6 hours agoVV for Constitutional Decision: Repeat PDK phrases
Periskopi(10 months ago)
(10 months ago)The Vetevendosje movement has reacted after publishing the Constitutional act. In a statement posted on Facebook, the VV said that after 10 days the Court acknowledged that through the Act of Judgment published today it has written a new rule. It has called it an arbitrary decision affecting democracy. According to the VV, overcoming jurisdiction is not justified with anything. [...]
The Vetevendosje movement has reacted after publishing the Constitutional act.
In a statement posted on Facebook, the VV said that after 10 days the Court acknowledged that through the Act of Judgment published today it has written a new rule. It has called it an arbitrary decision affecting democracy.
According to the VV, overcoming jurisdiction is not justified with anything. It is emphasized that the late days for publishing the decision announce the inability to justify the arbitrary decision that violates democracy.
The narrow lines of reasoning today are the result of the extent of the excesses the Court has permitted itself. That the secret vote is not contrary to the Constitution is confirmed. Opposition noise fell again. But the Court's prejudice over the lack of political consensus as long as it has never been put to the polls is walking the way of the blocking subjects. This road takes us back to where there was no result of”, it says in response.
The VV says the analogy the Court uses has nowhere to stay.
According to them, the Constitution, unlike the election of the Speaker and Vice-Presidents of the Parliament, clearly defines the president's rounds of voting as well as the legal consequences of non-election within a deadline. It is said that in the Court's reasoning, there is nothing but phrases used by the PDK on analogy.
“Based on “thesis” of analogy with the elections of other institutions, it seems that the Court is preparing the ground for granting the right to any other party after 30 days if it fails to elect the first party to the Parliament's chairman. That is what opposition explorers are looking for and saying, even in comments sent to constitutionalis”, it says in response.
The VV says that as often as it was rare, the Constitutional Court did not refer to any European and global constitutions, nor did it seek the opinion of constitutional court counterparts for the comparison of cases.
“A case so as no other case” wrote the VV. /Periscope/
