DOCSLIB.ORG

Constitutional Issues in Romania Decisions, Rulings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Constitutional Issues in Romania Decisions, Rulings Strasbourg, 5 September 2012 CDL-REF(2012)031 Opinion 685/2012 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES IN ROMANIA DECISIONS, RULINGS AND OPINIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT (Translations from Romanian provided by the Romanian Authorities) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-REF(2012)031 - 2 - Table of Contents ADVISORY OPINION no. 1 of 6 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court, concerning the proposal to suspend from office the President of Romania, Mr. Traian B ăsescu................... 3 RULING no. 1 of 9 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court on ascertaining the existence of the circumstances justifying the ad interim exercise of the office of President of Romania........ 21 DECISION no. 727 of 9 July 2012 on the referral of unconstitutionality of the Law amending Article 27(1) of Law no. 47/1992 on the Organisation and Operation of the Constitutional Court................................................................................................................................... 25 DECISION no. 728 of 9 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court on the rejection of the claim of inconsistency with the Constitution of the Decision of the Senate no. 24 of 3 July 2012 for the dismissal of Mr. Vasile Blaga from the office of President of the Senate ....................... 34 DECISION no. 729 of 9 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court on the rejection of the claim of inconsistency with the Constitution of the Decision of the Chamber of Deputies no. 25 of 3 July 2012, on the dismissal of Mrs. Roberta Alma Anastase from the office of President and member of the Permanent Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies .......................................... 43 DECISION no. 732 of 9 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court on the rejection of the claim of inconsistency with the Constitution of the Decision of the Parliament no. 32 of 3 July 2012 for the dismissal of Mr. Gheorghe Iancu from the office of Ombudsperson................ 52 DECISION No. 731 of 10 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court on the rejection of the claim of inconsistency with the Constitution of the Law amending Article 10 of Law No. 3/2000 concerning the Organization of the Referendum ................................................................. 63 DECISION no. 734 of 24 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court on the rejection of the claim of inconsistency with the Constitution of the provisions of Article 3 of the Decision of the Parliament no. 34 of 6 July 2012 concerning the establishment of the object and of the date of the national referendum for the dismissal of the President of Romania ........................... 71 RULING no. 3 of 2 August 2012 of the Constitutional Court on the claims related to the compliance with the procedure for the organization and carrying out of national referendum of 29 July 2012 for the dismissal of the President of Romania, Mr. Traian Basescu............ 79 PRESS RELEASE [of the Constitutional Court issued on 14 August 2012]......................... 92 RULING no. 6 of 21 August 2012 on the compliance with the procedure for the organization and conduct of the national referendum of 29 July 2012 for the dismissal of the President of Romania, Mr. Traian Basescu, and on the confirmation of its results .............. 93 - 3 - CDL-REF(2012)031 ADVISORY OPINION no. 1 of 6 July 2012 of the Constitutional Court, concerning the proposal to suspend from office the President of Romania, Mr. Traian B ăsescu Published in the Official Journal of Romania no. 456 of 6 July 2012 By means of Letter no. 1/1.023/VZ dated 5 July 2012, the two chambers of the Parliament of Romania requested the Constitutional Court, in accordance with the provisions of Article 95 and Article 146 (h) of the Constitution of Romania, of Articles 42 and 43 of Law no. 47/1992 on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court, as well as of Articles 67 and 68 of the Regulation of reunited meetings of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate, to issue, no later than 6 July 2012, 12:00 hours, the advisory opinion on the proposal to suspend from office the President of Romania, Mr. Traian B ăsescu. The letter was registered with the Constitutional Court under no. 4.617 dated 5 July 2012, forming the object of File no. 1,200H/2012, together with the following documents: - the proposal to suspend from office the President of Romania, Mr. Traian B ăsescu, initiated by 154 deputies and senators; - the letter sent to the President of Romania by the chairpersons of the two Chambers of the Parliament on 4 July 2012, informing the latter of the submission of the proposal of suspension from office and advising the date of the joint meeting of the two Chambers of 5 July 2012, 10:00 hours, on the agenda of which the request for suspension was included; - the shorthand of the reunited meeting of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate, from 5 July 2012. Having analyzed the request for intervention submitted to the file, after deliberations, the Court dismissed the requests submitted. Having examined the proposal to suspend Mr. Traian B ăsescu from the office of the President of Romania, the standpoint delivered by the President of Romania and the other documents indicated herein above, the Constitutional Court ascertains as follows: 1. The provisions of the Constitution of Romania which, in accordance with the proposal to suspend from office, were infringed by grave acts committed by the President of Romania, Mr. Traian B ăsescu, are as follows: Article 1 (3), (4) and (5) – the Romanian State; Article 8 – Pluralism and political parties; Article 16 – Equality of rights; Article 21 – Free access to justice; Article 23 (3) – Individual freedom; Article 34 – Right to protection of health; Article 47 (2) – Living standard; Article 77 – Promulgation of laws; Article 80 – the President of Romania; Article 82 (2) – Validation of mandate and oath-taking; Article 84 – Incompatibilities and immunities; Article 102 – Role and structure of the Government; Article 134 (2) – Powers of the Superior Council of Magistracy; Article 142 (2) – Structure of the Constitutional Court; Article 147 – Decisions of the Constitutional Court; Article 150 (1) – Initiative to revise the Constitution. 