The Constitutional Court, acting as part of Mr. Alexandru Tanase, President, Mr. Aurel BĂIEŞU, Mr. Igor DOLEA, Mr. Victor PALMER, Mr. Zadrahimi, judges, with the participation of Mrs. Sadik Munteanu, Registrar, taking into account the appeal lodged on 4 October 2016, recorded at the same time, examining the admissibility of the referral, taking into account the laws and proceedings, Acting on 12 October the Council room 2016 the next decision, a decision: in fact 1. 4 October 2016 Igor Dodon, Vladimir Batrincea as Sandy, and Vasile Bae, deputies in Parliament, they addressed a complaint to the Constitutional Court, requesting constitutionality-following acts: Government decision nr. 1081 dated 26 September 2016 employment liability on the Bill relating to redress and resolution of banks and the Act on redress and resolution of banks;
-Government Decree No. 1082 of 26 September 2016 employment liability on the draft law on modification and completion of some legislative acts and the law on modification and completion of some legislative acts;
-Government Decree No. 1083 of 26 September 2016 to employing the liability on the Bill in respect of central depository of securities and the law concerning central depository of securities;
-Government Decree No. 1085 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability on the draft law on the issue of State bonds for enforcement by the Ministry of Finance of the payment obligations arising out of State guarantees, nr. 807 17 November 2014 and nr. 101 in 1 April 2015 and the law on the issuance of State bonds for enforcement by the Ministry of Finance of the payment obligations arising out of State guarantees, nr. 807 17 November 2014 and nr. 101 in 1 April 2015;
-Government Decree No. 1086 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability on the draft law for the modification and completion of the State budget law for the year 2016 nr. 154 from July 1, 2016 and the law on modification and completion of the State budget law for the year 2016 nr. 154 from July 1, 2016;
-Government Decree No. 1087 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability on the Bill for the amendment of the law on State social insurance budget for the year 2016 nr. 156 of 1 July 2016 and the law on modification of the law on State social insurance budget for the year 2016 nr. 156 of 1 July 2016;
-Government Decree No. 1088 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability upon the draft law on modification of the law on compulsory insurance funds healthcare for the year 2016 nr. 157 of 1 July 2016 and the law on modification of the law on compulsory insurance funds healthcare for the year 2016 nr. 157 of 1 July 2016.
A. reasons for referral 2. Reasons for referral, as were its authors, can be summarized as follows.
3. During the meeting of 26 September 2016, Government of Moldova, in accordance with article 10. 1061 of the Constitution, and assumed responsibility for the package of laws indicated supra.
4. The decisions of the Government on assuming responsibility, and draft laws assumed have been published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova nr. 329-336 of 27 September 2016. On the same day, the Prime Minister presented himself in front of the Plenary and presented the package of draft laws on Government and undertook the responsibility of.
5. The constitutional term of 3 days, a group of 37 lawmakers filed a motion of censure against the Government.
6. The permanent Bureau of the Parliament ruled that the motion of censure to be considered during the meeting of Parliament dated 3 October 2016.
7. At the plenary session were presented only 47 deputies, and the President of the sitting, Mr Vladimir Vitiuc, found lack of quorum and stated the motion as being rejected.
8. The authors claim that the contested acts referral in breach of articles 1, 2, 6, 7, 20, 23, 46, 54, 58, 66, 73, 96 and 106/1 of the Constitution.
B. relevant Legislation 9. The relevant provisions of the Constitution (republished in the Official Gazette, no. 2016, 78, art. 140) are as follows: Article 6Separaţia and cooperation of powers "in the Republic of the legislative, Executive and judicial powers are separate and cooperate in the exercise of their prerogatives under the Constitution."


Article 66Atribuţiile "Parliament has the following attributions: the laws, judgments) and motions;
b) declaring referendums;
c) interpretations and ensure the legislative unity of regulations throughout the country;
d) approves the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the State;
(e) approve military doctrine);
f) exercising parliamentary control over the executive power in the ways and within the limits provided for by the Constitution;
g) ratify, denounce, suspend and abrogate the action of international treaties concluded by the Republic of Moldova;
h) approves the budget of the State and exercising control over him;
I) exercising control over the granting of loans, State economic aid and other foreign States, awarded upon conclusion of agreements concerning State loans and credits from foreign sources;
j) chooses and appoints State officials where provided by law;
k) approve the orders and medals of the Republic of Moldova;
partial mobilization declared it) or General;
m) declares a State of emergency, martial law and war;
n) initiates research and examination of any issues that relate to the interests of society;
a) suspends the activity of local public administration bodies, in cases stipulated by law;
p) adopt Amnesty;
r) meets other duties established by the Constitution and laws. "


Article 1061Angajarea "Government liability (1) the Government may undertake its responsibility in front of the Parliament on a programme, a general policy statement, or a Bill.
