On behalf of the Republic of Moldova, 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. Ludmila Chihai, Registrar, considering the appeal filed on 21 November 2016 and recorded at the same time, examining the appeal referred to in public plenary, taking into account the laws and proceedings, Acting in the Council Chamber following the judgment, a decision: 1. The origin of the case lies the appeal relating to the Central Electoral Commission confirming election results November 13, 2016 and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova submitted to the Constitutional Court on 21 November 2016, pursuant to articles 79 paragraphs 1 and 2. (1) and 135 para. (1) (a). e) of the Constitution, 60 para. (2) and (3), 111 and 112 of the election code, "". (1) (a). e) of the law on the Constitutional Court and of the implementing regulation. (1) (a). 38 e) and paragraph 3. (3) of the code of constitutional jurisdiction.
2. On 13 December 2016, candidate of the opposition lodged Maia Sandu in Constitutional Court against the decision of the Central Election Commission regarding election results summed up for the post of President of the Republic of Moldova, calling its findings and results will make the cancellation of the second round.
3. In the plenary session of the Court the appeal was supported by Mrs. Alina Russu and Mr. Veaceslav Brooke, President and Secretary of the Central Electoral Commission. Also attended by representatives of electoral contestants ': the part of Mr. Igor Dodon, candidate-Mr. Vladimir Turcan, Basil and Vadim Faam Bae; on behalf of Mrs. Maia Sandu, candidate-Mr. S. Lara.
CONTEXT 4. On March 4, 2016, the Constitutional Court decision No. 7, by which it declared unconstitutional certain provisions of the law No. 1115-XIV of 5 July 2000 on the modification and completion of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, in the coming Presidential election by Parliament, by a vote of 3/5 of the number of deputies elected. Judgment of the Court endorsed the method of electing the exclusive of the President of the Republic of Moldova, not its powers, as amended by the same Act, within the meaning of the ruling regime's parliamentary Setup.
5. Thus, following the adoption of the said judgment, was returned at the election of the President of the Republic of Moldova by universal, equal, direct, secret and freely expressed by citizens in the framework of a parliamentary Republic.
In FACT 6. On 23 March 2016 mandate the President of the Republic of Moldova. By decision No. 55 in 1 April 2016, pursuant to articles 78 and 98 of the Constitution para. (3) of the electoral code, Parliament set presidential elections for Oct. 30, 2016.
7. On 30 October 2016 presidential election took place. The ballot also attended 50.95 percent of citizens registered in the electoral roll, and thus reached the threshold of 1/3, it is necessary to validate the election.
8. On 2 November 2016, by decision No. 517, Central Electoral Commission found that none of the candidates obtains at least half of the votes of the voters participated in the election, which is why he ordered the Organization of the second round, the top two candidates in order of number of votes obtained in the first round: Igor Dodon (1) and (2), Maia Sandu.
9. On 13 November 2016 held the second round of presidential elections.
10. In summarising the results of the vote, the Central Election Commission has found that the greatest number of votes in the second round of elections was registered by the electoral contestants Igor Dodon, which is why it has been declared elected as President of the Republic of Moldova.
11. On 18 November 2016, through Decisions No. No. 571 572, the Central Electoral Commission has approved the report and the report on the results of the elections for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova of 30 October 2016, which were submitted to the Constitutional Court to confirm the results of the presidential elections/limits and validation of the mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
PERTINENT LEGISLATION. The relevant provisions of the Constitution (republished in the Official Gazette, no. 2016, 78, art. 140) are as follows: Article 38Dreptul of the right to vote and be elected "(1) the will of the people is the basis of State power That will be expressed through free elections held at regular intervals through universal suffrage, equal, direct, secret and freely expressed suffrage.
(2) the Moldovan citizens have the right to vote from the age of 18 years old until the voting day inclusively, except those placed under interdiction in the manner established by law.
(3) the right to be elected is guaranteed to Moldovan citizens with the right to vote, in accordance with the law. "


Article 78Alegerea of the President "(1) the President of the Republic of Moldova shall be elected by universal, equal, direct, secret and freely expressed suffrage.
(2) can be elected President of the Republic of Moldova citizens with voting rights who has 40 years old, resided or resides permanently in the territory of the Republic of Moldova for no less than 10 years and speaks the State language (3) Is declared elected the candidate who obtains the votes of at least half of the voters participated in the election.
(4) where none of the candidates obtains that majority, organised the second round between the top two candidates in order of number of votes obtained in the first round. It declared candidate who obtained the largest number of votes, provided that their number is greater than the number of votes cast against the candidate.
(6) the procedure for electing the President of the Republic of Moldova is determined by an organic law. "


Article 79Validarea of mandate and oath "(1) the outcome of elections for the post of President of the Republic of Moldova shall be validated by the Constitutional Court. […]”


Article 135Atribuţiile "[Constitutional Court] (1) the Constitutional Court: [...]
e) confirms the results of the choice [...] The President Of The Republic Of Moldova;
[…]”
13. The relevant provisions of the electoral code no. 1381-XIII of November 21, 1997 (reprinted in the Official Gazette, no. 2016, 277-287, art. 585) are as follows: Article 65Contestaţiile "(1) Voters and contestants can challenge the actions/inactions and decisions of electoral councils and bureaus and the actions/inactions of electoral contestants. Submission of the application to the Court must be preceded by prior disputes over the electoral body hierarchically superior body whose act is dispute, except for complaints relating to the exercise of the right to vote or to the administration of the elections to the electoral Office on election day.
(2) Appeals relating to the Organization and conduct of elections will be examined by electoral bodies, in accordance with their hierarchy. The detailed arrangements for the examination of complaints during the electoral period is approved by the Central Electoral Commission.
(3) Complaints concerning the electoral campaign by the broadcasters under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Moldova shall be examined by the audiovisual Coordinating Council in accordance with the provisions of the broadcasting code of the Republic of Moldova, and appeals to the mass media by shall be examined by the Court.
(4) the decisions of electoral bodies and of the electronic media watchdog CCA over complaints may be appealed in court.
(5) the notice of opposition shall contain a description of the facts relied on as evidence of the alleged breach, the legal basis, the requirements of the opposing party, the signature and the data from the identity of the person lodging the complaint. In the case of complaints concerning the decisions of electoral bodies, the burden lies with those bodies legality of sampling.
(6) Appeals relating to the financing of election campaigns is addressed to the Central Election Commission, in the case of political parties, electoral blocs and independent candidates in parliamentary elections and presidential election boards or, in the case of independent candidates in local elections. The examination of complaints relating to the financing of election campaigns of political parties shall not be subject to the limitation periods set out in art. 66-68. "


Article 66Depunerea review ' (1) the actions/inactions and decisions of electoral bodies, as well as actions/inactions contestants can be appealed to the electoral body within 3 calendar days from the date of committing the action/inaction identification or adoption judgment. The term deposit shall be calculated with effect from the day following the day on which it has been committed the action, inaction has been identified or has been adopted. […]
(3) Complaints concerning the actions and decisions of the Central Election Commission shall be submitted to the Court of appeal.
(4) Opposition electoral contestant may not be filed by a member of the electoral Council, but may be lodged by a representative of the competitor in the electoral body concerned or by a person empowered by the election by proxy.

(5) where the examination is not within the competence of the respective electoral body, the opposition, and materials attached to it to be forwarded for examination according to competence, urgently, within two calendar days from the date of its receipt. "


Article 67Examinarea review ' (1) the complaints relating to the actions and decisions of the Central Election Commission during the electoral period will be examined within 5 calendar days of the filing, but no later than election day.
(2) Appeals relating to the actions and decisions of the district electoral councils and bureaus of the polling station shall be examined within three calendar days of the filing, but no later than election day. Appeals regarding actions/inactions of electoral contestants shall be examined within 5 calendar days of the filing, but no later than election day. When examining complaints and disputes, electoral bodies/courts will give priority to those which relate to the registration of candidates and the correctness of voter lists.
(3) Appeals lodged with the courts on election day shall be examined on the same day, and appeals against the decision of the electoral body regarding election results tabulation and award of mandates will be examined by the Court together with the confirmation of legality and validation of mandates.
(4) the courts shall be organised so that appeals can be lodged with and examined without delay.
(4/1) Contestants can defend their interests in court when examining complaints concerning the actions/inactions and decisions of electoral bodies and actions/inactions contestants through her designated representative in accordance with art. 15 para. (1) and (5) Appeals lodged with the courts shall be examined in accordance with the provisions of the code of civil procedure and the law on administrative courts. "


Article 111Confirmarea the legality of elections "within 10 days after receiving the documents from the Central Electoral Commission, but no earlier than the final settlement by the courts of appeals submitted in accordance with procedures established by law, the Constitutional Court shall either confirm or not, by a notice, the legality of the elections."


