The Constitutional Court, acting as part of Mr. Alexandru Tanase, President, Mr. Aurel BĂIEŞU, Mr. Igor DOLEA, Mr. Victor POPA, judges, with the participation of Mrs. Sadik Munteanu, Registrar, considering the appeal filed on December 15, 2015, recorded at the same time, examining preliminary referral referred to, taking into account the laws and proceedings, Acting on 16 December 2015 in closed session, Pronounce the following decision: in fact 1. December 15, 2015, deputies of the Parliament Mr. Igor Dodon, Bae and Adrian Ladani addressed a complaint to the Constitutional Court requesting interpretation of paragraph 2, the provisions of article 85. (2) of the Constitution.
A. reasons for referral 2. The authors of the referral provisions contained in interpretation calls art. 85 paragraph 4. (2) of the Constitution, by formulating the following questions: ' 1. the term of 45 days; 85 paragraph 4. (2) of the Constitution, may be decreased or increased by the President?
2. If so: what are the deadlines that require to be followed by the submission of candidature to the President as Prime Minister to prevent power-based impersonation in your State?
3. In the event that the President already violate the deadlines and procedure for the nomination of the candidate to the post of Prime Minister: a. What are the legal effects of such a breach for President?
b. Parliament has the right or is required to dismiss the President of the country for "usurping the power of the State"?
c. where it is required, then in what period must dismiss Parliament President for "usurping the power of the State"?
4. As a result of non-compliance by the Chairman of constitutional time limits for the submission of applications for the post of Prime Minister: a. What are the actions to be followed by it for re-entry into constitutionality?
b. the President shall retain the right of discretion of the lodging of applications first and for what period?
5. in the event of non-compliance in accordance within the terms of the constitutional President of submission of applications for the post of Prime Minister, does this affect the overall time limit of 3 months, after which the Chairman shall be obliged to dissolve Parliament?
6. it is necessary to respectively the expiry of 3 months for general dissolution of Parliament? "
B. relevant Legislation 3. The relevant provisions of the Constitution (Official Gazette, no. 1, 1994) are as follows: Article 85Dizolvarea Parliament ' (1) in the case of the inability of the Government or a training situation for three months, the President, after consulting parliamentary factions, may dissolve Parliament.
(2) the Parliament may be dissolved if a vote of confidence to form a new Government within 45 days after the first request, and only after rejection of at least two requests of investiture.
(3) In the course of a year, Parliament can be dissolved only once.
(4) Parliament may not be dissolved during the last six months of the Presidential term of Office, except as provided for in article 78 (5), nor during the State of emergency, siege or war. "
Article 98Învestitura "(1) after consulting parliamentary factions, the President of the Republic of Moldova designates a candidate for the post of Prime Minister.
(2) the candidate for the post of Prime Minister will be asked, within 15 days from designation, the vote of confidence of Parliament upon the work programme and the entire list of the Government.
(3) the work schedule and the list of the Government debating upon sitting in Parliament. This trust of the Government by a majority vote of the elected deputies.
(4) on the basis of the vote of confidence granted by the Parliament, the President of the Republic of Moldova appoints the Government.
In the authors ' Arguments AS a. referral to the 4. The authors assert that the referral under article 85, paragraph 3. (2) of the Constitution, for the dissolution of Parliament for two conditions: (1) compliance with a time limit of 45 days from a first presidential request to a Government and (2) rejection of at least two requests of investiture.
5. At the same time, the authors of the referral, the constitutional provisions do not expressly establish the consequences in the event that the President of the Republic of Moldova shall submit a bid for the post of Prime Minister within 45 days.
6. The authors of referral calls. interpretation 85 paragraph 4. (2) of the Constitution with a view to finding mandatory stages leading up to the dissolution of Parliament in case of impossibility of the formation of a Government as well as the consequences of non-compliance with them.
B. Assessment Of The Court 7. In the preliminary examination process of referral to the Court, please note the following.
8. One of the tasks of the Constitutional Court, in accordance with the provisions of article 135, paragraph 1. (1) letter b) of the Constitution, article 4 para. (1) letter b) of the law on the Constitutional Court and article 4 para. (1) (a). (b) constitutional jurisdiction) of the code, is the interpretation of the Constitution.
9. Order any interpretations of constitutional norms is to ensure the proper perception of the unity of content and their authentic meaning. The official interpretation is imperative in cases where uncertainty cannot be resolved through another judicial procedure.
10. Given the importance of interpreting constitutional norms, the Constitutional Court deals with complaints of this nature with a particular requirement. They can be accepted for the examination only if the constitutional disposition, whose interpretation is sought, is uncertain, ambiguous or incomplete, and if the Court has not been called previously.
11. the Court finds that the interpretation is subject to the provisions contained in article 85 (2) of the Constitution.
12. Thus, the appeal concerns the time limits in which the President of the Republic of Moldova is to designate the candidate for Prime Minister, and in particular the validity term of 45 days, and the consequences nedesemnării the candidate within that period.
13. the Court noted that according to paragraph 1 of article 85. (2) of the Constitution: "the President may dissolve the Parliament if a vote of confidence to form a new Government within 45 days after the first request, and only after rejection of at least two requests of investiture.".
14. the court notice that article 85 paragraph 4. (2) of the Constitution were interpreted by decision No. 30 of October 1, 2013.
15. The decision referred to, the Court noted that the period of 45 days, held at paragraphs 2 and 3 of article 85. (2) there is one distinct from the term of 3 months, contained in paragraph 2. (1) of the same article, the first being absorbed by the latter.
16. Thus, the Court established that the term of 3 months is a general term for the formation of the Government, which starts to run from the date of the occurrence of the circumstances that have caused the need for the formation of a new Government, regardless of the training procedures of triggering new Government and/or on the completion of the procedures provided for in paragraph 2 of article 85 of the Constitution. 45-day term is the term in which the President can dissolve Parliament if it was rejected at least one additional premium TCF candidates.
17. Moreover, in its judgment No. 30 of October 1, 2013, the Court concluded that, if the Parliament failed to învestească the Government within three months, President of the Republic is obliged to dissolve the Parliament, thus the discretionary right of the President to dissolve Parliament is turning into an obligation imposed by the will of the legislator constituent.
18. At the same time, the Court noted that, whereas the constitutional provisions do not expressly indicate the period for which the President is expected to make the first nomination of the candidate to the post of Prime Minister under the general term of 3 months, the President to take into account the constitutional deadline and put at the disposal of the candidate appointed to the position of Prime Minister to ask Parliament for a vote of confidence (15 days-article 98 para. (2) of the Constitution).
19. the Court observes that the authors have requested the referral interpretation of a multitude of assumptions in the light of the constitutional provisions relating to time limits in which the head of State to nominate the candidacy as Prime Minister. However, the authors did not bring the matter before the relevant arguments which would lead the Court to appraise the object of referral as being distinct from the one examined previously under its jurisprudence, which denotes the recurrent nature of the referral.
20. In the light of the above, the Constitutional Court stresses that the provisions of paragraph (2) of article 85 of the Constitution have been the object of interpretation in Constitutional Court jurisdiction and cannot be accepted for review.
For these reasons, pursuant to article 26 of the law on the Constitutional Court, articles 61 para. (3) and 64 of the code of constitutional jurisdiction, the Constitutional Court D E C I D E: 1. It is hereby declared inadmissible the appeal of deputies in Parliament, Igor Dodon, Bae and Adrian Ladani concerning interpretation of article 85 (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova.
2. this decision is final, cannot be subject to any appeal, shall enter into force on the date of its adoption and shall be published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova.
The PRESIDENT of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Alexandru Tanase