2. Article 95 (1) of the Fundamental Law stipulates that the President of Romania may be suspended from office “ in case of having committed grave acts infringing upon constitutional provisions ”. Given that the constitutional provision fails to define the notion of “ grave acts ”, in order to determine whether the conditions are met to suspend from office the President of Romania, the Constitutional Court, through Advisory Opinion no. 1 dated April 5, 2007 CDL-REF(2012)031 - 4 - on the proposal to suspend from office the President of Romania, Mr. Traian B ăsescu, published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I, no. 258 of 18 April 2007, stated that “ It is obvious that an act, namely an action or an inaction, infringing upon the constitutional provisions, is grave in relation to the very object of the infringement. However, in regulating the procedure to suspend from office the President of Romania, the Constitution does not stick to this meaning as, in this case, the phrase <<grave acts>> would have no meaning. Analyzing the distinction contained in the provision quoted above and taking into consideration the fact that the Fundamental Law is a normative legal document, the Constitutional Court finds that not any act infringing upon the constitutional provisions may justify the suspension of the President of Romania from office, but only <<grave acts>>, having the complex meaning held by this notion in the science and practice of law. From the legal standpoint, the severity of an act is assessed depending on the value it prejudices, as well as its damaging consequences, occurred or potential, on the means used, on the person of the author of the act and, not last, with the subjective position thereof, on the purpose for which the act was committed. By applying these criteria on the acts infringing upon the constitutional legal order referred to in Article 95 (1) of the Fundamental Law, the Court notes that there may be deemed as grave acts infringing upon the constitutional provisions the acts of decision or circumventing the fulfillment of certain mandatory decision acts, whereby the President of Romania would hamper the functioning of public authorities, would suppress or restrict the rights and freedoms of the citizens, would disturb the constitutional order or would seek to change the constitutional order or other acts of similar nature, which would or could entail similar effects .” 3. The proposal to suspend from office the President of Romania, Mr. Traian Băsescu, is divided into the preamble and 7 chapters representing the reasons underlying the suspension proposal, setting forth several infringements or categories of infringements upon the constitutional provisions. 3.1. In the preamble of the proposal to suspend from office, it is stated that, “ starting with 6 December 2009, democracy and the rule of law witnessed an extensive process of erosion, of replacing the institutions of the state subject to the rule of law provided by the Constitution of Romania, reaching the situation where the political will and action are concentrated, in a discretionary and unconstitutional manner, in the hands of a single individual – the President of the country ”, who “ came to dictate to the executive power, to the legislative and judicial powers, which equals to a grave departure from the fundamental principles of the Constitution of Romania ”. At the same time, it is emphasized that “ under such circumstances, the institutions of the democratic state, as defined in the Constitution of Romania, in accordance with the principle regarding the separation of State powers, were faced with the practical impossibility to continue their function.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Moldova: from Oligarchic Pluralism to Plahotniuc's Hegemony
    Centre for Eastern Studies NUMBER 208 | 07.04.2016 www.osw.waw.pl Moldova: from oligarchic pluralism to Plahotniuc’s hegemony Kamil Całus Moldova’s political system took shape due to the six-year rule of the Alliance for European Integration coalition but it has undergone a major transformation over the past six months. Resorting to skilful political manoeuvring and capitalising on his control over the Moldovan judiciary system, Vlad Plahotniuc, one of the leaders of the nominally pro-European Democra- tic Party and the richest person in the country, was able to bring about the arrest of his main political competitor, the former prime minister Vlad Filat, in October 2015. Then he pushed through the nomination of his trusted aide, Pavel Filip, for prime minister. In effect, Plahot- niuc has concentrated political and business influence in his own hands on a scale unseen so far in Moldova’s history since 1991. All this indicates that he already not only controls the judi- ciary, the anti-corruption institutions, the Constitutional Court and the economic structures, but has also subordinated the greater part of parliament and is rapidly tightening his grip on the section of the state apparatus which until recently was influenced by Filat. Plahotniuc, whose power and position depends directly on his control of the state apparatus and financial flows in Moldova, is not interested in a structural transformation of the country or in implementing any thorough reforms; this includes the Association Agreement with the EU. This means that as his significance grows, the symbolic actions so far taken with the aim of a structural transformation of the country will become even more superficial.