(2) the Government shall be dismissed if the motion of censure submitted within 3 days of the program, the Declaration of general policy or draft law, passed under the terms of article 106.
(3) if the Government has not been dismissed according to paragraph (2), the Bill presented shall be considered as adopted, and the program or the Declaration of General politics becomes obligatory for the Government.   
the expression of people's opinion on the selection of the legislative body. "

In the authors ' Arguments AS a. referral to the 10. The authors describe the budgetary changes referral operated as abusive under the conditions in which the citizens were forced to cover budgetary solidarity a hole which appeared due to bank fraud.
11. in addition, the authors invoke the absence of emergency the adoption procedure of the commitment of Government liability, once some of the laws passed were passed all stages of the legislative procedure and were voted by Parliament in first reading on 29 July 2016.
12. With reference to the condition imposed by the Constitutional Court, namely the immediate application of the laws adopted by the procedure of the commitment to the responsibility, the authors pointed out that the law stipulated by decision No. 1083 contains tools for immediate effect. Similarly, they state that laws targeting the banking and finance, securities market, the budget, and therefore laws circumscribes the same domain.
13. With reference to the procedure of adoption, the authors noted that according to article 106/1 of the Constitution, the Government shall be dismissed if the motion of censure submitted within 3 days of the program, the Declaration of general policy or draft law, passed under the terms of article 106. Thus, under the rule, the Parliament was obliged to debate survived a no in plenary meeting. Or, in the absence of the quorum cannot be considered censorship that survived was debated.
B. Assessment Of Court 14. Examining the admissibility of the referral, the Court retains the following.
15. pursuant to paragraph 1 of article 135. (1) (a). the article of the Constitution). (1) (a). a) of the law on the Constitutional Court and to article 4 para. (1) (a). the constitutional jurisdiction of the code), referral to the constitutionality of laws relating to judgments of Government competence of the Constitutional Court.
16. Articles 25 lit. g) of the law on the Constitutional Court and 38 para. (1) (a). g) of the code of constitutional jurisdiction authorizing Deputy in Parliament with the right to refer the matter to the Constitutional Court.
17. the Court remember that constitutionality is the subject of several decisions of the Government which has undertaken the responsibility to draft laws, and laws passed by this procedure.
18. the Court finds that the authors of the referral considers that the contested acts are contrary to articles 1, 2, 6, 7, 20, 23, 46, 54, 58, 66, 73, 96 and 106/1 of the Constitution.
19. With reference to the allegation of articles 23, 46, 54, 66, 73 and 96 of the Constitution, the Court noted that the appeal does not include cogent arguments for breaching them.
20. Furthermore, the Court retains the lack of incidence of disputed article 20 of the Constitution, which guarantees "the free access to justice", and article 58 of the Constitution, which establishes the fundamental duty of citizens "to contribute financially to public expenditure".
21. With reference to the alleged violation of article 106/1 of the Constitution, the Court noted that, according to paragraph 1 of this article, the Government may undertake its responsibility in front of the Parliament on a programme, a general policy statement, or a Bill.
22. the Court shall retain that hiring a Government liability Bill represents a way for indirect legislative adoption of a law.
23. In Judgement No. 28 of 22 December 2011, referring to the commitment to the responsibility of the Government, the Court stated: "55. [P] the Government's liability engagement rocedure before Parliament is a peculiarity of the legislative procedure, whereby the Bill no longer follows the legislative procedure provided by Parliament's regulation, which is subject to a strict political debates, having as consequence the maintenance or the dismissal of the Government by withdrawing the confidence granted by the Parliament.
[...]
58. [P] rocedure itself bind the Government accountability to Parliament is a legal reality, does not affect the "monopoly of legislative Parliament" as long as this way of lawmaking is used under the conditions laid down in the basic law. The procedure does not preclude the Government from liability for engagement and cannot be used to rule out parliamentary control by initiating a motion of censure. What is this procedure excludes the constitutional debate of the Bill as it stands, however, this is not a result unconstitutional, as resulting from article 106/1 of the Constitution. "
24. In its previous case-law, the Court noted that the Government may commit the liability in respect of several draft laws at the same time, in order to achieve the public interest. The Court also noted that the Government's liability engagement, being a procedure that operates in extremis, when targeting a Bill, it must, by the subject of settlement, contain provisions clearly circumscribes just a single domain (HCC nr. 11 of 13 may 2015, HCC nr. 2 of 2 March 2016).
25. In the context of those set out above, the Court shall retain the right of the Government to engage the liability of several draft laws. At the same time, the Court finds that, although laws passed regulating the State budget, social insurance budget and health insurance, banking and the securities market, in essence, the subject of regulatory laws challenged the State field.
