The Romanian language, introduced with errors in the Constitution. What the jurists signal and how PAS reacts

0

More precisely, the former Minister of Justice, Alexandru Tănase wrote on March 30 that on the legis.md website the notion of the Moldovan language was still listed, specifying that the phrase “operating on the basis of Latin script” was found to be obsolete (taken out of use – no). In the lawyer’s opinion, this fact led to the fact that in the Republic of Moldova the official language would be “Moldovan”, but which this time, was “emptied of the constitutional guarantee that it works on the basis of Latin script”, which theoretically, would allows another government, including the switch to the “Cyrillic script”, since the supreme law no longer mentions this aspect.

“Thus, if some madmen come to power tomorrow, they will have no obstacle to switch the “Moldovan language” to the Cyrillic script again, invoking the “argument” that this is how Stephen the Great wrote”, says the former president of the Constitutional Court.

The jurist also states that according to the declaration of independence “the Latin alphabet is an element of our national identity”, and placing it in obsolescence is not mentioned either by the CCM Decision, nor should it have been introduced or discussed by the Parliament.

Later, the jurist welcomed the exclusion of the phrase “Moldovan language”, which was only carried out on March 31, stating, however, that maintaining the obsolescence of the phrase “Latin script” would not be the happiest solution “but it is definitely the best”. On the other hand, the doctor in constitutional law, Alexandru Arseni, believes that the provisions regarding the finding of obsolescence of the phrase “operating on the basis of the Latin script” are unconstitutional and contrary to scientific provisions as well.

The Parliament, through this organic law, did nothing but implement the decision of the Constitutional Court regarding the interpretation of art. 13, the decision which has legal, defining power and is an official interpretation, did not dictate how to make the law, in the preamble of the Constitutional Court’s decision is the wording “Romanian language”, the rest remains unchanged because the Constitutional Court clearly interpreted the phrase that the Moldovan language is unscientific according to the decision of the Constitutional Court, the rest was not pronounced. That is why the intervention of the Parliament, through this law regarding the exclusion “on the basis of the Latin script” is unconstitutional, contrary to the scientific provisions for explanation.

Author: Alexandru Arseni, PhD in constitutional law

advertisement

At the same time, another error that several jurists have noticed refers to the fact that no reference is made to the decision of the Constitutional Court no. 36/2013, as is done in other cases.

“So, dear technicians of the legis.md website, deputies, etc. – correctly draft the note to art. 13 and mention both CC Decision no. 36 of 05.12.2013 and Law no. 52 of 16.03.23. This small nuance has a triple impact – first of all, this is already the custom (this is how it has been done for years!!), secondly, everyone must know CC Decision no. 36 and thirdly, the “Romanian language” in the text will remain intact, when Law no. 52 will be declared partially unconstitutional in the part “obsolescence of the text “operating on the basis of Latin script”, lawyer Laura Urschi said.

Previously, the PAS deputy, Veronica Roșca qualified as “unsuccessful” the fact that the “obsolete” wording was initially introduced

“Strictly technical, they have 30 days at their disposal. The adjustment process is very arduous. Respectively, in my opinion, they wrote the simplest part – that it is found “obsolete”, then they are going to change it. We were dismayed, I ask them daily: when will the modification be completed, it’s embarrassing. It’s totally unsuccessful and they left room for interpretations, but they didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary,” said Veronica Roșca for newsmaker.md.

We remind you that on March 28, the law by which the phrase “Moldovan language” was replaced by “Romanian language” in the Constitution and all state laws, was attacked by the Socialist Party at the Constitutional Court. The Vice-President of the Parliament, Vlad Batrîncea, states that the given amendment ignored the procedure for amending the Supreme Law.

So, dear technicians of the legis.md website, deputies, etc. – correctly draft the note to art. 13 and mention both CC Decision no. 36 of 05.12.2013 and Law no. 52 of 16.03.23. This small nuance has a triple impact – first of all, this is already the custom (this is how it has been done for years!!), secondly, everyone must know CC Decision no. 36 and thirdly, the “Romanian language” in the text will remain intact, when Law no. 52 will be declared partially unconstitutional in the “obsolescence of the text” operating on the basis of the Latin script.

Author: Laura Urschi, lawyer

Previously, the PAS deputy, Veronica Roșca qualified as “unsuccessful” the fact that the “obsolete” wording was initially introduced, in a statement for newsmaker.md.

Strictly technically, they have a 30-day deadline. The adjustment process is very arduous. Respectively, in my opinion, they wrote the simplest part – that it is found “obsolete”, then they are going to change it. We were dismayed, I ask them daily: when will the modification be completed, it’s embarrassing. It’s totally unsuccessful and they left room for interpretation, but they didn’t notice anything out of the ordinary.

Author: Veronica Roșca, PAS deputy

We remind you that on March 28, the law by which the phrase “Moldovan language” was replaced by “Romanian language” in the Constitution and all state laws, was attacked by the Socialist Party at the Constitutional Court. The Vice-President of the Parliament, Vlad Batrîncea, states that the given amendment ignored the procedure for amending the Supreme Law.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here