On Tuesday, December 21st, I returned to the Constitutional Court to hear the oral argument in the case that the President of the Constitutional Court had advised us of in our meeting the week before. Unfortunately, none of my students could join me, as they were in review sessions for their exams. (Unfortunate for them, as I wanted for them to hear an oral argument; unfortunate for me, as I was without a translator!)
When I arrived, I signed in. There was no real security check (I didn't walk thru a mag, or have my small purse searched.)
At the U.S. Supreme Court, after thorough security check, all bags and personal items are to be stored in lockers before entering the courtroom. Visitors cannot bring anything into the courtroom, not even a notebook or pencil to take notes. (Only those seated in the press section are allowed to take notes.)
At the Constiutional Court I was permitted to bring in my small purse, a notebook/pen -- and I was even permitted to take photographs during the oral argument! (I did ask first.) (No cameras of any kind are permitted at the U.S. Supreme Court, not even for members of the press.)
The seating for observers seems to have a capacity of about 25 people. As I looked at those in attendance, it seemed as if they were all members of the press.
In the lobby, there is a big screen/closed circuit television, in case there is an overflow of visitors who wish to hear the case.
This case had attracted a great deal of media attention. There were 7 television cameras spread throughout the courtroom. The woman sitting next to me would get up from her seat every 10-15 minutes or so, and go out into the lobby to do a stand-up with the live feed. (I knew this would be a big case when I arrived outside the courthouse to find all of the satellite TV trucks.)
As far as the format of the oral argument --
5 Justices were sitting to hear the case; there is currently a vacancy on the Bench.
The 1st speaker, the petitioner, sitting to the left of the Justices, made a long opening statement; he was then asked questions by the Justices; then a speaker to the right of the justices, the respondent, stood at his seat, and questioned the first presenter directly. Later that party had the opportunity to speak directly at the podium.
Here is the statement about the case that was distributed to the press corps by the Serviciul de presa al Curtii Constitutionale:
"Marti, 21 decembrie 2010, ora 10.00, Curtea Constitutionala va examina sesizarea unui grup de deputati in Parlament din partea PCRM privind controlul constitutionalitatii unor modificari si competari operate, pe 21 mai a.c., in Legea cu privire la Curtea Constitutionalal, Codul jurisdictiei constitutionale si Legea contenciosului administrativ.
"Prin noile norme, Curtii Constitutionale i s-a retras competenta de a examina acte cu caracter individual emise de Parlament, Presidentele Republicii Moldova si Guvern. Actele exclusiv politice si cele administrative cu caracter individual emise de aceste autoritati nu pot fi atacate nici in instantele de contencios administrativ. Totodata, autorii sesizarii contesta si stabilirea Listei persoanelor oficiale de stat, exponente ale unui interes politic sau public deosebit, care sint exceptate de la adresarea in instanta de contencios administrativ."
Click here for more information about the Constitutional Court:
http://www.constcourt.md/
No comments:
Post a Comment