26. With reference to the procedure of adoption, the Court finds that the package of laws on which the Government has engaged the responsibility of the meeting of 26 September 2016 was published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova on 27 September 2016. Also on September 27, the Prime Minister presented the plenary draft laws over which the Government has engaged the responsibility, and the constitutional deadline of 3 days a group of 37 Deputies submitted a motion of censure against the Government.
27. the Court noted that article 106/1 of the Constitution states that the Government shall be dismissed if the motion of censure submitted within 3 days of the program, the Declaration of general policy or draft law, passed under the terms of article 106. If the Government was not dismissed, the Bill presented shall be considered as adopted, and the program or the Declaration of General politics becomes obligatory for the Government.

28. Thus, with regard to political debate concerning the dismissal of the Government by withdrawing the confidence granted to the plenary session of the Parliament, in its jurisprudence, the Court declared unconstitutional a law passed by engaging the liability on the grounds that it was submitted to the Parliament Secretariat only Government decision on hiring liability with enclosed, without this act of political responsibility in the plenary session. In this respect, the Court held that it did not comply with the constitutional norms of employment responsibility "before" Parliament (HCC No. 28 dated 22 December 2011).
29. Moreover, in the situation mentioned above the Bill which the Government assumed liability has not been published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova. In this respect, owing to the need to ensure transparency in Government Act, the Court has noted that, in the procedure of employment of Government accountability to Parliament, to be published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova not only the text of the Government itself, but also the entire text of draft laws which constitute the subject-matter of this proceeding.
30. In the present case, the Court notes that on 27 September 2016 draft laws over which the Government has engaged the responsibility of the work have been published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova, and the Prime Minister has forwarded it to plenary.
31. On the same day, a group of 37 lawmakers filed a motion of censure against the Government. The Court observes that Parliament's plenary session to consider a no-confidence motion was set for 3 October 2016. At the same time, being present at the meeting only 47 deputies, it could not be considered deliberative. In this regard, note that Court were not met the quorum required is considered to be an unsuccessful attempt to express the distrust in Government.
32. Moreover, the Court points out that, according to article 106 of the Constitution, the initiative for the expression of no confidence in the Government will be examined after 3 days from the date of referral to Parliament. Thus, regardless of whether Parliament has expressed or not explicitly vote to the initiative for the expression of no confidence shall be deemed exhausted upon expiry of this term.
33. In conclusion, the Court finds that the appeal does not meet the eligibility conditions for exercising the constitutionality and, therefore, cannot be accepted for examination.
For these reasons, in accordance with the provisions of article 26 para. (1) of the law on the Constitutional Court, articles 61 para. (3) and 64 of the code of constitutional jurisdiction, the Constitutional Court DECIDES: 1. To be declared inadmissible the appeal of Deputies Igor Dodon, Sandy, and Vasile Batrincea as Bae for notification constitutionality control:-the governmental decision nr. 1081 dated 26 September 2016 employment liability on the Bill relating to redress and resolution of banks and law No. 232 of 3 October 2016 concerning redress and resolution of banks;
-The governmental decision nr. 1082 of 26 September 2016 employment liability on the draft law on modification and completion of some legislative acts and law No. 233 of 3 October 2016 for the modification and completion of some legislative acts;
-The governmental decision nr. 1083 of 26 September 2016 to employing the liability on the Bill in respect of central depository of securities and the law No. 234 of 3 October 2016 concerning central depository of securities;
-The governmental decision nr. 1085 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability on the draft law on the issue of State bonds for enforcement by the Ministry of Finance of the payment obligations arising out of State guarantees, nr. 807 17 November 2014 and nr. 101 in 1 April 2015 and law No. 235 from 3 October 2016 on the issue of State bonds for enforcement by the Ministry of Finance of the payment obligations arising out of State guarantees, nr. 807 17 November 2014 and nr. 101 in 1 April 2015;
-The governmental decision nr. 1086 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability on the draft law for the modification and completion of the State budget law for the year 2016 nr. 154 from July 1, 2016 and law No. 236 of 3 October 2016 for the modification and completion of the State budget law for the year 2016 nr. 154 from July 1, 2016;
-The governmental decision nr. 1087 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability on the Bill for the amendment of the law on State social insurance budget for the year 2016 nr. 156 of 1 July 2016 and law No. 237 of 3 October 2016 for the modification of the law on State social insurance budget for the year 2016 nr. 156 of 1 July 2016;
-The governmental decision nr. 1088 of 26 September 2016 about hiring liability upon the draft law on modification of the law on compulsory insurance funds healthcare for the year 2016 nr. 157 of 1 July 2016 and law No. 238 of 3 October 2016 on the modification of the law on compulsory insurance funds for medical assistance for the year 2016 nr. 157 of 1 July 2016.
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