1. The case originated in the complaint filed with the Constitutional Court by the Supreme Court of Justice on 9 December 2015, in accordance with Article 135 para. (1) let. b) of the Constitution, Article 25 let. d) of the Law on the Constitutional Court and Article 38 para. (1) let. d) of the Constitutional Jurisdiction Code on the interpretation of Article 135 para. (1) let. g) of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova.

2. The author of the complaint requested the Constitutional Court to interpret the provisions of Article 135 para.(1) let. g) of the Constitution in the following aspects:

‘1) Is the Supreme Court of Justice entitled to ban the courts to notify the Constitutional Court on the exception of unconstitutionality raised during the trial proceedings, under the provisions of Art. 135 para. (1) let. g) of the Constitution?

2) What is the role of the Supreme Court of Justice in notifying the Constitutional Court on the exception of unconstitutionality in relation to the courts of all levels?

3) Are the courts entitled to refuse to raise the exception of unconstitutionality?’

3. By the Decision of the Constitutional Court of 15 December 2015, the complaint was declared admissible, without prejudicing the merits of the case.

4. In the process of examination of the complaint, the Court requested the opinions of the Parliament, President of the Republic of Moldova, Government, Superior Council of Magistracy, Association of Judges and the Association of Lawyers of the Republic of Moldova.