[ad_1]
“The decision of the CCR seems to me abracadabrante, a flagrant violation of the Constitution by the body that must be the guarantor of the Constitution. Something must be changed. It is no longer possible. The political tricks must be changed,” Orban said. He said that he could not understand the decision of the Constitutional Court, which, in his opinion, is nonsense.
According to Orban, the government has attacked the law whereby a parliamentary majority claims the right to set the date of elections, since parliamentarians are not responsible for their vote or their political opinions.
“What happens if a majority does not put the bill on the agenda on the date of the elections? What is the interest of a parliamentarian? Extend his mandate. We have attacked and the Court rules on the validity of the Decision of the Government, such nonsense I have not seen in my life. Why? That Iordache orders Dorneanu? ”
Parliament has full competence to set the date of the elections by ordinary or organic law, as the case may be, depending on the political decision to hold elections within the mandate of the Chambers or within 3 months after their expiration, states the decision. The Constitutional Court rejected President Klaus Iohannis’ appeal on this issue.
President Klaus Iohannis and the Government presented a notification to the Law on some measures for the organization of the elections for the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, after the end of the mandate of the elected Parliament in 2016. On August 17, the head of The State notified the RCC, requesting that this regulation is unconstitutional as a whole.
However, the RCC rejected this complaint on September 29.
“In view of the above, it seems that Parliament has full powers to set the date of the elections by ordinary or organic law, as the case may be, according to the political decision to hold elections within the term of the Chambers or within 3 months following their expiration. That. In the absence of a law that establishes the date of the parliamentary elections, these may only take place within the 4-year term of the Chambers, the elections being on time, while, in the conditions of said law, parliamentary elections may be held both on time. As well as throughout the legislature, the political decision in this regard belongs exclusively to Parliament ”, is shown in the motivation of the ICR that was published on Friday.
It should be noted that Judge Daniel Morar formulated a separate opinion, in which he stated that “the complaints made by the President of Romania and the Government must be admitted” in order to establish “the unconstitutionality of the provisions of the Law on some measures to the organization of elections for the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, as after the end of the mandate of the elected Parliament in 2016 ”.
“It turns out that the assumption of the political will to hold elections over time, after the expiration of Parliament’s mandate, cannot be achieved by the Government, but only by Parliament. The political decision to hold parliamentary elections after the expiration of the mandate of the Chambers, with the consequence of the legal extension of their mandate, is intrinsically related to the role of Parliament provided for in Article 61, paragraph 1, of the Constitution, preserving the Government, in this case, only powers are purely administrative with respect to the organization of law enforcement [şi anume aspectele referitoare la organizarea propriu-zisă a alegerilor, cu referire, spre exemplu, la stabilirea calendarului acţiunilor din cuprinsul perioadei electorale]. Only the representative authority that exercises national sovereignty can decide on such a measure, because the decision to set the date of the elections in time is directly related to national sovereignty, ”argue the judges of the CCR.