Article 112Validarea the mandate of the President of the Republic of Moldova "(1) the Constitutional Court validates electoral results and confirms the election of a candidate, acting to be published immediately.
(2) pending the validation of mandate, the candidate elected to the position of President of the Republic of Moldova presents the Constitutional Court's confirmation that is not a member of any political party and does not meet any other public or private office. "


Article 115Alegerile void "If the Constitutional Court establishes that, in the election process and/or the counting of the votes, there have been violations of this code have affected election results, elections are declared null and void."
LAW 14. From the contents of the referral, the Court observes that it is aimed at confirming the results of the presidential election of 13 November 2016 and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
I. Jurisdiction Of The Constitutional Court. According to article 135 paragraph 1. (1) (a). e) of the Constitution, articles. (1) (a). e) of the law on the Constitutional Court, "". (1) (a). 38 e) and paragraph 3. (3) the constitutional jurisdiction of the code, the Constitutional Court confirmed the results of contentious elections for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova and validate its mandate.
16. Note that the Court, pursuant to article 60 of the electoral code, the Central Electoral Commission shall record the results of aggregation of votes on the country as a whole in the minutes, which shall be signed by the members of the Commission, and shall draw up a report on the results of the election, which shall be submitted to the Constitutional Court for confirmation of the election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
17. Within 10 days after receipt of the documents from the Central Electoral Commission, but no earlier than the final settlement by the courts of appeals submitted in accordance with procedures established by law, the Constitutional Court shall either confirm or not the legality of elections (art. 111 of the electoral code).
18. pursuant to constitutional and legal rules, based on the materials submitted by the Central Electoral Commission, final decisions of the courts and the proceedings shall be filed with the Constitutional Court, the Court will examine if the poll was held in accordance with the constitutional provisions and universal principles for democratic elections and will assess whether frauds have influenced the final result.
19. At the same time, the Court recalled that any final and irrevocable judgment with regard to the legality of acts issued by the authority has the power of final decision and work involves respect for the principle of res judicata. Thus, the Court cannot adjudicate upon hearing of evidence administered in litigations, which had the purpose of examining the legality of acts of the electoral bodies. To proceed otherwise would mean substitution by the Constitutional Court, the State authorities whose competence is determined by law.
20. Thus, under article 115 of the code, where the Constitutional Court would find that in the process of the elections and/or to vote counting, there have been violations of this code have affected election results, elections could be declared void.
21. The Constitutional Court has referred to the case-law that in the course of an election campaign are certain irregularities, but the validity of the elections depends on the size and scale of their findings by State authorities (Judgment No. 29 of 9 December 1986 concerning the confirmation of the election results for the Moldovan Parliament on 30 November 2014 and validation of mandates of deputies elected).
22. In the same context, the Court reiterates that: 1) annulment of elections can intervene only if the voting and establishment of the results took place through fraud;
2) not any fraud from the electoral process is equivalent to election fraud, but fraud that is likely to influence the results of the elections;
3) cancellation request must be substantiated and elections together with the evidence on which it is based.
II. confirmation of election results 1. The results of the centralized Central Electoral Commission. The court notice that, pursuant to articles 18, 26, 60 and 108 of the election code, through Decisions No. 571 and no. 572 of 18 November 2016, the Central Electoral Commission has approved the Protocol regarding the tabulation of the second round of elections of the President of the Republic of Moldova of 13 November 2016 and report on the results of the elections for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova of 30 October 2016.
24. the Court note that for the presidential election of October 30, 2016 Central Electoral Commission originally recorded 12 contestants from 16 requests. 2 of those 4 pretenders to push contested in court the decisions of the Commission concerning the rejection of applications for registration as electoral contestants in the presidential election of October 30, 2016, their shares being rejected as groundless. 2 other registered competitors withdrew from the race until election day.
25. At the same time, at the request of the Central Election Commission, which has the theme of opposition filed by another competitor for the distribution free of charge for the benefit of voters cards, discount store and the materials presented by the Police Inspectorate Râșcani, mun. Chisinau, by judgment of the Court of appeal of 21 October 2016 Chişinău, a candidate was excluded from the list of candidates. Judgment of the Court of appeal was maintained by decision of the Supreme Court of Justice of 22 October 2016.
26. Thus, the October 30 poll 2016 9 contestants participated.
27. the Court notes that, under article 114 of the election code, the first ballot shall be considered valid if attended by more than 1/3 of the number of voters enrolled in the electoral lists.
28. Examining Central Election Commission Judgement No. 516 of November 2 2016 on the participation of voters at polling stations on the day of October 30, 2016, the Court observes that the voter lists were included 2,812,566 voters, to which have been added to the lists of electors included 117,128 extra, and at polling stations was attended by 1,440,733 voters.
29. From the data presented, the Court finds that the rate of participation by the voters to vote for 30 October 2016 was 50.95%, which is more than 1/3 of the number of persons enrolled in the electoral lists. Thus, the first round of elections on October 30, 2016 met minimum rate of voter turnout in the vote to be declared valid.

30. the Court notes that, under article 78 paragraph 1. (3) of the Constitution, shall be declared elected the candidate who obtains the votes of at least half of the voters participated in the election.
31. Examining Central Election Commission Judgement No. 517 of 2 November 2016, note that, according to Court data processed by the Central Electoral Commission following presidential elections on 30 October 2016, none of the candidates for President of the Republic of Moldova has met at least half of the votes of the voters who participated in the election in the first round.
32. the court notice that, according to paragraph 4 of article 78 of the Constitution, where none of the candidates obtains that majority, organised the second round between the top two candidates in order of number of votes obtained in the first round. It declared candidate who obtained the largest number of votes, provided that their number is greater than the number of votes cast against the candidate.
33. the court notice that, pursuant to art. 18, 26, 60, 106, 108 and 109 of the election code, the Central Election Commission has fixed November 13, 2016 for conducting second tour ballot for the election of the President of the Republic of Moldova between the top two candidates in order of decreasing number of votes obtained in the first round, as follows: (1) Igor DODON, appointed by the political party "the party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova" which he obtained 680,550 votes;
(2) S Maia, designated by the political party "party of action and Solidarity" which obtained 549,152 votes.
34. the court notice that, according to paragraph 1 of article 114. (2) of the electoral code, in the second round of elections, the elections will be declared valid regardless of the number of voters who participated in the election.
35. The second round of presidential elections took place on 13 November 2016, registered the following results: a) the number of voters included in voter lists





2,810,057









b) number of voters included in additional voters ' 209,438









c) the number of voters who received ballots





1,614,067









d) number of voters who participated in voting





1,614,023









e) figure reflecting the difference between the number of ballots received from voters and the number of voters who participated in voting





44









f) the number of ballot papers declared invalid





13,349









g) number of valid votes cast for each candidate: Igor DODON, political party "the party of Socialists of Moldova ' S Mafi, political party and Party" Solidarity "





 

834,081 766,593









h) total number of valid votes cast 1,600,674









I) the number of ballot papers printed





3,164,549









j) the number of unused ballots and void (including voting ballots filled out wrong and void)





1,550,482










36. In summarising votes, the Central Election Commission has found that the greatest number of votes in the second round of elections was registered by the electoral contestants Igor Dodon, which is why it has been declared elected as President of the Republic of Moldova.
37. the Court notes that, during the electoral campaign for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova to the electoral bodies were lodged numerous complaints.
38. Complaints lodged had as object: 1) exercise of the right to vote;
2) freedom of expression, including defamation actions or ofensare of the electoral competitor;
3) Copyright;
4 election) publicity in internet network;
5) display in unauthorized places;
6) electoral campaign by the mass media;
7) use for the purpose of election advertising material containing the image of some foreign officials, too, intended involvement in actions of persons who are non-nationals;
8) method of financial reporting by electoral contestants;
9) use in campaign funds undeclared material and financial.
39. According to the Central Election Commission, complaints which had as their object the circumstances set forth in sections 1, 2, 3 and 4 were returned to the depositors because their settlement there is the responsibility of the Commission, but also the proceedings of the Court.
40. In disputes related to violation of the conditions of the election campaign coverage by the broadcasters, the Commission has ordered the remission thereof to the electronic media watchdog CCA. 
41. The Commission has submitted to the General Inspectorate of police complaints in which they invoke the violation of art. 47 of the election code, namely placing posters in places other than those established with a view to undertaking actions of the constitutive elements of the offence and identifying the perpetrator.
42. The Commission submitted to the Council of the municipal electoral districts of Chisinau election no. 1 other 7 complaints (of which 6 made by groups of voters outside the country), which had as their object the impossibility of exercising the right to vote and have been made in compliance with the procedure laid down in the electoral code and the Regulation on the procedure of examination and review procedures of electoral bodies during the electoral period.
43. The Commission also ordered restitution without examination of complaints lodged by people neîmputernicite, pursuant to section 3 of the regulation on the procedure of examination and review procedures during the electoral period, in respect of non-compliance with legal requirements.
44. following the appeals lodged, CEC, through decisions taken, he found the following violations of the electoral legislation:-failure ways financial reporting;
-violation of art. 38 para. (3), (4) and (5) and article 3. 382 para. (1) of the electoral code, through the use of financial funds and the undeclared material;
-failure to comply with article 4. 47 para. (21) of the electoral code, through the involvement of foreigners in shares of Brownian motion.
45. From the judgment process 263 to which CEC was part, only in a single file the CEC was forced to submit to the electoral documents requested. In other cases, the courts of law have found that CEC decisions have been adopted in accordance with the legal provisions.
2. Complaints lodged with the electoral Constitutional Court annulling the elections carried out in the second round on 13 November 2016 46. On 13 December 2016, election Maia Sandu filed a complaint concerning the cancellation of the election in the second round on 13 November 2016. In its reasoning, were put forward following election allegedly infringing content: a) the vote suppression of citizens residing abroad, through lack of ballot papers and the poor organization of the voting process by the public authorities;
b) organized transportation and corrupting voters residing on the left bank of the Dniester;
c) involvement of the representatives of the Orthodox Church in Moldova during the electoral campaign;
d) multiple voting;
e) distribution by representatives of electoral candidate Igor Dodon material with defamatory character;
f) fostering of media institutions of electoral candidate.
3. The conclusions of the International Observers of the observers) International Observation Mission Alegerilor1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/moldova/278191?download=true;


http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/moldova/281246?download=true



