Activity of the Parliament on February 17 – March 9, 2003

February 17–21, 2003

Opposition is still boycotting the Parliament sessions. During the week, MPs focussed on the Law on Fighting Extremism as well as the draft laws on changing the status of the National TV.

Law on Fighting Extremist Activities

The debates on the law commenced immediately it was published for public debates in mass media. However there was a low feedback, which focussed mainly on:

Rejecting the initiative, on the grounds it runs counter to democratic norms and legal framework;
Adopting the initiative and its immediate enforcement, on the grounds tough measures should be taken against the opposition “extremism”. Such opinions were largely circulated in the state mass media.

As civil society failed to express its position and propose concrete improvements, deputies decided to adopt the law in the wording submitted by the President.

The law defines the notions of extremism, extremist activity, extremist organization, and extremist materials. The following measures shall be applied to the (political, non-governmental and religious) organizations involved in extremist activities:

warning to stop extremist activities;
appeal to the Court to suspend the activity of the relevant organization.

The law also provides sanctions for mass media, which circulates extremist information and prohibits extremist activities during public rallies. Penal and administrative sanctions shall be not specified directly in the Law, but rather in the specific laws.

One of the greatest difficulties in enforcing the law would be the interpretation of extremist activities by the law enforcement forces, which proved on numerous occasions they might enforce and interpret the law differently in different cases.

Law on the modification and completion of the Law on National Audiovisual Public Institution

The Parliament adopted in the first reading three draft laws on the establishment and operation of the Coordinating Council of the “Teleradio-Moldova” Company. The authors of the drafts are the Communist Faction, Social-Democratic Alliance Faction and a group of independent MPs.

All three drafts were submitted for the expertise of the Council of Europe. As the draft developed by the Social-Democratic Alliance was considered to be the best, the majority faction approved it as a basic for the second reading.

Law on social canteens

Under the law, social canteens are to be established as legal entities providing free services to the vulnerable strata of the society. Local government and entrepreneurs are entitled to establish such canteens under any form of ownership. The following may benefit of the canteen: pensioners, disabled and sick persons. Many deputies criticized this unclear definition of the persons entitled to benefit of the canteen and argued that it would make the enforcement cumbersome.

The canteens may provide the following services: daily meals, home delivery of cheap products, home delivery of clothes at a discount rate, etc. Canteens shall be funded out of the extra-budget funds and local budgets.

Law on artifacts

The draft was adopted by the Parliament in the first reading and is intended to define the legal framework for the national crafts, so as to revive national traditions in the field.

The law guarantees the copyright on artifacts, and provides the procedure of their registration in the National Patrimony Register. Also, the law provides that state allocations shall be provided to support the national crafts and fund the programs in the field.

Needless to say, Prime-Minister referred on several occasions to the importance of supporting the crafts and to the obligation of the state institutions to promote national traditions by purchasing souvenirs.

Resolution on appointing new judges to the Supreme Court of Justice

Three new judges have been appointed to the Supreme Court of Justice, whereas other two judges have been promoted to the position of Deputy Chair of the Penal and Civil College of the Supreme Judiciary Body.

It is worth mentioning that it has been debated for long time whether judges should be appointed based on a contest. Although this time judges were selected based on a contest, it wasn’t made public and the appropriateness of the applicants was evaluated only by the representatives of the majority faction, as Social-Democratic Alliance and Christian-Democratic Peoples’ Party were boycotting the session.

February 24–28, 2003

Law on modification and completion of the Law on Audiovisual

As was expected, opposition factions and ruling party tried to negotiate a compromise draft for the second reading that would suit the authors and meet Council of Europe recommendations. During the plenary session representatives of the Communist faction stated they agreed state authorities to designate 1/3 of the Observers’ Council members, whereas opposition and non-governmental organizations the other 2/3, on condition they enjoy large public support.

Representatives of the Social-Democratic Alliance withdrew their draft, protesting that not all their recommendations were accepted. The ruling party acted exactly like it did last summer and voted an alternative draft. In line with the recommendations of the Chair of Parliament Commission on Mass Media, the Observers’ Council would include:

2 representatives of the Presidency;
2 representatives of the Parliament (1 of the opposition or independent candidates);
2 representatives of the Government;
2 representatives of the national minorities;
1 representative of the Supreme Magistracy Council;
1 representative of the “Teleradio-Moldova” employees;
1 representative from each of the following public associations (trade unions, artists’ unions, mass media organizations, veteran’s and cultural associations).

