The President of Moldova shall exercise his mandate until the newly elected President is sworn in

On 16 March 2016 the Constitutional Court of Moldova adopted a decision of inadmissibility of the application on the interpretation of Article 90.1 in conjunction with Articles 80.1, 80.2 and 91 of the Constitution (Application no.18b/2016).  

Circumstances of the case

The case originated in the application lodged with the Constitutional Court on 15 March 2016 by the President of Moldova, Mr Nicolae Timofti.

The author of the application requested the interpretation of Article 90.1 in conjunction with Articles 80.1, 80.2 and 91 of the Constitution, by elucidating the following aspects:

1. Whether the occurrence of vacancy of office of the President of Moldova in terms of Article 90.1 of the Constitution, in connection with the expiration of four years following the take of the oath, is a legal basis for ensuring the interim office in accordance with Article 91 of the Constitution?

2. When does the mandate of President Nicolae Timofti expire, given he was elected on 16 March 2012, and his mandate commenced on the oath-taking day on 23 March 2012, taking into account the provisions of the Judgment of the Constitutional Court no. 7 of 4 March 2016 that restored the election of the President by the direct vote of citizens?

The Constitutional Court ruled on the application in the following composition:

Mr Alexandru TĂNASE, president,

Mr Aurel BĂIEȘU,

Mr Igor DOLEA,

Mr Victor POPA, judges

Conclusions of the Court

Examining the admissibility of the application, the Court held that the concerned provisions were previously interpreted by the Constitutional Court.

Thus, by Judgment no. 43 of 14 December 2000, the Court held that, the occurrence of the vacancy for the office of the President of Moldova (Article 90.1 of the Constitution) in connection with the expiration of the mandate (Article 80.1 of the Constitution), the President of Moldova shall exercise his mandate, under Article 80.2 of the Constitution, until the newly elected President is sworn in.

Also, in the same judgment, the Court noted that the interim office of the President of Moldova occurs only in case of vacancy of office following the resignation or removal from office of the President, temporary or definite impossibility to fulfil his functional duties or death and it is ensured under Article 91 of the Constitution (in the given order, by the President of the Parliament or by the Prime Minister).

As there were no new elements liable to determine the change of the caselaw of the Constitutional Court, both the considerations and the operative part shall preserve their validity in this case.

In addition, the reasoning stated by the Constitutional Court in the abovementioned judgment are reiterated by the Judgment no. 7 of 4 March 2016 in which it underscored that its effects do not extend on the President of Moldova, elected by Parliament's vote cast on 16 March 2012. Thus, he remains in office until the expiration of the term for which he was elected, as provided by the provisions Article 80.2 of the Constitution, meaning until the newly elected President is sworn in.

Decision of the Court

For these reasons, the Court held that the aspects addressed in the application have been resolved previously by the Constitutional Court, the application being repetitive and therefore inadmissible.

The Decision of the Court is final, cannot be appealed, shall enter into force on the date of passing, and shall be published in the Official Journal of Moldova.

This press release is also available in its original version, in Romanian language.