Moldovan Constitutional Court rejects appeal regarding constitutional judges' mandates

The Constitutional Court has dismissed as inadmissible the appeal filed by MP Gaik Vartanean, which challenged the legality of a constitutional judge serving two consecutive terms.

At a news briefing, President of the Constitutional Court Domnica Manole said that the Fundamental Law did not explicitly limit the number of terms.

“The Court on September 17 resolved, by an inadmissibility decision, an appeal regarding Article 9 of the new law on the Constitutional Court. The author asked us to verify the constitutionality of the norm allowing a judge to hold office for two terms. The Constitution states that a term lasts six years, but does not establish a prohibition on the maximum number of terms,” Manole said.

The president of the Constitutional Court noted that, over time, more judges had served two terms in a row.

“The reality is that, over time, some constitutional judges have served two consecutive terms, and this practice has not been considered contrary to the Constitution. Unlike other positions, such as the Ombudsman or the Prosecutor General, where there is an explicit limitation to a single term, the Constitution does not establish such a restriction for Constitutional Court judges,” the cited source noted.

Referring to accusations regarding the lack of additional selection mechanisms, Domnica Manole said:

“The Constitution assigns the prerogative of appointing judges to three authorities – the Parliament, the Government and the Superior Council of Magistracy. There is no constitutional obligation for the legislature to establish a single public competition, an independent selection committee, or mandatory vetting procedures for candidates.”

As for the political affiliation criteria, the Court highlighted that mere past membership in a party did not represent an impediment.

“The mere fact of being a former member of a political party cannot be considered an incompatibility. As long as the individual resigns from this position before taking the oath, he/she can serve as a constitutional judge. The law clearly prohibits judges from being party members or getting involved in political activities during their term,” Manole concluded.

In conclusion, the head of the Constitutional Court emphasized that the provision allowing two terms for constitutional judges stayed in effect.

“The contested legal provision does not contravene the Constitution. The author of the appeal did not demonstrate how appointing a judge for a second term would affect the independence of the Court,” the president of the Constitutional Court added.