aia Respublika in Article 79 of the Constitution). In France since 1983 the right to dissolution has been located to prefects, and is provided by the law, by jurisprudence of the State Council, and only the administrative judge is allocated with the authority to adopt the statutory act or to cancel it. The principle of restriction of heads of local bodies by the judge, instead of the parliament guarantees observance of local self-management.is necessary to note that the deputies have not been elected depending on political parties as it is in the majority of other countries. In the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika candidates to deputies are determined by collectives of voters that can favor to the national political parties having the programs, focused on the public interest. To tell the truth, in the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika the multi-party system is gradually arising. But it should be necessary to put the question about opportunities of development of the given process, not being equaled at the same time, completely on the foreign experience.the Constitution of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika everything is made, so that the deputies would seriously correspond to the functions. Absence of the deputy of the Supreme Soviet at sessions of the Supreme Soviet as well as in the working bodies without the sufficient grounds means the opportunity of application to him of the sanctions fixed in the law (Article 60) and resolutions, and it could be an example for France and the European Parliament.allocating the Parliament with the powers of the amplified control over other bodies of the state in the question on examination are very significant. But they do not make any reference to courts of inquiry.to executive authority we can note, that it is weaker than in the USA as it does not provide imposing the absolute veto on laws, and in some respects, than in France as in our country there exist some procedures (Article 49-3 of the French Constitution), compelling the Parliament to pass laws.the same time the executive authority in Pridnestrovie is stronger in relation to the judicial power, than in France as the President of Pridnestrovie can appoint judges without preliminary passage of competition among lawyers. This type of resolution (order) can appear dangerous as the appointed judge becomes obliged (debtor) in relation to the President who has appointed him to the position. The competition, at least, is the corporate guarantee which gives the judge understanding, that he is obliged by the position only to himself. The judicial authority of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika requires the note in the Constitution about the staff (personnel) which would operate in full independence (that in France is named the Supreme Council of magistracy and which has the equivalent in the majority of western countries). of the judicial power undoubtedly is the weak point in the Constitution of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika.is evident, however, that the Constitutional Court of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika is applied to correct this lack. And in its latest decisions the Constitutional Court forbids the executive authorities to impose sanctions without court decision. But the judicial power would undoubtedly be more powerful, if its independence has been better guaranteed by the Constitution at the level of assignment of judges.the strong point of the Constitution of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika is the reference to the direct power of the people and national collectives, namely: the question about the legislative initiative (Article 64 of the Constitution of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika), the question on the referendum (Articles 1 and 31) and, mainly, changes of the Constitution (Article 101). These are those regulations which have no equivalent in the neighboring countries of the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika and which very seldom exist in some European countries.given regulations remind the Constitution of France of +1793 which have never been applied. They are significant. It would be important to decide how these positions are carried out, and how they could be profound. Thus, it would not be interesting to establish the system of response of elects and presidents in the middle of the term of the mandate on the initiative of the people as it is at present in Venezuela? Or to enter the toss-up at assignment of some administrative, judicial, political positions? The role, allocated to people, should not be the source of anarchy. Especially, concerning the judicial power. But our Constitution allows everyone to press on the Constitutional Court at any time by laws or presidential decrees, (that never happens in France). But these regulations if they are completely applied, can allow everyone again (constantly) to bring attention up to the question on the law and order. And in fact vulnerability...