    [Show full text]
  • CONSTITUTION of ROMANIA – Republished – the CONSTITUTION of ROMANIA of 1991 WAS AMENDED and COMPLETED by the LAW NO
    CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA – republished – THE CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA OF 1991 WAS AMENDED AND COMPLETED BY THE LAW NO. 429/2003 ON THE REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA, PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF ROMANIA, PART I, NO. 758 OF 29 OCTOBER 2003, REPUBLISHED BY THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF ROMANIA, PART I, NO. 767 OF 30 OCTOBER 2003) ON THE GROUNDS OF ARTICLE 152 OF THE CONSTITUTION, WITH THE UPDATED DENOMINATIONS AND THE RENUMBERED TEXTS (ARTICLE 152 BECAME, IN THE REPUBLISHED FORM, ARTICLE 156). THE LAW NO. 429/2003 ON THE REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA WAS APPROVED BY THE NATIONAL REFERENDUM OF 18-19 OCTOBER 2003, AND CAME INTO FORCE ON 29 OCTOBER 2003, THE DATE OF THE PUBLICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF ROMANIA, PART I, NO. 758 OF 29 OCTOBER 2003 OF THE DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT NO. 3 OF 22 OCTOBER 2003 FOR THE CONFIRMATION OF THE RESULT OF THE NATIONAL REFERENDUM OF 18-19 OCTOBER 2003 CONCERNING THE LAW ON THE REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA. THE CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA, IN ITS INITIAL FORM, WAS ADOPTED IN THE SITTING OF THE CONSTITUANT ASSEMBLY OF 21 NOVEMBER 1991, WAS PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE OF ROMANIA, PART I, NO. 233 OF 21 NOVEMBER 1991, AND CAME INTO FORCE AFTER ITS APPROVAL BY THE NATIONAL REFERENDUM OF 8 DECEMBER 1991. CONSTITUTION OF ROMANIA – republished – Descrierea CIP a Bibliotecii Naionale a României ROMÂNIA [Constituie] Constitution of Romania. – București: Monitorul Oficial R.A., 2012 ISBN 978–973–567–770-1 342.4(498)”1991“ CONTENTS TITLE I General
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring Facebook. Presidential Elections – Romania, November 2019
    Monitoring Facebook. Presidential Elections – Romania, November 2019 A report drafted by GlobalFocus Center, Bucharest, in cooperation with MEMO98, Bratislava. Supported by Democracy Reporting International, Berlin. Monitoring Facebook. Presidential Elections – Romania, November 2019 Monitoring Facebook. Presidential Elections – Romania, November 2019 February, 2019 Bucharest, Romania This project was supported by Civitates Monitoring Facebook. Presidential Elections – Romania, November 2019 GlobalFocus Center is an independent international studies’ think tank that produces in-depth research and high-quality analysis on foreign policy, security, European aairs, good governance, and development. Our purpose is to advance expertise by functioning as a platform for cooperation and dialogue among individual experts, NGOs, think-tanks, and public institutions from Romania and foreign partners. We have built, and tested over 10 dierent countries a unique research methodology, proactively approaching the issue of malign interference by analysing societies' structural, weaponisable vulnerabilities. We are building a multi-stakeholder Stratcom platform, for identifying an optimal way of initiating and conducting unied responses to hybrid threats. Our activities are focused on fostering regional security and contributing to the reection process of EU reforms. During November 1-24, 2019, GlobalFocus Center, in cooperation with MEMO98 and Democracy Reporting International (DRI), monitored Facebook during the 10 and 24 November presidential election polls in Romania. AUTHORS GlobalFocus Center: Ana Maria Luca, Run Zamr (editor) ANALYSTS: Alexandra Mihaela Ispas, Ana Maria Teaca, Vlad Iavita, Raluca Andreescu MEMO98: Rasťo Kužel Monitoring Facebook. Presidential Elections – Romania, November 2019 Contents I. INTRODUCTION 4 II. HIGHLIGHTS 5 III. CONTEXT 6 III.1 TRUST IN MEDIA AND SOCIAL MEDIA CONSUMPTION IN ROMANIA 6 III.2 PUBLIC ATTITUDES AND TRUST IN INSTITUTIONS 7 III.3 THE NOVEMBER 2019 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 7 IV.
