- Since the initiative requires an interim measure, it means that we initiate an urgent procedure and expect the Constitutional Court immediately after the vacation, which means right before the referendum, to make a decision. In case the court fails to decide, it is possible that it will invalidate the results post festum, said Dimitar Apasiev from Levica.
Apasiev says that the decision of the Assembly does not include all the necessary seven elements, among which the explanation, and the type of referendum is not specified. He called the referendum question "a trap question."
- The first formal reason is that the decision does not include all seven mandatory elements which, according to the Law on Referendum, are a must. It does not have an explanation and does not have the entire title of the act for voting, only a short name of the act is given, and also voting on separate ballots is not envisaged, just as the law requires, he said.
According to him, Levica refutes this decision because it also does not specify the type of referendum, which is an essential element of the decision.
- We do not know whether it is a matter of previous or an additional referendum, and we do not know whether it is an optional or compulsory referendum. Therefore, it is impossible to assess the legal consequence of the success or failure of a referendum that violates the principle of legal certainty, Apasiev said.
The third reason why Levica disputed this decision is the referendum question.
- This is a trap that is prohibited by our law and European standards, that is, the Venice Code of Good Practice on Referendums, says Apasiev. According to him, such a parliamentary question has eight possible answers, and the law gives the choice of only two.
From a material and legal point of view, Levica wants to abolish the decision, because a consultative referendum cannot be announced for membership in an alliance or a union with other states, as is the case with the EU.
Apasiev also emphasizes that the Agreement that is put on a referendum vote has not been ratified and that the Assembly itself has led itself to a legally insurmountable position. According to him, the assembly can not hold a previous referendum because the agreement has already been concluded, and it can not hold an additional referendum because there is no law that would refer to a referendum vote because the president refused to sign it.
- Article 120 provides for obligatory and mandatory referendum, said Apasiev, pointing out that according to their research, the Republic of Macedonia has not made any decisions for the EU membership.
The political party Levica will boycott the referendum on the name, but according to its representative, the party will ask the SEC to be allowed to observe the vote. According to Apasiev, the MCIC poll published yesterday that the majority of citizens will come out to vote at the referendum is fake, while the referendum is supported by only 14% of the citizens.