution. In his opinion, in the conditions of the new administrative-territorial device the constitutional regulations on collection in support of initiative of review of the Constitution at least 20 000 signatures in each of at least a half of administrative and territorial units of the second level cannot be realized. So, after the administrative-territorial reform of 2003 performed based on the Law N 764-XV of December 27, 2001 in some administrative and territorial units of the second level the number of citizens with voting power does not reach 20 000.
Having considered the address, the Constitutional court recognized that it cannot be accepted to consideration on the merits on the following bases.
Interpretation of the constitutional provisions is intended to exclude ambiguity, to clear up content, to designate the legal principles containing in these provisions, to provide single and correct understanding of content and their authentic sense. Need of interpretation shall be confirmed with essence of the legal problem which resulted from lack of uniform nature of the constitutional regulations.
The essence of the address provided by the deputy of Parliament consists in discrepancy between the constitutional regulation providing that in each of at least a half of administrative and territorial units of the second level at least 20 000 signatures in support of initiative of review of the Constitution, and provisions of the Law N 764-XV of December 27, 2001 on the administrative-territorial device of the Republic of Moldova shall be collected.
The constitutional court considers that the item and) h. (1) Art. 141 of the Constitution does not contain ambiguities, inaccuracies or ambiguities and that the will of the legislator is stated accurately.
Official interpretation is imperative in cases when uncertainty of the constitutional regulations is caused by specific situation, and this uncertainty cannot be resolved by means of other procedure.
The question which is brought up in the address is within the competence of the legislator and is subject to permission by change of the constitutional regulation.
Proceeding from stated, being guided by provisions of Art. 26 of the h. (1) Law on the Constitutional court, Art. 61 of the h. (3) and Art. 64 of the Code of the constitutional jurisdiction,
The constitutional court DETERMINED:
1. Refuse acceptance to consideration on the merits of the address about interpretation of the item and) h. (1) Art. 141 of the Constitution.
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".
Chairman of the Constitutional court
To Dumitr Pulbere
Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info
Database include more 50000 documents. You can find needed documents using search system. For effective work you can mix any on documents parameters: country, documents type, date range, teams or tags.
More about search system
If you cannot find the required document, or you do not know where to begin, go to Help section.
In this section, we’ve tried to describe in detail the features and capabilities of the system, as well as the most effective techniques for working with the database.
You also may open the section Frequently asked questions. This section provides answers to questions set by users.