47. According to the findings and preliminary conclusions of the International Mission of election observation [OSCE observers of the Office for Democratic Institutions and human rights (OSCE/ODIHR), the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (pace) and the European Parliament (EP)], the first direct presidential election in the last 20 years took place amid economic hardship and lack of trust in State institutions , providing ample opportunity for citizens to express their preference for a new head of State while the campaign was competitive, it was affected by the use of administrative resources, the lack of financial transparency and a lopsided campaign coverage by the media. Election administration has fulfilled its responsibilities in a professional and transparent manner about the voting process and vote counting, calculating, evaluated most positively.
48. The legal framework provides an adequate basis for the conduct of democratic elections. Following the decision of the Constitutional Court of 4 March 2016, by which they have been direct provisions governing the election of the head of State, the electoral code has been modified to ensure emergency legal basis for the purpose of carrying out the election. However, despite the concerns, set out in the OSCE/ODIHR and the Council of Europe, a number of ambiguities and gaps continue to persist. These relate, in particular, the collection and verification of signatures in support of candidates, campaign financing and the conduct of effective dispute resolution, settlement, implementing the provisions concerning the media and the conduct of a possible second round of presidential elections.
49. The CEC is responsible for supervising the election campaign funding, but does not have sufficient resources to do so. Recent amendments pertaining to the legal aspect of campaign funding, they included some of the previous recommendations, provided by OSCE/ODIHR and the Council of Europe, which provides comprehensive reporting requirements and criteria for spending limits. However, the lack of effective financial supervision and proportionate sanctions for violations proved to be a problem and has led to concerns about the transparency of funding for collecting signatures and electioneering.
50. media Institutions are strongly affiliated with the main political parties, the concentration of control over political institutions the media pluralism diminishes. The results of media monitoring by the OSCE/ODIHR EOM, as well as monitoring activities of regulatory authorities have revealed a clear political partisanship of the main broadcasters during the election campaign. Failure to ensure fair coverage, balanced and impartial campaigning conditions compromised the equal competitors.
51. The complaints and appeals were addressed, more generally, in an open manner, within the period laid down by law. However, inconsistent interpretation of the law in cases of deregistration of candidates decreased overall confidence in the election administration and the judiciary.
52. the expeditious Procedures on the day of the first round have been completed in an orderly and calm. The voting process was rated as very positive, being complied with basic procedures.
53. In the coming second round of elections, observers have noted that it was competitive, fundamental freedoms being respected. The campaign, with the election debates, allowed the two candidates to address voters directly. However, media coverage increasingly more polarized, harsh and intolerant rhetoric and examples of abuse of administrative resources have affected the process.
54. the fact that the representatives of the Orthodox Church in Moldova have expressed public support for a candidate and negative effects towards each other has raised concerns relating to the fact how suitable is the active role of the representatives of the Church, especially in light of separation of Church and State. 55. Complaints, which largely focused on the financing of the campaign, have not been settled in a manner consistent and fast. Technical preparations for the second round of the elections generally were administered in a professional way and the procedures on the day of election are rated positively. In spite of efforts to prepare for a big presence at the ballot boxes in some polling stations from abroad and for voters from Transnistria, many citizens were not able to vote because the number of ballot papers allocated to those polling stations proved to be insufficient.
56. The legal framework provides an adequate basis for the conduct of democratic elections, but does not address the issues essential to the conduct of the tour, especially on the examination term useful for handling complaints and, beginning the official campaign for the second round, the application of regulations on the financing of the campaign coverage in the media and updating of voter lists.
57. That CEC has rejected a number of complaints on the grounds that they excedau the competence of that institution to settle them, has triggered concerns in relation to the understanding of the actors concerned in the process of dispute resolution. The law does not contain norms that would provide urgent deadlines for examination and review procedures concerning violations committed during the electoral period, what has undermined the realization of the right to an effective remedy. The CEC has not examined all complaints before election day.
58. Fundamental freedoms were generally respected, and the candidates have campaigned freely and without restrictions.
59. The legal provisions on the financing of the election campaign does not cover second round. Financial reports for the second round, although not expressly required by law, were submitted to the CEC on 11 November. This term is insufficient to supervise effectively the financing of the campaign, and the audit report of the CEC was not approved before election day. This has diminished the effectiveness of supervision, contrary to international standards and good practices, and has affected the ability of voters to make an informed choice.
60. On that day, the election went calmly, being well administered across the country. Overall assessment of the voting, the counting and aggregation of votes was positive, the key procedures being followed.
b) of election monitoring Mission, "the European Network of election monitoring Organizations" (ENEMO) 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 http://enemo.eu/uploads/file-manager/EOMMoldova/PreliminaryII/PFC_2_EN.pdf 61. According to the preliminary findings and conclusions of the ENEMO observers, national legal framework constituted a sufficient legal basis for the conduct of democratic elections. However, the provisions of the electoral code regulates in a vague way the procedures aiming at the second round of elections. The lack of rules for the second round offers the possibility of interpretations and disparities in the application of the provisions of the legislation.
62. Observers ENEMO found that the elections were generally well organized, took place in an orderly manner. Isolated cases of irregularities observed did not affect the electoral process. However, in some polling stations the voting from abroad were registered voters who have not been able to exercise their right to vote because of a lack of ballot papers, because the number of voters who arrived at ballot boxes exceeded the number of ballots distributed. As a result, the CEC were addressed complaints about the restriction of the exercise of the right to vote.
63. observers have also noted that it was a serious violation of the attestation of fundamental rights in psychiatric institutions and prisons (such as violating the secrecy of voting, intimidation, violation of human dignity, which resulted in limiting the exercise of the right to vote).
64. At the same time, observers have noted that unbalanced and politically influenced broadcasting of events of the election campaign has limited the ability of the public to receive impartial information and to provide equal conditions for election candidates.
65. At the same time, it was noted that on the day of the vote on the State's automated information system "elections" functioned smoothly, which allowed the CEC to receive and announce the preliminary results of the elections in a fast way. It was stressed that CEC election day has worked under conditions of transparency.
-Association of national Observers) charity "Promo-LEX 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3https://promolex.md/category/publicatii/monitorizare-procese-democratice/66. Election observation mission "Promo-LEX" found that in the voting process and the counting of the votes in the election for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova of 30 October 2016 weren't violations of laws that would influence the results of elections to the extent that they should be declared void.

67. At the same time, observers have expressed concern with electoral officials ' involvement in the activities of agitation, using active in campaigning for the second round of the ballot printing materials containing disparaging the candidates address the presence of advertising material, posters, billboards in radius of polling stations (100 metres from the premises of the Department) and undue presence of unauthorised persons inside or within 50 meters of the voting section.
68. "Promo-LEX" of stirring up public associations and certified trainers of opinion on the eve of elections on tour, which through the press conferences have called voters to civic mobilization and urged to vote for a particular candidate.
69. In this regard, "Promo-LEX" found the involvement of the Metropolitan Church of Chisinau and clergy all Moldova campaign supporting candidate Igor Dodon. On numerous occasions, several Church faces have expressed political preferences and even urged people to vote for certain candidates.
70. "Promo-LEX has attested cases of organized transportation of voters. In this respect, the monitoring report indicated that, despite the fact that the transport of the voters is not considered a violation of the provisions of the electoral code, Promo-LEX monitored these situations, as the potential actions of corruption of voters.
71. With reference to the final results of the vote in the second round of elections, observers "Promo-LEX" also found errors in the 34-book at least one formula. At the same time, this figure has been decreasing compared to the first round.
72. in addition, the observers "Promo-LEX" also found that in 18 departments abroad voting ballots have been exhausted or remained very little until the closure of the polling stations (some sections of a vote from United Kingdom, France, Italy, Romania, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, the Russian Federation).
the charity Association) "Institute for human rights in Moldova (IDOM) 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 http://idom.md/index.php? option = com_k2 & view = item id = & 319: press-to-press% C4% 83 & Itemid = 393 〈 = en 73. According to recommendations of IDOM, exposed as a result of the presidential elections, monitoring major irregularities recorded and reported held for failure to provide access to voting under the pretext of the inability of patients to exercise this right, but also influencing the expression of voters vote institution. Moreover, in their reports, observers have pointed out that not all persons entitled to vote from the country's psychiatric institutions were included in the electoral lists for the presidential elections on 30 October and 13 November 2016, and in some institutions vote was not secret.
74. At the same time, according to experts, IDOM, qualified incidents were not likely to affect the final outcome of the election for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova.
75. In order to ensure the exercise of the electoral law for people with intellectual disabilities or psychosocial, IDOM has held to come up with a series of recommendations for State authorities, including: ensuring the right of persons with disabilities to vote without intimidation and secretly; ensuring voting materials accessible and easy to understand and use, by the representatives of the Organization of the CEC's/NGO sessions profile simulation the voting process in order to familiarize patients with the institutions the voting stages.
4. Assessment of Court 18. General principles 76. According to article 2 of the Constitution, sovereignty belongs to the people of the Republic of Moldova, who shall exercise it directly and through its representative bodies in the forms laid down in the Constitution.
77. the provisions of article 2 are to be applied in conjunction with the provisions of article 38 of the Act, under which the Supreme will of the people is the basis of State power, the latter to be expressed through free elections held at regular intervals, by universal suffrage, equal, direct, secret and freely expressed suffrage.
78. The election represents an element of the exercise of fundamental human rights and in particular the civil and political rights. Fair elections represents a political competition that takes place in an environment characterized by confidence, transparency and responsibility and that allows voters to make a choice between distinct political alternatives. A fair and democratic electoral process presupposes respect for freedom of expression and freedom of the press, freedom of Association, Assembly and movement, adhering to the principle of the rule of law, the right to establish political parties and to run for public office, discrimination and ensuring equal rights for all citizens, the right not to be the victim of bullying, as well as a host of other fundamental rights and freedoms of man , the State is obligated to defend them and promote them.
79. Democratic elections are decisive for ensuring that the will of the people in the formation of governance at all levels, but also the fact that bodies are made up of representatives chosen effective.
80. Article 78 of the Constitution stipulates that the President of the Republic of Moldova shall be elected by universal, equal, direct, secret and freely expressed suffrage. According to paragraph 6 of the same article, the procedure of electing the President of the Republic of Moldova shall be established by organic law.
81. In this respect, the entire procedure of conduct of presidential elections, the competent authorities, conditions for candidates and voters are governed by the electoral code.
4.2 handling on the organisation and conduct of elections 82. According to article 14 of the electoral code, the electoral system consists of the Central Electoral Commission; district electoral councils; polling precinct.
83. The Central Electoral Commission is an independent body set up for the purpose of achieving electoral policy of good conduct of the election, for the monitoring and control of compliance with the legal provisions on the financing of political parties and election campaigns (article 1 of the electoral code).
84. Article 65 of the election code stipulates that voters and candidates can contest the actions/inactions and decisions of electoral councils and bureaus and the actions/inactions of electoral contestants. Submission of the application to the Court must be preceded by prior disputes over the electoral body hierarchically superior body whose act is dispute, except for complaints relating to the exercise of the right to vote or to the administration of the elections to the electoral Office on election day. Complaints regarding the Organization and conduct of elections will be examined by electoral bodies, in accordance with their hierarchy. Complaints concerning the actions and decisions of the Central Election Commission shall be submitted to the Chisinau Court of appeals [article 66 (para. 3) of the electoral code].
85. Under art. 67 of the election code, complaints regarding the actions and decisions of the Central Election Commission during the electoral period will be examined within 5 calendar days of the filing, but no later than election day. Complaints lodged with the courts on election day shall be examined on the same day.
86. Furthermore, according to article 65 of the code, complaints concerning the electoral campaign by the broadcasters under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Moldova shall be examined by the audiovisual Coordinating Council in accordance with the provisions of the broadcasting code of the Republic of Moldova, and appeals to the mass media by shall be examined by the Court.
87. It follows From the legal provisions that the electoral bodies have competence, especially with regard to securing the right to vote of citizens, how to draw up electoral lists, registration of candidates, ensuring equality of all electoral contestants, adequate monitoring of compliance with the rules of conduct of the electoral campaign and election results. At the same time, monitored election coverage by broadcasters, by ensuring that the principles of fairness, accountability, balance and impartiality, competence of the electronic media watchdog CCA.
88. the decisions of electoral bodies and other bodies with competence in the matter can be appealed in the courts in administrative courts procedure. Respectively, the legality of acts issued by these bodies may be subject to judicial control at the request of the parties concerned.
89. The fundamental objective of abolition of the Constitutional Court confirming the results of the elections for the Presidency of the Republic of Moldova is to assess the extent to which the electoral process was carried out in accordance with constitutional provisions and other universal principles for democratic elections.