    [Show full text]
  • OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 168 1 European Integration (AIE)
    Centre for Eastern Studies NUMBER 168 | 22.04.2015 www.osw.waw.pl An appropriated state? Moldova’s uncertain prospects for modernisation Kamil Całus There have been several significant changes on Moldova’s domestic political scene in the wake of the November 2014 parliamentary elections there. Negotiations lasted nearly two months and re- sulted in the formation of a minority coalition composed of two groupings: the Liberal-Democratic Party (PLDM) and the Democratic Party (PDM). New coalition received unofficial support from the Communist Party (PCRM), which had previously been considered an opposition party. Contrary to their initial announcements, PDLM and PDM did not admit the Liberal Party led by Mihai Ghim- pu to power. Moreover, they blocked the nomination for prime minister of the incumbent, Iurie Leancă. Leancă has been perceived by many as an honest politician and a guarantor of reforms. This situation resulted in the political model present in Moldova since 2009 being preserved. In this model the state’s institutions are subordinated to two main oligarch politicians: Vlad Filat (the leader of PLDM) and Vlad Plahotniuc (a billionaire who de facto controls PDM). With control over the state in the hands of Filat and Plahotniuc questions are raised regarding the prospects of Moldova’s real modernisation. It will also have a negative impact on the process of implementation of Moldova’s Association Agreement with the EU and on other key reforms concerning, for example, the judiciary, the financial sector and the process of de-politicisation of the state’s institutions. From both leaders’ perspective, any changes to the current state of affairs would be tantamount to limiting their influence in politics and the economy, which would in turn challenge their business activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitorul Oficial Partea I
    PARTEA I Anul IX Ñ Nr. 85 LEGI, DECRETE, HOTÃRÂRI ªI ALTE ACTE Joi, 8 mai 1997 SUMAR Nr. Pagina Nr. Pagina HOTÃRÂRI ALE GUVERNULUI ROMÂNIEI 181. Ñ Hotãrâre privind aprobarea indicatorilor tehnico- 168. Ñ Hotãrâre privind regimul produselor ºi serviciilor economici ai obiectivului de investiþii ”Înfiinþare dis- care pot pune în pericol viaþa, sãnãtatea, securita- tribuþie gaze naturale în comuna Tiþeºti, judeþul tea muncii ºi protecþia mediului înconjurãtor .......... 1Ð3 ArgeºÒ......................................................................... 13 172. Ñ Hotãrâre pentru înfiinþarea Registrului Naþional 182. Ñ Hotãrâre privind aprobarea indicatorilor tehnico- al Substanþelor Chimice Potenþial Toxice ºi apro- economici ai obiectivului de investiþii ”Modernizare barea regulamentului de organizare ºi funcþionare centrale termice ºi reabilitare reþele de distribuþie a acestuia .................................................................. 3Ð5 energie termicã în oraºul Predeal, judeþul BraºovÒ 13 175. Ñ Hotãrâre privind înfiinþarea Societãþii Comerciale 183. Ñ Hotãrâre privind aprobarea indicatorilor tehnico- ”Editura CeresÒ Ñ S.A. ............................................ 5Ð10 economici ai obiectivului de investiþii ”Blocuri de 177. Ñ Hotãrâre privind numirea preºedintelui pãrþii locuinþe S 10 ºi S 11, zona Nord, municipiul Râmnicu române în Comisia mixtã româno-iugoslavã ºi a Vâlcea, judeþul VâlceaÒ ............................................. 14 reprezentanþilor pãrþii române în Comisia mixtã hidro- tehnicã româno-ungarã ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Romanian Pension System Reforms: Evidences from Legislative Roll Call Analysis
    STUDIA UBB SOCIOLOGIA, 61 (LXI), 1, 2016, pp. 109-126 DOI: 10.1515/subbs-2016-0005 THE ROMANIAN PENSION SYSTEM REFORMS: EVIDENCES FROM LEGISLATIVE ROLL CALL ANALYSIS CLAUDIU BARBU1 Abstract. There are important differences between all Eastern European countries regarding the implementation of pension system privatization. The differences regarding the political configuration between the countries from Eastern Europe might be a possible explanation for the amount of diversity in this area. The ideology of political parties that form or sustain the government that implements the reform can also be an explanation, but this influence must be studied beyond the cliché that stipulates that