Decision of the Constitutional Court demonstrates double standards of justice
The Constitutional Court’s decision to class as inadmissible the application filed by ombudsman Mihail Cotorobai by which he asked to examine the constitutionality of the legal provisions that ban the Moldovans from the diaspora from voting with the identity card and expired identification papers reveals the use of double standards, stated expert in public policies Ștegan Gligor, IPN reports.
He said that in 2016, when voting based on expired documents was allowed by a decision of the Constitutional Court, the government didn’t realize the impact that the diaspora can have in elections. “They didn’t expect this then. About 60,000 – 70,000 people usually voted then. Approximately 138,000 people voted in the second round of the presidential elections. In the current election campaign, they understand very well the stake and this is very important for them. The whole system was built on these parliamentary elections,” noted Ștefan Gligor.
According to him, it wasn’t even necessary to interpret the Constitution in this regard as the law does not say that the vote can be cast based on a valid or invalid passport, but stipulates only that a document is needed.
Ion Guzun, jurist at the Legal Resources Center, said the fundamental law provides that any person has the right to vote and specifies the documents based on which this can be done, but does not say that person with the expired document cannot vote. Now the citizens who are abroad are in an unequal situation compared with those from Moldova. The taken decision is evidently political in character.
On January 29, the Constitutional Court rejected the ombudsman’s application by which Mihail Cotorobai demanded to examine the constitutionality of an Election Code article that bans Moldovans abroad from voting with the identity card and expired identification papers.