90. At the same time, any final and irrevocable judgment in respect of the legality of acts issued by those authorities, has the power of final decision and work involves respect for the principle of res judicata. Thus, the Court cannot adjudicate upon hearing of evidence administered in litigations, which had the purpose of examining the legality of acts of the electoral bodies. To proceed otherwise would mean substitution by the Constitutional Court, the State authorities whose competence is determined by law.
91. In this context, the Court notes that both the electoral authorities and courts of law have rejected a large number of complaints as being outside their competence (see §§ 43, 45, supra).
92. In particular, the Court notes that, on the day of 13 November 2016, the bureaus from outside the country were lodged complaints, complaints, requests concerning the exercise of the right to vote from 1434 people individually, while 2597 signatures were lodged in collective complaints. The Central Election Commission, instead of resolving the issue of finding/lack of infringement, and declined jurisdiction, noting that the competent authority to rule on the legality of the process of organizing the presidential elections is a Constitutional Court, which is due to assess the consequences of those cited on the aggregation of the results of the vote.
93. On the other hand, to assess the impact on the outcome of the election, the Court is expected to operate with certain violations established by the authorities.
94. Similarly, being seized by the electoral contestants Maia Sandu in order to finding violations of the Electoral Court, the courts have stopped the process, initially through the conclusion of 25 November 2016 the Court of appeal, upheld by decision solution of 30 November 2016 of the Supreme Court of Justice.
95. The motivation of the solutions given, both the Court of appeal, and the Supreme Court of Justice stated that, according to art. 67 para. (3) of the electoral code, complaints lodged with the courts on election day shall be examined on the same day. According to the common law courts, the election code does not stipulate that after election day, and the President of the competent courts of law are to examine complaints of persons having the right to vote or the electoral contestants.
96. In common law courts, checking the legality of elections of the Parliament and the President of Moldova is the exclusive competence of the Constitutional Court in proceedings for confirmation of election results and validation of mandates, while the Administrative Court is not competent to rule in matters of election wrongdoing on 30 October and 13 November 2016 2016 invoked by the application filed in Maia Sandu on 21 November 2016.
97. This fact denotes the lacking understanding of the actors concerned in the process of settling electoral disputes. This finding is corroborated by the conclusions of the international observers.
98. Furthermore, the competent authorities why he put electoral complaints the Constitutional Court unable to take them into account, or, in accordance with article 4 para. (3) of the code of constitutional jurisdiction, the Constitutional Court shall examine exclusively on matters of law, not fact circumstances. The Constitutional Court does not have the legal tools necessary to administer, for hearing witnesses, etc. These legal possibilities exist only in the common law courts. From the legal provisions in force, it follows that all complaints concerning infringements of the election to be settled exclusively by the courts, those not within the competence of the Constitutional Court.
99. In that context, the Court recalled that a rule should be interpreted in the sense that they permit application, and not in the sense in which its application is excluded. The Court emphasizes that its field of competence is established by the Constitution and the law on the Constitutional Court, and cannot be modified by common law jurisprudence.
100. Consequently, the rules inherent in such an exercise, a lack of explicit rules, are to be deduced from the text of the law, by applying the principle of "minimum useful effect."
101. In this respect, both electoral bodies and courts of law were not to decline jurisdiction, but also to examine violations reported on election day. Or, if you are competent to examine electoral violations in the framework of the election campaign, a fortiori they are competent to examine violations of the day of the vote. This category of violations may prove to be particularly relevant to the process of confirmation/cancellation of election results.
102. For the reasons set out, the Court note that due to the deficient application of the legislation by the courts of common law, the electoral actors were, in fact, deprived of effective judicial control, and the Constitutional Court were unable to operate with the acts of infringements. Therefore, the Court considers it necessary to present an address to Parliament (1), in order to clarify the legislation in part what keep handling on the organisation and conduct of elections. In particular, the Court recommends a separate regulation and Parliament's explicit procedures for the examination of complaints for various types of elections. In the same vein, the Court asks Parliament to regulate the procedures for examining different complaints in the event of the existence of two rounds, including complaints that it has received on election day.
4.3. Alleged violations cited for the cancellation of elections the vote) Suppression of citizens residing abroad, through lack of ballot papers and the poor organization of the voting process by the public authorities to 103. According to contestatarei, the right to vote is a constitutional right of enclosure which is unacceptable.
104. According to contestatarei, under the tour of presidential elections, State authorities have suppressed the voting rights of the Moldovan citizens living abroad, the number of 500,000 people.
105. In support of its contestatara nature alleged, invoking public data provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration, whereby abroad live 805,509 citizens. According to contestatarei, the actual number of citizens learn abroad is greater, especially in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, considering the fact that this country does not enter into the Schengen area.
106. According to contestatarei because the Central Election Commission has secured the opening of only 100 polling stations abroad, what constitutes a potential for expression of the vote than 300,000 citizens, it follows that more than 500,000 citizens were deprived of their right to vote, "potential victims" or "indirect" victims within the meaning of case-law of the European Court.
107. contestatarei, the impossibility of Moldovan citizens to exercise their right to vote due to lack of ballot papers or from lack of organization of public elections process demonstrates vicierea and violation of art. 38 of the Constitution and article. 2 (2). (3) of the electoral code.
108. the Court shall retain the right to vote is a relative and not absolute. Therefore, the exercise of voting rights can be subject to limitations implied, given States a wide margin of discretion in this area. Thus, the exercise of voting rights to be exercised in compliance with the law.
109. In its jurisprudence, the Court pointed out that Parliament, being the Supreme representative body of the people of the Republic of Moldova and the sole authority of the laws of the State, through the exclusive jurisdiction conferred by the Constitution, regulated by the organic law of the electoral system.
110. the court notice that equality does not imply the obligation to vote exercise thereof under identical conditions both in the country and abroad, citizens of the country and abroad are located in different legal situations.
111. In the same sense, the European Convention does not guarantee the right of citizens of a State party to it to vote abroad. In addition, the code of good practice in electoral matters of the Venice Commission determines that resident can make the exercise of the right to vote. At the same time, the code of good practice determines that the right to vote and to be elected may be accorded to citizens residing outside the country.
112. According to the European Court, the necessity of fulfilling the requirement of residence or length of residence for holding or exercising the right to vote is not, in principle, an arbitrary restriction of the right to vote and, therefore, is not incompatible with article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (decision Hilbe v. Liechtenstein, nr. decision 96/31981, Doyle v. United Kingdom, February 6, 2007).