the right-wing parties will support the public pension system reform and the left-wing parties will oppose it. Armeanu (2010a) showed that there are countries where privatization was supported by the centre-left coalitions that needed to overpass a strong opposition made by the right-wing parties. Using the Ideal Point Estimation technique within the voting sessions related to pension reform during the last three Romanian legislatures, we will explain the formation of pro and against coalitions regarding the pension reform from Romania during the privatization process of public pension system. We also test the hypotheses of the model presented by Armeanu (2010a, 2010b), model that predicts the behaviour of political parties based on the position they have on a two-dimensional space related to the costs of pension reform. Keywords: pension privatization, pension system reform, party system, DW- NOMINATE multidimensional scaling, Romania The privatization of the pension system in Central and Eastern Europe The privatization of the pension systems represents the mainstream in the field of pension reform, because it is supported by International Financial Institutions (IFI).
    [Show full text]
  • Anuarul Institutului De Cercetări Socio-Umane „C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor” “C.S
    ACADEMIA ROMÂNĂ ANUARUL INSTITUTULUI DE CERCETĂRI SOCIO-UMANE „C.S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR” “C.S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR” INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN SOCIAL STUDIES AND HUMANITIES YEARBOOK XVIII/2017 FOUNDING EDITOR: EDITORIAL BOARD: Vladimir OSIAC (University of Craiova, Acad. Dan BERINDEI (Romanian Academy, Romania) Romania); Acad. Dinu C. GIURESCU (Romanian Academy, EDITOR IN CHIEF: Romania); Cezar Gabriel AVRAM (C.S. Nicolăescu- Acad. Victor SPINEI (Romanian Academy, Plopşor Institute for Research in Social Studies Romania); and Humanities, Craiova, Romania) Nicolae PANEA (University of Craiova, DEPUTY EDITOR IN CHIEF: Romania); Mihaela BĂRBIERU (C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor Lucian DINDIRICĂ (The Alexandru and Aristia Institute for Research in Social Studies and Aman County Library, Romania); Humanities, Craiova, Romania) Simona LAZĂR (C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor Institute for Research in Social Studies and INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD: Humanities, Craiova, Romania); Patrick CHARLOT (University of Bourgogne, Nicolae MIHAI (C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor France); Institute for Research in Social Studies and Shpakovskaya Marina ANATOLIEVNA Humanities, Craiova, Romania); (People’s Friendship University of Russia); Ion MILITARU (C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor Karina Paulina MARCZUK (University of Institute for Research in Social Studies and Warsaw, Poland); Humanities, Craiova, Romania); Teodora KALEYNSKA (Sf. Cyril and Sf. Şerban PĂTRAŞCU (C.S. Nicolăescu-Plopşor Methodius University of VelikoTurnovo, Institute for Research in Social Studies and Bulgaria); Humanities, Craiova, Romania); Anatol PETRENCU (Moldova State University, Roxana RADU (University of Craiova, Romania) Chişinău, Moldova); Virgiliu BÎRLĂDEANU (Institute of Social ROMANIAN ACADEMY PUBLISHING History, Chişinău, Moldova) HOUSE EDITORS: Mihaela IAMANDEI Monica STANCIU ACADEMIA ROMÂNĂ ANUARUL INSTITUTULUI DE CERCETĂRI SOCIO-UMANE „C. S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR” “C.S. NICOLĂESCU-PLOPŞOR” INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN SOCIAL STUDIES AND HUMANITIES YEARBOOK XVIII/2017 EDITURA ACADEMIEI ROMÂNE Bucharest, 2017 Editura Academiei Române, 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • In Order to Reduce Energy