Overall the Council would include 5 representatives of the authorities, thus 1/3 quota has been observed.

Law on extending the deadline for submitting the income declarations by public officers

Initially the law provided that by January 20, 2003, income and estate declarations were to be filled by public officers (President, MPs, Government members, judges, prosecutors, mayors, etc) and verified.

The campaign has started in mid-January and mass media reported on the formation of Control Commission and submission of declarations by officers employed by Ministries and Departments, as well as other state institutions.

There was much skepticism voiced with regard to the transparency of the declarations and the fact that they would really be made public. Even more skepticism was expressed with regard to the sanctions to be applied for the submission of false data or illegal income.

Under the newly adopted amendments, the deadline for submitting the declarations has been extended until July 1, 2003. Afterwards the Control Commissions would examine them and supposedly make public some of the data.

Law on state policy on innovations and know-how, adopted in the first reading

The law defines the basic notions in the field of know-how. The state policy in the field is declared a national priority. The law also regulates the responsibilities of local government in the field; priorities in the field of innovations and know-how; criteria for selecting innovation projects; sources of funding, etc.

Law on Local Public Administration

After short debates, the Parliament passed a new Law on Local Public Administration in the first reading. For more details on the law see the commentary “Revision of the local public administration system”.

March 3–7, 2003

In the time period covered by the commentary the Parliament examined the following laws:

Law on modification of the Law on Privatization

The law revises almost completely the Law on Privatization passed in 1991 which was applied ever since for the privatization of the state patrimony.

The law defines the goals of privatization: enlarging the private sector; attracting foreign and domestic investments; and boosting securities market and increasing production. The following principles shall govern privatization: social security of the population; transparency of the privatization process; granting preferential conditions to the employees of the privatized companies; and free access to privatization process.

The Parliament decided to change the procedure of privatization at symbolic price of 1 Lei, establishing that it would be applied only in the case of certain companies, which are to be determined by the Government. Also, the Parliament ruled that 3% of the privatization revenues should be transferred to the Privatization Department.

Another provision of the law entitles companies to turn the company into public companies, however the procedure is to be regulated via a separate law.

Although the initial draft provided sanctions for the investors, who failed to meet the assumed obligations, those provisions were later excluded at the insistence of the international monetary organizations, except for the annulment of the privatization contract via a court ruling.

Noteworthy, the modification of this law as well as the adoption of a new law on pre-dispatch inspection were among the requirements set by the international monetary organizations for resuming Republic of Moldova funding.

Law on the modification of the Law on the Deputy Status

The law allows members of Parliament to conduct research and didactic activity only outside the working hours as specified in the Parliament Regulation. However the said Regulation does not specify the exact number of hours a deputy should work in the Parliament. The only thing the Regulation is clear about are the days of plenary sessions and commission sittings. Specifying the exact number of hours would be in line with the labor law, however would run counter to the constitutional provision, Article 68 (1) obliging deputies to be in the permanent “service of the people”.

Law on modification and completion of the Penal Code and Code of Administrative Offence, adopted in the first reading

Under the law the Code of Administrative Offence is completed with new sanctions for violating the rules of using cash registers.

A new wording of the following articles of the Penal Code is provided: on illegal entrepreneurship; on embezzlement; on illegal deposits in foreign banks; on failure to pay taxes and other binding payments; on transportation, storage and sale of goods not marked with excise stamps, etc.

Needless to say many deputies opposed the amendments due to the fact that the offences referred to were not clear enough and are not likely to improve the situation.

Law on the modification of the Law on Access to Information, adopted in the first reading

The Law on Access to Information is completed with provisions related to access to environmental information. The initiative has been criticized by the authors of the Law on Access to Information and of the Law on Access to Environmental Information (“Biotica” NGO).

Environment activists objected to the fact that under the new law, access to environmental information may be denied if making it public would damage the environment, or if the people might wrongly interpret it, and thus lead to panic or other negative events.

Noteworthy, previously the Parliament rejected the draft on access to environmental information on the grounds that it should be incorporated in the Law on Access to Information.

e-democracy.md