113. According to the European Court, a restriction of the right to vote on the basis of the criterion of residence may be justified for several reasons: firstly, the presumption that non-residents are less tethered directly and continuously, daily problems of the country and have less knowledge of them; Secondly, candidates in this election cannot so readily on matters relating to the election of citizens living abroad, which will also have less influence over the selection of candidates, or in the preparation of the programmes; Thirdly, the close relationship between the right to vote in elections and the fact of being directly targeted in acts of political bodies chosen and, fourthly, such a restriction is explained by legitimate concern and of the legislature to limit the influence of the choices of citizens living abroad in respect of the fundamental problems of the country that particularly affects those who live in the country (see, mutatis mutandis, Sitaropoulos and Giakoumopoulos v. Greece, of 15 March, § 70).
114. the Court note that Moldovan law allows voting abroad. At the same time, it cannot be held in any conditions, but in compliance with legal provisions.
115. In the case of the vis, contestatara considers, essentially, that the citizens of the Republic of Moldova to learn abroad have been prevented from exercising their right to vote and that the number of polling stations and voting ballots distributed to polling units outside the country were, in fact, insufficient, leading to the conclusion that voting took place by deceit of a nature to change the assignment of the President's mandate.
-Reduced number of polling stations abroad organized 116. With regard to the claim concerning the existence of a number of 500,000 citizens learn abroad who were unable to vote due to a reduced number of polling stations organized abroad, keep in mind that, according to article 29/1 (1). (5) the electoral code, "the organisation and functioning of the peculiarities of the bureaus of polling stations abroad shall be governed by the Central Electoral Commission, in coordination with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration, and expenses related to the organisation and operation of those offices shall be covered from the budget for election/referendum. For polling stations set up abroad, spending is estimated in advance by the Government and the Central Electoral Commission, and in the case when they are not provided for in the budget for election/referendum, funds are allocated from the Reserve Fund of the Government. "
117. in order to comply with this legal obligation, the Government issued Government decision nr. 1080 of 26 September 2016 concerning the Organization of polling stations abroad, published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Moldova No. 337 of 27 September 2016, by which it approved the establishment of departments of 100 polling stations abroad for the Organization and conduct of elections of the President of the Republic of Moldova in year 2016, 5 more than the previous poll. For example, note that Court were held 25 such establishments are in 11th in Italy, Romania, the Russian Federation, 8-7 in the US, 6 in France, four in Portugal.
118. The Court also observes that article 29/1 (1). (2) and (3) of the electoral code provides that: "(2) in the case of parliamentary elections, presidential and referendum, in addition to diplomatic missions and consular offices of the Republic of Moldova organize one or more polling stations for voters who find themselves abroad at the time of the election.
(3) apart from polling stations specified in paragraph 2. (2) will be organized, with the agreement of the competent authorities of the country concerned, polling stations and other locations. The Organization of these polling stations shall be established by the Central Electoral Commission, the Government, in collaboration with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration with other central public administration authorities, on the basis of prior registration of citizens abroad and the number of voters who participated in the previous poll. Prior registration regulations approved by the Central Electoral Commission ".
119. the Court recalls that, in its decision No. 11 of 18 November 2014 inadmissibility of referral for constitutionality governmental decision nr. 872 of 20 October 1986 concerning the Organization of polling stations abroad, the Court held that the number of polling stations abroad is an issue that relates to the responsibility of the competent authority in organizing the elections, which are better placed for an appreciation of the practical possibilities and needs of the Organization of the vote abroad.
120. Moreover, in its judgment No. 15 of 16 June 2015 for controlling notification constitutionality of some provisions of article 23. 291 para. (3) of the electoral code, the Court stated: ' 61. […] the Organization of polling stations, additional to those organized around diplomatic missions, is an exclusive right of the State. Thus, the State may establish certain criteria determined on the basis of which these establishments are to be opened, the criteria due to technical benefit reasons rather than for the authorities responsible for organizing the electoral process.
62. [...] by setting the condition of prior registration of Moldovan citizens voting abroad State seeks more legitimate objectives, such as: establishment of the estimate of the number of voters who are abroad to establish additional polling stations abroad; drawing up a list of citizens who vote in the polling division and fixing the number of man-days of ballots to be distributed to the polling station in question.
65. [...] through the provisions challenged, which grant the right to organize voting sections at existing ones which operate in addition to diplomatic missions, the legislator has set up additional facilities in exercising the right to vote to citizens of the Republic of Moldova in the world.
66. For these reasons, the Court considers that this condition does not affect the substance of the electoral rights, does not violate the voting rights of the person, not annihilate the free expression of the will of the people in the choice of the legislative body or the holding of referendums. The contested provisions only regulate the procedure under which you can open additional polling stations polling stations. "
121. the court notice that, according to paragraph 16 of the Regulation on the registration of prior approved by Central Election Commission decision No. 2547 of 21 may 2014, the period of prior registration of citizens of the Republic of Moldova with voting that election day will find themselves abroad began on 10 may 2016 and lasted until 19 September 2016 (over four months).
122. According to the data presented by the Central Election Commission, no later than 20 September 2016 have registered in advance of 3570 Moldovan citizens voting abroad, who have expressed a desire to participate in the elections. These data were submitted by the Government, and those relating to the number of voters who voted abroad in parliamentary elections of 30 November 2014 (total 73.311).
123. In the light of the number and the locations in which they were organized sections, it appears that they were organized for voters who find themselves abroad at the time of the elections both in addition to diplomatic missions and consular offices of the Republic of Moldova, as well as in other municipalities than in established diplomatic missions or consular posts shall, in accordance with article 29/1 (1). (2) and (3) of the electoral code, which shows some additional lodging Maxi by public authorities.
124. the Court shall retain election, contested Maia Sandu any Government decision, any judgment of the ERC concerning the Organization of polling stations abroad, which is why this claim is out of time. Moreover, Ms. Mafi S contested the results of the ballot, the first tour that was held in the same conditions as the tour.
125. In view of the above, it is found that doesn't take any role nor the responsibility of the Constitutional Court to assess whether it had organized a number of less or more than the voting sections, if they were to have another territorial distribution or if they had taken and other organisational measures. This power rests with the Government and, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration, constitutional court having jurisdiction solely to ascertain whether the Organization was whether or not the substance of the right to vote has been reached or to be elected, which is found not in this matter.

126. However, in view of the fact that a large number of citizens learn abroad were unable to vote, the Court considers it necessary to adopt an address to Parliament (2), to amend the voting mechanism abroad, as well as introducing additional criteria to determine the number and geographical distribution of polling stations abroad.
-Reduced number of ballots 127. With regard to the criticism relating to the number of ballots available to polling stations abroad, keep in mind that, in accordance with article 29, paragraph 1. (2) of the electoral code, "the polling stations [...] shall contain not less than 30 and not more than 3000 voters. ". Similarly, according to article 49 paragraph 3. (3) of the electoral code, "bureaus of polling stations set up outside the Central Election Commission of the Republic of Moldova it sends out ballots [...], based on the estimated number of voters determined on the basis of the information submitted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration and the accumulated by the Central Electoral Commission, but not more than 3000 ballots for each polling station."
128. the aforementioned legal provisions Relating to the situation in fact învederată by contestatară regarding the voting process conducted abroad, please note the following.
129. From data provided by the Central Electoral Commission, note that monitors the Court placed abroad were distributed 270,350 ballots in the first round and 288,850 ballots in the second round (the number of ballots being distributed four times greater than the number of votes cast at the preceding elections in 2014).
130. In these circumstances, the Court observes that the number of such ballots, although at first sight it seems relatively small in relation to the number of polling stations in reality correspond to estimates of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration, estimates that, by definition, are considering statistical data based on the existing situation within the framework of previous election cycles.
131. For example, in this regard, the Court observes that the first round of elections for the post of President of the Republic of Moldova carried out on 30 October 2016 in Senatorial voting from abroad were submitted to a vote of the citizens, and 67,205 in the second round of elections on November 13, 2016 a number of 138,720 citizens. Furthermore, the Court notes that the distribution of ballot papers to the polling station monitors has not been carried out in equal shares, but according to the Ministry's appreciation, it taking into account, as has been shown above, the situation at the previous election cycles (73,311 votes cast abroad the parliamentary elections of 30 November 2014). Thus, for 95 of the voting sections, of the 100 organized abroad, was printed the maximum number of ballots of 3000 copies for a section, in accordance with the provisions of article 49 paragraph 3. (3) of the electoral code. In total, for the first round 270,350 the CEC printed ballot papers intended for voting abroad, and for the second round of the CEC has increased its circulation until 288,850 ballots.
132. According to the CEC, in 13 of the 100 polling stations abroad (Canada, the Russian Federation, Ireland, United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, the French Republic and the Italian Republic) have been exhausted ballots until the closure of the orderly polling station.
133. Thus, the CEC report shows that, on November 13, 2016, the bureaus outside the country have lodged complaints concerning the violation of the exercise of the right to vote of citizens in 1434, and 2597 signatures were lodged in collective complaints. The same Report shows that these complaints were not resolved by the electoral bodies, which have declined jurisdiction. Please note that Court, surprisingly, neither the CEC's failure to examine these complaints had not been challenged by those interested in the courts. Note that CEC's Court, though it has not resolved these challenges, in its report, said: "the Constitutional Court [...] to appreciate the consequences of those cited on the aggregation of the results of the vote ". From this it follows that explicit formulation of the CEC acknowledges that these citizens were unable to vote. Therefore, in the particular situation, the Court will start from the presumption that those citizens 4031 who submitted individual and collective complaints on election day (including the 133 citizens that were addressed in court), they were unable to exercise their right to vote and will assess the impact of these non-citizens to vote on the final result of the presidential elections.
134. In the light of the fact that most complaints were lodged by citizens of the Republic of Moldova in the Republic of Italy, note that Court in that State were open to 25 polling stations. According to data presented by the Central Electoral Commission, each precinct received ballots 3000 (overall-75,000 ballots), and 51,738 attended the polling of voters. Thus, neither the 75,000 ballots allocated have not been fully exploited in the polling stations opened in Italy (even in the sections located in the same locality).
135. In the same context, the court notice that, according to the authorities, at least two of the countries that have exhausted ballots, Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany, the establishment of polling stations is only permitted in addition to the diplomatic missions and consular offices. Matters pertaining to the Organization of foreign electoral events in the territory of Canada and Germany are reflected in the circulars of ministries of Foreign Affairs Protocol of those two States.
136. Thus, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs cited Germany's no. 08/2003 from 19.06.2003, reconfirmed by note No. 10/2016 from 18.03.2016, related to the elections, opinion polls and censuses of German territory, except where it is established otherwise, not conduct elections and censuses/surveys, will be limited to the headquarters of diplomatic missions. In this regard, the MINISTRY of FOREIGN AFFAIRS as a result of appeals, Germany has approved the opening of two polling stations polling stations for the presidential elections in the Republic of Moldova, in Berlin and Frankfurt, where the Republic of Moldova has Embassy and consulate.
137. the Canadian Authorities, the official position of the Department of Foreign Affairs (circular and international trade of Canada no. XDC-1264 from 08.11.2011), draws the attention to the fact that the organisation will refuse bureaus outside the diplomatic missions and consular representations using the canadian State as extra-territorial constituency. However, although in Canada there's only Embassy in Ottawa, as a result of inquiries to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration, Canadian authorities allowed as exception opening two more polling divisions in Montreal and Toronto, which is confirmed by note verbale No. XDC-6608 of 13 October 2016.
138. Therefore, the Court concluded that there are no objective indications that the public authorities have neglected the obligation to act in good faith, the obligation laid down in article 56 of the Constitution.
139. Finally, note that the Court also claims those votes in respect of contestatarei "500,000 citizens learn abroad" shall take into account elements of probability, without calculation there are certain elements indicating readiness to prevent or distort electoral expression to them. Moreover, the application for annulment of elections must be accompanied by the evidence on which it is based, electoral fraud cannot be established only through the various information media, inferences, probabilistic calculations, based on simple demand of the author's acknowledgments.
140. Taking into account the difference of 67,488 votes between the two competing contestants expressed in the second ballot, the votes that 4031 could not be expressed in the units outside the country, even if it were established by the electoral authorities or the Court, are not such as to influence the final outcome of the elections Furthermore, the higher the eventual choice of citizens who have not been able to exercise their right to vote may not, in abstracto, be attributed exclusively to one candidate over another.
141. However, considering the fact that a large number of citizens learn abroad were unable to vote, the Court considers it necessary to adopt an address to Parliament (3), to amend the voting mechanism abroad, as well as introducing additional criteria to determine the number and geographical distribution of ballots from abroad, including securing polling stations abroad with a reserve amount of ballots.
b) organized Transportation and corrupting the voters residing in the left bank area

