Saturday, October 28, 2006

Moldova has again an output to the sea!

Moldova has finished the building of the international Giurgiulesti terminal on the Danube River. Now it can accept the sea vessels from anywhere. The president of Moldova declared that this is a very important economical, social and political event, which could lead to new international relations, to the touristy development, and to new working vacancies for our people.

The first sea vessels will arrive by the end of 2006. It has mooring for bulk-oil tankers, 8 tanks for storage of mineral oil by the general capacity of 52 thousand tons. The terminal is equipped by modern system of a storm drain and clearing of residual waters, and also waters with the maintenance of oil, the substation automated by system of fire protection.

Construction Giurgiulesti of the international terminal proceeded 10 years with breaks because of difficulties with financing the project in cost almost 30 million dollars. The Azerbaijan company Danube Logistics SRL known earlier as Azertrans SRL was engaged in realization of the project.

Saturday, October 21, 2006

Why Transnistria has no right of being independent.

The Soviet socialist Autonomic Moldavian Republic was formed in 1940, with the initiative of a local group, headed by Kotovsky. So, as you see, this wasn’t the will of the population. No elections, no referendum took place. This was the action of a small group of people, which wanted to promote their own interests, and of course by support of the USSR. In conclusion, Transnistria was taken illegally from Basarabia, without its accordance. Can they now ask for independence, basing on the fact, that they used to be separated illegally? Of course – not! The population of Transnistria was formed by Romanians (Moldavians), and it was violently assimilated with Ukrainians and Russians brought from abroad.

Even nowadays, the considerable part of population of Transnistria consists of Moldavians, more than 40 %. They represent the native population.

No region can ask for independence whether it consists of the same people as the rest of the country. Only an entire nation can ask for independence. Transnistria doesn’t represent that case. These are the same people that live on the territory of the Republic of Moldova. Here, we also have Russians, Ukrainians, Bulgarians, Turks, Jews, etc. But they represent an ethnic group, same as the Russians and Ukrainians in Transnistria.

The political authority has an illegal existence in Transistria. There were no states that recognized the independence of Transistria in the early 90’s. You can’t be independent if no one recognizes it.

About the referendum that took place in September, 2006, there’s an opinion of the head of the OSCE mission in Moldova:

The OSCE will not recognize this referendum, and we have no intention to support or observe a unilateral action, which calls into question the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova...”. The international observers, often are not let in on the territory of Transnistria, especially at elections. This demonstrates the non-democratic character of the Transnistrian so called “government”, and their political behaviour.

The referendum was against the constitution of the Republic of Moldova. Because it represent a unitary state, not a federation, that’s why no region can ask for independence, especially if the interest of other countries are involved.

Sunday, October 15, 2006

Passive strike in Chisinau, on the 29-th of October 2006

There was formed a special committee to sustain the declaration of the Romanian president Traian Basescu, about the integration of the Republic of Moldova in the European Community together with Romania, at 01.01.2007.

According to the Infotag Agency source, as the president of this Committee was chosen a university professor Vasile Ursu, as vice president – Ilie Bratu (the president of the unification movement from Moldova), Nicolae Dabija (the president of the democratic Romanians from Moldova, the president of the Romanian union from Basarabia), Dionisie Gutu (the president of the national Romanian party).

The committee considers that the slogans of the authorities from Chisinau, about the integration of the Republic of Moldova in the European Community by itself as an independent state, represent simple speculations, with the purpose of confusing the electors and the international public opinion. “The integration of the Republic of Moldova in the European Community is possible only in case when this territory will become an integrate part of the United Romanian State.”

This committee intends to organize a passive strike, on the 29-th of October, on the Big National Square, to sustain the initiative of the Romanian President, Traian Basescu.

In case of the opposing of the authorities, to agree to this statement, they promise to organize massive strikes and movement, according to the legislation.