    With regard to “Financial incentives and market barriers” (Article 10(2) of Directive 2010/31/EU): In order to reduce energy consumption in buildings and to increase the number of buildings with a reduced consumption of energy, the following legislative acts were promoted: - Government Emergency Order No 18/2009 on the increase in the energy performance of residential buildings. The legislative document provides for funds to finance the works carried out for the envelope of residential buildings, as follows: Ø 50% from allocations from the State budget; Ø 30% from funds provided under the local budgets and/or from other legally established sources; Ø 20% from the fund of the owners’ association, which is intended for repairs, and/or from other legally-established sources. Likewise, the legislative act provides for the putting in place of specific measures so as to ensure that the specific annual heating consumption has decreased below 100 kWh/square meter of useful area. - Government Emergency Order No 69/2010 on the thermal rehabilitation of residential buildings with funds from bank loans granted under a Government guarantee. The legislative act provides mainly for the following issues: Ø the non-discriminatory access of the owners’ associations and natural persons acting as owners of single-family residential buildings to bank loans granted under a Government guarantee and having a subsidized interest rate for the thermal rehabilitation of buildings. The value of the loan shall account for 90% of the value of the works to be executed but not above the following thresholds: - the equivalent amount in RON of EUR 1,850/room, VAT inclusive, in the case of residential blocks, - the equivalent amount in RON of EUR 7,400/room, VAT inclusive, in the case of individual residences.
    [Show full text]
  • REGULATION on the Joint Meetings of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate of Romania Regulation on the Joint Meetings Of
    REGULATION on the Joint Meetings of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate of Romania Regulation on the Joint Meetings of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate, approved by the Decision of the Parliament of Romania No 4 of 3 March 1992, published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I, No 34 of 4 March 1992, as amended and completed by the Decision of the Parliament No 13/1995, published in the Official Journal of Romania, Part I, No 136 of 5 July 1995. CHAPTER I Organisation and Running of the Joint Meetings Section 1 Competence; Convening of the Joint Meetings Article 1 - The Chamber of Deputies and the Senate shall meet in joint meetings in order: 1. to received the message of the President of Romania (Article 62 (2) (a) of the Constitution); 2. to approve the State Budget and the State social security budget (Article 62 (2)(b) of the Constitution), the corrections and the account for budget implementation; 3. to declare general or partial mobilization (Article 62 (2) (c) of the Constitution); 4. to declare a state of war (Article 62 (2) (d) of the Constitution); 5. to suspend or terminate armed hostilities (Article 62 (2) (e) of the Constitution); 6. to examine reports of the Supreme Council of National Defence and of the Court of Audit (Article 62 (2) (f) of the Constitution); 7. to appoint, upon the proposal of the President of Romania, the Director of the Romanian Intelligence Service, and to exercise control over the activity of this Service (Article 62 (2) (g) of the Constitution); 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by the Republic of Moldova
    AS/Mon(2012)03 rev 14 March 2012 amondoc03r_2012 or. Engl. Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) Honouring of obligations and commitments by the Republic of Moldova Information note by the co-rapporteurs on their fact-finding visit to Chisinau (28 November – 1 December 2011) 1 Co-rapporteurs: Ms Lise CHRISTOFFERSEN, Norway, Socialist group, and Mr Piotr WACH, Poland, Group of the European People’s Party 1 This information note has been made public by decision of the Monitoring Committee dated 13 March 2012. F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex | e-mail: [email protected] | Tel: + 33 3 88 41 2000 | Fax: +33 3 88 41 2733 AS/Mon(2012)03rev I. Introduction 1. After a first visit to Chisinau and Comrat in March 2011 (see doc. AS/Mon (2011) 13 rev), we paid a second fact-finding visit to the Republic of Moldova from 28 November to 1 December 2011. The programme of the visit is appended. We intended to address the implementation of Resolution 1572 (2007) on The honouring of obligations and commitments by Moldova, Resolutions 1666 (2009) and 1692 (2009) on The functioning of democratic institutions , the state of play of the election of the President of the Republic, and other current issues, such as the reform of the judiciary, the action taken to combat corruption and organised crime, the legislation and measures to combat discrimination and the latest developments in Transnistria. 