142. Contestatara more claims that there have been practices such as "tourism" and "bribe election", with the consequence of a massive fraud, which is likely to alter the award tenure as President of the Republic of Moldova, fraud related to the cases of both transportation and bribery to express a vote if citizens coming from areas under the military occupation of the left bank of the Dniester.
143. In support of its contestatara nature alleged, stated that on 13 November 2016 there have been multiple cases of organized transportation of voters resident in the left bank area to the polling stations in the perimeter of the river Dniester, such cases being reported in floresti Sanatauca village, the polling station 18/58, Rezina town, polling station No. 26/42, district Stefan Voda, Răscăieţi village polling station No. 32/24, Dubasari, village Cocieri, polling station No.     15/1 and nr. 15/2, Dubasari, Molovata Nouă, polling station No. 15/10, Dubasari, dorotcaia, polling station 15/6, Anenii Noi, varnita, precincts 4/41, 4/42, Căuşeni district, the village of Hagimus, polling station 10/32, Copanca, Causeni district, the polling station 10/22, Causeni, Fîrlădeni, a village, the polling station No. 10/26.
144. In the light of the mentioned citizens through the uncontrolled by the Moldovan authorities and the inability of electoral contestants to bring them to the knowledge of the electoral programs, as well as free transportation to those citizens from voting bureaus, contestatara believes that the voters have exercised pressures and their consent was tainted.
145. In support of its contestatara nature alleged, alleging that the Association Promo-LEX "found at least 164 transport units carrying organized voters. Also, according to her, the images published on the internet and the findings of the Association Promo-Lex ", proving that for voting for these voters have been remunerated.
146. the court notice that the transportation organized by itself is not a violation, unless it is proved that undue pressure were exerted to influence electoral option. Moreover, the transport was found and organized in the diaspora, without this involving allegations of "electoral tourism".
147. Also note that Court, in order to ensure the exercise of the right to vote of citizens of the Republic of Moldova residing in the administrative-territorial units on the left bank of the Dniester, in Bender municipality and in some localities of Causeni rayon, provisionally outside the control of the constitutional authorities of the sovereign Republic of Moldova, at the presidential election of October 30, 2016, the Central Electoral Commission, by decision No. 330 of 4 October 2016, established the Organization of 30 polling stations for this category of citizens, with 4 more than the 26 polling stations polling stations opened for parliamentary elections of 30 November 2014.
148. According to the report the CEC, in the first round of presidential elections on 30 October 2016 voted 6964 people residing in the occupied territories, in the second round vote 16,728 citizens. According to data presented by the Central Electoral Commission at the request of the Court, in the parliamentary elections of 30 November 2014 voted 9261 citizens residing in the occupied territories, which shows a relatively stable interest from them for the past few years carried out by the electoral authorities of Moldova's constitutional, known as presidential ballots usually have a higher participation rate than parliamentary ones.
149. Analyzing the arguments presented, the Court finds that none of them is likely to lead to the conclusion of the election fraud.
150. Thus, the existence of a large number of voters who came out to vote at special polling stations, and the disproportion between the result obtained by the two candidates in those sections compared to other sections of the national territory, are not such as to determine by itself, such a conclusion. Moreover, even in sections of the voting from abroad or from the national territory there are similar differences (for example: Romania, Russia, Italy, etc.). In essence, these differences reflect the political option to voters, not the illegality of the vote expressed by them.
151. the Court reiterates that it cannot substantiate the conclusions on such documents or evidence in the absence of video acts of infringements. The fact that these allegations, which are based on the conclusions of a public authority having the powers established by law in administration and verification of the data in question, ask the Constitutional Court to consider them. To decide otherwise would mean substitution by the Constitutional Court, the State authorities whose competence is determined by law. In this respect, Chapter 12 of the electoral code regulates the handling, and liability for violation of electoral legislation, including in relation to the competent authorities. Moreover, in cases where illegalities, are reported to have seized on the public authorities in the implementation of the sanctions provided for by law.
152. According to the law-enforcement bodies responsible for yard, interpelate, there were no complaints or investigations regarding undue influence of choice of citizens from the left bank of Nistru River who voted in special workshops.
153. the Court finds that the cancellation of the election may intervene only if the determination results of voting were held by fraud, and this is likely to change the assignment of the mandate or, where appropriate, the order of candidates who can participate in the second round, and by the fact that the application for annulment of elections must be substantiated and be accompanied by the evidence on which it is based.
154. In this regard, the Court finds that the circumstances of the reported are not likely to lead to the annulment of the elections, as they do not demonstrate a fraud of a nature to change the award tenure. Or, considering the difference of 67,488 votes between the two competing contestants expressed in the second ballot, the votes are even 16,728 if quality of the vote, were not likely to affect the final outcome of the election.
155. At the same time, the Court shall retain, electoral corruption, in which political leaders are using the benefits obtained improperly to influence elections is a form of political corruption.
156. Corrupting voters constitute the offer or giving of money, goods, services or other benefits in order to determine the electors to exercise their electoral rights in a certain way in the context of elections. In this sense, art. 38 para. (5) the electoral code prohibits electoral competitors to offer voters money, gifts, distribute free material goods, including humanitarian aid and other charitable activities. On the other hand, the Court finds the lack of incrimination under the criminal code to determine whether the voters within the election, similar to the criminalisation of giving or putting of money, goods, services or other benefits in order to determine the electors to exercise their electoral rights in its a certain way in the context of the parliamentary elections, the local times in the referendum (art. 181). For this reason, the Court considers it necessary to adopt an address (4) to signal the need for Parliament to eliminate that shortcoming.
157. the Court shall retain, corrupting the voters must be regarded as a serious breach of the principles of free and democratic elections, including the fair and transparent elections. Such violations create preconditions for questioning the legality and legitimacy of the elections. These violations also can influence considerably on the election results.
c) Involvement of the representatives of the Orthodox Church in Moldova 158 during the electoral campaign. According to contestatarei, contrary to legal provisions, several representatives of the Orthodox Church in Moldova have intervened improperly in the process of electing the President of the Republic of Moldova, urging parishioners, by threatening calls, and defamatory information not corresponding to the truth, to vote for his opponent.
159. In support of its contestatara nature alleged, invoking the following facts:-statement of 27 October 2016 to cet. Kantaryan Naga (Metropolitan of Chisinau and all Moldova Vladimir);
-Press Conference of 4 representatives of the Metropolitan Church of Chisinau and all Moldova, instigaţi de cet. Mihăescu (Nellie Bishop);
-instigators of calls monk Nicholas monastery Japca;
-display in the formation of the public in the company of representatives of the Orthodox Church in Moldova or inside the grooves.
160. the court notice that none of these claims was not subject to appeal in the courts of law until the presidential election day.
161. However, the Court take to point out that, according to art. 31 para. (4) of the Constitution, religious cults are autonomous and separate from the State.