Russia breaks the sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova

As it is mentioned in its constitution, the Republic of Moldova is a sovereign, independent state. So this means that it is independent in solving all sorts of problems, including internal and external problems. So economical reforms, for example, administrative or constitutional, whatever it can be, Moldova has the right to resolve them by itself, as well as the international traits. After the disintegration of the USSR, Moldova gained the right to be independent in all its activities. But Russia doesn’t consider so. Not looking at different international agreements, Russia stills keeps it munitions on the territory of Transnistria, which is a territorial part of Moldova. Russian Federation promised many times that it will take the munitions, but yet they didn’t do that. They use to call it “Peacemakers” - which is definitely not the perfect identification of their activity there. Because as the Transistria’s government is located illegal there, the same thing Russian military bases do. They are situated there against the agreement of the Government of the Republic of Moldova and of any other states.

In conclusion: Russia kept its aggressive and dominative character, especially against the states that she used to dominate some time ago.

Sunday, October 08, 2006

Republic of Moldova – is or not a State of Law

Trying to analyze whether Moldova is or not a state of law, by its entire criterion, you can get a doubtful opinion.

The first article, point 3, of its Constitution, sustains that the Republic of Moldova is a state of law: “the Republic of Moldova is a state of law, democratic, where the human dignity, the human rights and liberties, the free development of the personality, the right and the political pluralism represent the guaranteed supreme values.”

This article really counts all this criterions of a state of law. But the real political and social life differs from what is written in the constitution.

As I mentioned earlier, only a democratic country can pretend to be a state of law. Moldova is being democratic only for 15 years. Our democracy is very young and brittle. Our government doesn’t have that mush experience, to be able to pronounce that law is the supreme power in this state. We are under a huge black spot for being a part of the USSR. This had a total opposite political regime from a state of law. And after the break up from USSR, the Republic of Moldova was trying to redirect its political orientation.

By the form of Government, the Republic of Moldova is a state of law. Is has the separation of powers. By the way it is a parliamentary republic, which is even more democratically than the presidential republic. The population secretly votes the Parliament. The legal procedure of elections is supervised by the international supervisors.

Another characteristic of a state of law, is the Supremacy of Constitution. The Republic of Moldova also respects this. No legal norm can be applied if it is contrary to the Constitution.

By all this steps Moldova seems to be a state of law. But, somehow, the biggest problem is the violation of human right. It exists anyway, not by laws, but by the disorder, by no control of the society and the political authorities. First of all it’s the judicial organs. There were many cases, when Moldovan Supreme Court was giving the person a verdict, which was violating his rights. And after the appealing to the European Supreme Court, the Republic of Moldova, for many times was receiving punishments from it (had to pay certain sums of money to the plaintiffs, and had to agree that they activated against the human rights).

In conclusion: Moldova is formally a State of Law,. Even though it is written in the Constitution so, in many situations it doesn’t reflect the real situation, because of the corruption of the political and judicial authorities, because of not having any democratic experience. So, the Republic of Moldova has to evolve a long period of time, to perfect not only its legislative domain, but also its executive power. Constitution should be an active document. As the basis of all the activities, should serve the human rights not only formally, but in fact.

Saturday, October 07, 2006

State of Law

State of law is an institutional form of political organization of society, which has as the main aim the protection and promotion of the basic human rights and liberties. State of law is not a state where the laws are respected, but it is a state where the human rights serve as the primordial values for the whole government, for population and for the social ideas.

The characteristics of a State of Law:
Normally, the first characteristic is the level of democratization of the state. A totalitarian state cannot be a State of law. It can be determined by the electuary fact – how the election procedure takes place. If the whole population, that reached the age 18, has the right to vote the Parliament, to vote secretly and by his own will. The population should have the right to change their representatives in the Parliament, the governors, anytime they want it.
By its form of government – a State of Law is based on the principle of the separation of the state powers. This principle guarantees a real independence of the justice. Each political, institutional authority should have its own domain of influence. A contrary example can serve the USSR, or other totalitarian states which denied this principle.
The supremacy of Constitution, which is based on the fundamental human rights, and liberties, which everyone should obey, and no other juridical norm, no governor can conquer it.
Equal rights and chances to everyone. A State of Law is a social state anyway, which protects the rights of every human, no matter of his age, sex, nationality, religion, social status etc.

In conclusion, a State of Law is, first of all, a democratically governed state.