2. The support of the Moldovan delegation to the PACE, the Moldovan parliament, and Mr Ulvi Akhundlu, Head of the Council of Europe Office in Chisinau, was again precious for facilitating our meetings, including with the acting President and Speaker, Mr Marian Lupu, the Prime Minister, Mr Filat, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Leanca, the Vice-Speaker of the parliament, Mr Plahotniuc, high-level representatives of the judiciary and enforcement bodies, representatives of the media and NGOs.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender and Elections in Romania
    GENDER AND ELECTIONS IN ROMANIA ABSTRACT UNDP has been undertaking a series of case study research projects about the opportunities and challenges for ZRPHQ¶VSDUWLFLSDWLRQDVYoters in the Europe CIS region. The present case study presents an analysis of gender and the electoral legislation reform process in Romania, focusing on two aspects of the legal framework factor: WKHHIIHFWRIWKHHOHFWRUDOV\VWHPRQZRPHQ¶VSDUWLFLSDWLRQDQGJHQGHUTXRWDVDVPHDQVRIHQKDQFLQJZRPHQ¶V descriptive representation. An important entry point is to acknowledge that low participation and representation of ZRPHQLVDVHULRXVLVVXHWKDWLPSDFWV5RPDQLD¶VGHPRFUDWL]DWLRQSURFHVV2QWKLVSDWKWRZDrds gender equality in politics, representatives of civil society should be carefully monitoring political actors who may have learned and are skilled at using the discourse of gender equality, but less so the practice. Future public discussions and debates on political participation and representation should focus on the role of political parties in shaping specific democratic differences. The debates should also emphasize the role of the electoral system in ensuring adequate representation of women. If change towards more gender equality in politics is needed, the joint efforts of all key actors are required. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 1. INTRODUCTION 5 2. METHODOLOGY 6 3. BACKGROUND: WOMEN IN POLITICS BEFORE 1989 7 3.1 RECLAIMING POLITICAL RIGHTS: 19TH AND EARLY 20TH CENTURY 7 3.2 POLITICAL COMRADES DURING COMMUNISM: 1947-1989 8 4. BACKGROUND: WOMEN IN POLITICS AFTER 1989 9 4.1 WOMEN IN THE PARLIAMENT AND LOCAL POLITICS 9 4.2 GENDER EQUALITY AND THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTORAL FRAMEWORK 10 4.3 MORE WOMEN IN POLITICS: FIGHTING FOR GENDER QUOTAS 12 4.3.1 Mandatory (Legislative) Gender Quotas 12 4.3.2 Voluntary (Party) Gender Quotas 13 4.4 INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR MORE WOMEN IN POLITICS: UNDP 14 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Submitted by Romania
    ACFC/SR (99) 11 prov. (original language English) REPORT SUBMITTED BY ROMANIA PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 25 PARAGRAPH 1 OF THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES (received on 24 June 1999) ACFC/SR (99) 11 - 2 - INFORMATION ON THE LEGISLATIVE AND OTHER MEASURES TAKEN TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE PRINCIPLES SET OUT IN THE FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES ROMANIA PART I 1. The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, which entered into force on 1 February 1998, was ratified by Romania on 11 May 1995. 2. The Government's Programme for 1998-2000, which was accepted by the Romanian Parliament by Decision No. 6 of 15 April 1998 expressing its confidence in the Government, also contains a number of provisions on the Romanian State's policy on the protection of national minorities. National minorities Principles specific to the protection of national minorities - the protection of national minorities in order to ensure their continuity and to prevent any action by the public authorities designed to alter the ethnic structure in areas inhabited by national minorities; - the establishment of the appropriate legal framework to ensure that persons belonging to national minorities have the right to preserve, develop and express their ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity; - the encouragement of intercultural action and promotion inter-ethnic co-operation. Institutional and legislative measures - continuing with the specific actions designed to achieve the criteria for
    [Show full text]