162. In its jurisprudence, the Court said that keeping neutral attitude toward religion was established as a principle of the founding of the State of Moldova. In particular, it has avoided taking a religions State and has been banned from any official State ideology. Thus, it has opted for the consecration of religious neutrality and promoting pluralism as constitutional principles. This fact shows that the principle of identity laicităţii constitutes the constitutional part of the Republic of Moldova, which obliges the State to adopt a neutral attitude in religious worship, ensuring respect for the fundamental rights of each person (HCC No. 14 of 16 may 2016).
163. the court notice that under art. 15 para. (2) of law No. 125 of 11 May 2007 concerning freedom of conscience, thought and religion: "religious cults and their component parts, shall refrain from the expression or manifestation of their political preferences, or favoring any political party or any socio-political organization."
164. In addition, article 38 para. (3) of the electoral code prohibits funding times in any material support, direct and/or indirect, of the activity of political parties, election campaigns/candidates by religious organizations.
165. the Court accepts the arguments regarding the engagement of aggressive contestatarei in the context of the election of the representatives of the Metropolitan Church of Moldova, who have used extreme language, xenophobic, homophobic and sexist in its address, which is confirmed and reports of national and international observers (see § 54, 69, supra).
166. the court notice that such behavior is contrary to the Constitution.
167. In this context, note that Court making campaigning and/or financial support or material of the contestants, the actions through which it violates the Constitution of Moldova constitutes grounds for the suspension of religious activity and their component parts (article 24 of the law on freedom of conscience). Religious activity and their component parts may be suspended by judicial process over a period of up to one year if the religious cults or their component parts carried out serious actions, their activities may be terminated by judicial process. The Ministry of Justice has the right to act in court or religious denominations and their components parts for suspension or termination thereof if they are conclusive evidence of the existence of one of the grounds provided by law.
168. the Court finds that all State authorities in charge of the electoral process and the work of religious cults have not honored the positive obligation of preventing and sanctioning religious involvement in the electoral process. For these reasons, the Court shall issue an address to Parliament (5) in order to establish mechanisms sancționatorii prompt and immediate, including criminal order, for any attempt to involve religious worship in election campaigns.
169 d) multiple Voting. According to contestatarei, were observed in 8 cases certain citizens voted multiple or instead of other people.
170. According to CEC via electronic system were detected several attempts to vote in the place of another person, but not by the same people voting more than once. In each case, have been seized on the law-enforcement authorities, cases have been documented and started criminal proceedings on the basis of articles 181 and 182 of the penal code. Thus, there has been no recorded cases of multiple voting, but isolated cases of attempted to vote in the place of another person. Every time CEC has tracked down and stopped these later by using his electronic system.
171. Therefore, in terms of suspicion concerning the existence of some cases of multiple voting, the Court withheld that evidence submitted does not confirm such situations.
172. Thus, allegations relating to election fraud through multiple voting is not based on documentary evidence that legal provisions.
e) Distribution by representatives of electoral candidate Igor Dodon material with defamatory character 173. According to contestatarei, on 28 October 2016 its sympathizers territory reported distribution through country towns and villages leaflets disparaging content.
174. On 4 November 2016 were disseminated through the formation of Soviets unsuccessfully villages and cities the Special Edition of the newspaper "Socialists", which contained slanderous information and offensively in the competitor address electoral Maia Sandu. Thus, this newspaper was shown erroneously that Maia had a S mutual understanding with Chancellor Angela Merkel aimed at coming to Moldova's acceptance of Syrian refugees after taking office as head of State.
175. In the absence of the relevant acts of violations, the Court is unable to determine the impact of these leaflets over the election results.
f) Fostering of media institutions to 176 electoral candidate. According to contestatarei, from the report on monitoring the media during the electoral campaign for the 2016 presidential election, conducted by the independent press Association, it follows that Igor Dodon was the most favored contestants from the standpoint of context occurrences. It has appeared in 116 times positive light and 80 times in the negative light. Maia Sandu has been more disadvantaged in negative light of 146 times and in the positive light of 103 times.
177. the Court shall retain that media is a fundamental element of a democratic society. The media is a tool for exerting power and influence opinion.
178. the court notice that the organisation of free and fair elections presupposes an informational and media reporting, complying with laws and ethics code of the journalist.
179. the main Function of the press in democratic societies lies in the coverage of political events and facts in an objective, impartial and open, promoting a large number of opinions and points of view, as well as the interpretation of news in such a way that the public understand the relevance of the information it receives. This is the basic principle that upholds the idea of journalism as "advocacy", whose purpose is to promote the participation of citizens in public life. From this perspective, the press promotes and protects the rights and interests of citizens through his role of "watchdog" ("watchdog").
180. the Court noted that, according to art. 64 of the election code, broadcasters, in all their programs, and the means of mass media by public authorities are based are required to abide by the principles of fairness, accountability, balance and impartiality in the coverage of elections. Public broadcasters granted candidates free air time in an equitable manner and without discrimination, on the basis of the principles of transparency and objectivity.
181. the Court noted that the media is the most important actor that facilitates the exchange of ideas between the electorate and the electoral competitors and which builds identity electorate.
182. the right of voters to make an informed choice, and that includes the media must inform in a professional way and exactly about candidates ' platforms and visions, and of events in the context of the electoral campaign and the election process.
183. As regards election coverage by the mass media, the Court finds that in the reports of international observers noted lack of autonomy for sources against political and business interests, including due to the high concentration of ownership of the media sources in the hands of interest groups, which continuously threatens the pluralism of opinion.
184. the Court observes that CCA has again successively broadcasters for biased coverage of the campaign and the lopsided presidential, including violation of the rules concerning the electoral campaign in the presidential election of 30 October 2016 in mass-media in Moldova.
185. the Court notes that, according to current regulations, the audiovisual Coordinating Council shall examine any question concerning the electoral campaign by the broadcasters in general orders. This makes it virtually impossible for penalties in good time and in proportion to the seriousness of the committed, and, as a consequence, restricts the possibility for the public to shape political opinion impartially and to provide equal conditions for election candidates.

186. Taking into account the role and the importance of the media, the Court stresses the need for the imposition of effective tools that would enable the authorities responsible for the application of sanctions with immediate execution and dissuasive sanctions, such as suspension of the right of broadcasting for the entire period of the election campaign for those institutions that are in breach of the duty of impartiality during the electoral period. For these reasons, the Court will make an Address to the Parliament (6) to amend the legislation relating to the liability of broadcasters during the period of election campaigns.
4.4.187. General conclusions The Court finds that the elections for the post of President of the Republic of Moldova in year 2016 were organized and were held amid a political crisis, financial and social, compounded by the lack of trust in State institutions.
188. This fact cannot be ignored, the phenomena shown being generated mainly from deficiencies in electoral legislation, likely to give rise to legal insecurity. The Court notes that the conduct of the presidential elections for the electoral code has been modified and substantially completed several months before the date of the Organization of the elections. Or, in the absence of these changes, the conduct of the elections would have been impossible.
189. Although the legal framework provides an adequate basis for achieving democratic elections, however, there are certain gaps and ambiguities. These relate, in particular, the collection and verification of signatures in support of candidates, campaign financing and implementation, effective resolution of electoral disputes, enforcement of provisions relating to mass media and provisions concerning the conduct of the second round of presidential elections. These gaps are reported and of national and international observers and led to the implementation of legal provisions.
190. It also notes a number of imperfections of the law in the modified version, for example, with regard to the Organization of voting in the special wards (which has led to suspicions concerning the exercise of practices such as "electoral tourism"), in voting bureaus abroad.
191. In this context, the Constitutional Court emphasises the need for the entire electoral legislation relating to the election of the President, Parliament and local authorities to be reviewed should be concentrated in a revised electoral Code, whose provisions common to the special and to ensure, in accordance with the constitutional principles, the organisation of democratic elections, transparent and fair. In this respect, the Court formulated 6 Addresses Parliament.
192. The observations are not exposed, however, liable to lead to another conclusion than that which led to the examination of the claims formulated and presented by the authors of the application for the annulment of the elections. The fraud relied upon constitutes in reality arising from these samples, a series of sequential items that haven't formed a phenomenon with vocation to change the will of the voters, meaning a amendment of award tenure. With respect to these possible violations of law, remain the responsibility of the competent authorities ' investigation of the facts and application of the sanctions provided for by law.
193. For the reasons above, the application for annulment of elections for the post of President of the Republic of Moldova, in turui two of 13 November 2016, to be rejected.
194. In the exercise of the powers which under the Constitution, the Constitutional Court confirmed the result of the presidential poll, according to which on 13 November 2016 Mr. Igor Dodon was elected President of the Republic of Moldova.
III. Mandate validation by the President of the Republic of Moldova 195. Under article 79 paragraph 2. (1) of the Constitution and the electoral code 112, the term of Office of the President of the Republic of Moldova shall be validated by the Constitutional Court.
196. According to article 112 paragraph 2. (2) of the electoral code, until the validation of mandate, the candidate elected to the position of President of the Republic of Moldova presents the Constitutional Court's confirmation that is not a member of any political party and does not meet any other public or private office.
197. In this connection, on 24 November 2016 Mr. Igor Dodon informed the Court, in order of quality, about the termination of the membership of the party.
198. On 12 December 2016 candidate elected as the President of the Republic of Moldova presented the Court a request for resignation from the post of Deputy elected from the party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova.
199. In the plenary session were not established the circumstances likely to hamper the validation of mandate of Mr. Igor Dodon to the position of President of the Republic of Moldova.
200. In view of the above, the Court validated the mandate of the President of the Republic of Moldova, in particular in the context of the election of 13 November 2016.
For these reasons, under articles 135 and 140 of the Constitution, 26 of the law on the Constitutional Court, 6, 61, 62 lit. d) and 68 of the code of constitutional jurisdiction, 111 and 112 of the election code, the Constitutional Court DECIDES: 1. confirms the results of election of the President of Republic of Moldova of 13 November 2016.
2. Validate the choice of Mr. Igor Dodon to the position of President of the Republic of Moldova.
3. 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 No. 34 Alexandru Tanase. Chisinau, 13 December 2016.


