Judgment no. 12 of 01.11.2012

JUDGMENT ON CONSTITUTIONALITY REVIEW of certain provisions of Article 32, paragraph (4) letter j) from the Law No. 162-XVI from 22 July 2005 on military status (Complaint №. 12a/2012)


The subject of complaint: Ombudsman
Type of judgment: constitutional review of laws, regulations and decisions of the Parliament
Provision: provisions declared unconstitutional



Application:
1.


Communication:
1. ( 01.11.2012)


1. The case originated in the complaint lodged at the Constitutional Court on 6 June 2012 grounded on the articles 135 para. (1) letter a) from the Constitution, 25 para. (1) letter i) from the Law on the Constitutional Court and 38 para. (1) letter i) from the Constitutional Jurisdiction Code by the Ombudsman Mr. Tudor Lazăr, on the constitutionality review of the Article 32 para. (4) letter j) from the law No. 162-XVI from 22 July 2005 on military status. 2. The author of the complaint claimed, particularly, that by specifying the category of “military woman” the contested norm institutes a sex based discrimination of militaries concerning the obtaining of parental leave; and that by non-inclusion of parental leave from the overall length of service of the military the persons right to the freedom of choice is infringed, contrary to the articles 16, 18, 43, 48 and 49 from the Constitution. 3. The complaint was declared admissible with no prejudice for the substance of the case by the Constitutional Court decision of 10 July 2012. 4. Within the public plenary session, the author of the complaint had extended the matter of the complaint, requiring there to be also declared unconstitutional the corresponding provisions from the Government Decision No. 941 from 17 August 2006 on the approval of the Regulation on the manner of performing the military service in the Armed Forces, which reproduce the contested legal norms. 5. When examining the complaint, the Constitutional Court had required the opinion of the Parliament, the President of the Republic of Moldova, of the Government, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Labour, Social Protection and Family, and the Ministry of Defence. 6. Within the first plenary session of the Court, the author of the complaint had personally attended. The Parliament had been represented by Mr. Sergiu Chirică, Senior Consultant of the Legal Division of the Parliaments Secretariat. The Government had been represented by Mr. Vladimir Grosu, Vice-Minister of Justice, assisted by Mr. Viorel Remişovschi, Deputy Head of Legal Division from the Ministry of Defence.
Info about Notification.:
+373 22 25-37-20
Press relations.:
+373 69349444
Total visits:   //   Visitors yesterday:   //   today:   //   Online:
Quick access