PCC-01/ -34/1 139e Chisinau, 13 December 2016, the Moldovan Parliament ADDRESS on 13 December 2016 Constitutional Court passed Judgement No. 34 concerning the confirmation of election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
In the process of examination of the case relating to the confirmation of the election results, the Court found several deficiencies in the electoral code in the take of handling, in this respect the electoral authorities and the courts judgment dismissing a large number of complaints as being outside their competence.
The Court referred to the lack of legal provisions which would establish the competent authorities to examine electoral complaints lodged later on election day, and the subject matter of disputes that could be deducted towards the settlement of common law courts.     Also, there is no clear procedure for examining complaints brought on election day, who couldn't be filed in court on the same day.
Note that the only court legal provision concerning the handling of election results tabulation is contained in art. 67 para. (3) of the electoral code, according to which "[...] appeals against the decision of the electoral body regarding election results tabulation and award of mandates will be examined by the Court together with the confirmation of legality and validation of mandates. "
The Court observed that the courts not included within the scope of this presidential election rules.
The Court noted that, due to the application of the legislation by making ordinary courts, electoral actors were, in fact, deprived of effective judicial control, and the Constitutional Court were unable to operate with the acts of infringements.
Therefore, taking into account the rationale for exposed in its judgment No. 34 of 13 December 2016, the Court stresses the need to clarify the legislation by Parliament in part what keep handling on the organisation and conduct of elections. In particular, the Court recommends a separate regulation and Parliament's explicit procedures for the examination of complaints for various types of elections. In the same vein, the Court asks Parliament to regulate the procedures for examining different complaints in the event of deployment of two rounds, including complaints that it has received on election day.
In accordance with the provisions of article 281 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the Court shall request Parliament to examine this address to be communicated the results of its examination within the time limits prescribed by law.

The PRESIDENT of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Alexandru Tanase PCC-01/ -34/2 139e Chisinau, 13 December 2016, the Moldovan Parliament ADDRESS on 13 December 2016 Constitutional Court Judgement No. 34 adopted regarding the confirmation of election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.

The Court noted that the Moldovan legislation allows voting abroad. At the same time, voting abroad cannot engage in any conditions, but in compliance with legal provisions. In this respect, pursuant to art. 291 electoral code, at the opening of the polling stations outside the country authorities to take into account: (1) the number of citizens who have registered in advance and (2) the number of voters who participated in the previous poll.
Examining the materials of the case, the Court found that several Moldovan nationals in foreign countries have not been able to exercise their right to vote and that the number of polling stations and the ballots distributed to polling stations outside the country were, in fact, insufficient.
Therefore, considering the fact that a large number of citizens learn abroad were unable to vote, taking into account the rationale for exposed in its judgment No. 34 of 13 December 2016, the Court considers it necessary for Parliament to come up with new regulations to amend the voting mechanism abroad, as well as introducing additional criteria relating to the determination of the number polling stations abroad and their geographical distribution.
In accordance with the provisions of article 281 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the Court shall request Parliament to examine this address to be communicated the results of its examination within the time limits prescribed by law.

The PRESIDENT of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Alexandru Tanase PCC-01/ -34/3 139e Chisinau, 13 December 2016, the Moldovan Parliament ADDRESS on 13 December 2016 Constitutional Court passed Judgement No. 34 concerning the confirmation of election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
In its judgment, with regard to the criticism relating to the number of ballots available to polling stations abroad, the Court noted that article 29 paragraph 1. (2) of the electoral code stipulates: "the polling stations [...] shall contain not less than 30 and not more than 3000 voters. " Similarly, according to article 49 paragraph 3. (3) of the electoral code, "bureaus of polling stations set up outside the Central Election Commission of the Republic of Moldova it sends out ballots [...], based on the estimated number of voters determined on the basis of the information submitted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European integration and the accumulated by the Central Electoral Commission, but not more than 3000 ballots for each polling station."
According to the Central Election Commission, in 13 polling stations of the open 100 overseas have been exhausted ballots until the closure of the orderly polling station.
Thus, given the fact that a large number of citizens learn abroad were unable to vote, the Court considers it necessary for Parliament to come up with regulations to amend the voting mechanism abroad, as well as introducing additional criteria relating to the determination of the number of ballot papers and their geographical distribution, including ensuring polling stations abroad with a reserve amount of ballots.
In accordance with the provisions of article 281 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the Court shall request Parliament to examine this address to be communicated the results of its examination within the time limits prescribed by law.

The PRESIDENT of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Alexandru Tanase PCC-01/ -34/4 139e Chisinau, 13 December 2016, the Moldovan Parliament ADDRESS on 13 December 2016 Constitutional Court Judgement No. 34 adopted regarding the confirmation of election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
In its judgment, the Court has said the detained, corruption is a form of electoral corruption, in which political leaders are using the benefits obtained improperly to influence elections.
Corrupting voters constitute the offer or giving of money, goods, services or other benefits in order to determine the electors to exercise their electoral rights in its a certain way in the context of elections. In this regard, according to art. 38 para. (5) the electoral code, electoral competitors shall not propose voters money, gifts, distribute free material goods, including humanitarian aid and other charitable activities.
On the other hand, the Court found a lack of incrimination under the criminal code to determine whether the voters within the election, similar to the criminalisation of giving or putting of money, goods, services or other benefits in order to determine the electors to exercise their electoral rights in its a certain way in the context of the parliamentary elections, the local times in the referendum (art. 181).
The Court shall retain, corrupting the voters must be regarded as a serious breach of the principles of free and democratic elections, including the fair and transparent elections. Such violations create preconditions for questioning the legality and legitimacy of the elections. These violations also can influence considerably the election results.
Thus, taking into account the rationale for exposed in its judgment No. 34 of 13 December 2016, the Court stresses the need for explicit regulation by Parliament in the Criminal Code of the incrimination of corruption within the presidential election voters.
In accordance with the provisions of article 281 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the Court shall request Parliament to examine this address to be communicated the results of its examination within the time limits prescribed by law.

The PRESIDENT of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Alexandru Tanase PCC-01/ -34/5 139e Chisinau, 13 December 2016, the Moldovan Parliament ADDRESS on 13 December 2016 Constitutional Court passed Judgement No. 34 concerning the confirmation of election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
Examining the materials of the case, the Court found aggressive involvement in the presidential elections of the representatives of the Metropolitan Church of Moldova, who have used extreme language, xenophobic, homophobic and sexist at the address of a candidate, which is confirmed and reports of national and international observers. The Court noted that such behavior is contrary to the Constitution.
The Court pointed out that, according to art. 31 para. (4) of the Constitution, religious cults are autonomous and separate from The case-law of its State, the Court said that keeping neutral attitude toward religion was established as a principle of the founding of the State of Moldova.
The Court noted that under art. 15 para. (2) of law No. 125 of 11 May 2007 concerning freedom of conscience, thought and religion: "religious cults and their component parts, shall refrain from the expression or manifestation of their political preferences, or favoring any political party or any socio-political organization."
Also, article 38(2). (3) of the electoral code prohibits funding times in any material support, direct and/or indirect, of the activity of political parties, election campaigns/candidates by religious organizations.
In this context, the Court has noted that making campaigning and/or financial support or material of the contestants, the actions through which it violates the Constitution of Moldova constitutes grounds for the suspension of religious activity and their component parts. Religious activity and their component parts may be suspended by judicial process over a period of up to one year if the religious cults or their component parts carried out serious actions, their activities may be terminated by judicial process. The Ministry of Justice has the right to act in court or religious denominations and their components parts for suspension or termination thereof if they are conclusive evidence of the existence of one of the grounds provided by law.
The Court found that all the State authorities in charge of the electoral process and the work of religious cults have not honored the positive obligation of preventing and sanctioning religious involvement in the electoral process.
Thus, taking into account the rationale for exposed in its judgment No. 34 of 13 December 2016, the Court stresses the need for explicit regulation by Parliament of sancționatorii mechanisms, including prompt and immediate in order, for any attempt to involve religious worship in election campaigns.

In accordance with the provisions of article 281 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the Court shall request Parliament to examine this address to be communicated the results of its examination within the time limits prescribed by law.

The PRESIDENT of the CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Alexandru Tanase PCC-01/ -34/6 139e Chisinau, 13 December 2016, the Moldovan Parliament ADDRESS on 13 December 2016 Constitutional Court adopted the decision on the confirmation of election results and validation of mandate of President of the Republic of Moldova.
In its judgment, the Court referred to noted that the media is a fundamental element of a democratic society. The media is a tool for exerting power and influence, opinion and organizing free and fair elections presupposes an environment information system and reporting, complying with media laws and ethics code of the journalist.
Under art. 64 of the election code, broadcasters, in all their programs, and the means of mass media by public authorities are based are required to abide by the principles of fairness, accountability, balance and impartiality in the coverage of elections. Public broadcasters granted candidates free air time in an equitable manner and without discrimination, on the basis of the principles of transparency and objectivity.
At the same time, the Court found that, according to current regulations, the audiovisual Coordinating Council shall examine any question concerning the electoral campaign by the broadcasters in general orders. This makes it virtually impossible for penalties in good time and in proportion to the seriousness of the committed, and, as a consequence, restricts the possibility for the public to shape political opinion impartially and to provide equal conditions for election candidates.
Thus, taking into account the role and the importance of the media, the Court stresses the need for the amendment of legislation relating to the liability of broadcasters during the period of electoral campaigns and the establishment by Parliament of some effective tools that would enable the authorities responsible for the application of sanctions with immediate execution and dissuasive sanctions, such as suspension of the right of broadcasting for the entire period of the election campaign, for those institutions that are in breach of the duty of impartiality during the electoral period.
In accordance with the provisions of article 281 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the Court shall request Parliament to examine this address to be communicated the results of its examination within the time limits prescribed by law.