Permanent Electoral Authority (AEP) President Tony Greble said on Friday that local elected officials who want to run for another party in the June 9 election will be able to do so 45 days before the election.

The clarifications came in the context of the fact that the government on Friday adopted an emergency resolution, which starts the process of simultaneous organization of local elections and elections to the European Parliament on June 9. According to Article 33 of the GEO, people who have the mandate of local voters can join any political party to participate in the June 9 elections without termination of mandate.

• Read also: Last-minute change of the “order of investigation”. The government cancels the three-month free political relocation provided for in the initial project

“From the effective date of the GEO, say from tomorrow, anyone who wants to run for office — councillor, mayor, CJ president — on behalf of a party other than the one he won the election with in 2020 is free to do so. He has 25-35 days, up to 45 days from the election day. Therefore, he has the opportunity to submit his candidacy from another party. He does not lose the powers on which he currently performs his duties. Until the date of creation of the new Council, i.e. before the oath of the mayor, president of CJ, he cannot change the party on behalf of which he ran in the elections on June 9,” Greble explained during the press conference. takes place in the Victoria Palace, reports Agerpres.

When asked how the current resolution differs from the one adopted ten years ago, which allowed mayors to switch to another party, but which was later recognized as unconstitutional, Tony Greble answered that it was a government decision in the context of the existence of gaps between the date of the elections (June) and the creation of the first local council (beginning of October).

“It is different, because now it was carried out for a limited period, from the date of the start of the election period until the end of the election – given that there is a gap before the creation of new elected authorities – mayors, presidents of the district council, respectively local councilors, district councilors – if they think , that it is good for the normal functioning of things, to be able to run on behalf of another political competitor without losing his local electoral mandate. This possibility of political migration from one party to another is only possible because there is a gap between June, when the elections take place, and probably early October, when the first local and district councils begin to be established. (…) This is the government’s decision so that they can run in the elections. Otherwise, one could understand that their right to run for office was limited only to the party that appointed them four years ago,” he said.

Tony Greble also clarified that the emergency resolution would allow for review by the Constitutional Court under the condition that any GEO “must be confirmed” by Parliament. On the other hand, he assured that the decree “does not violate the provisions” of the Constitution.

“You must mean political migration, which is the term you use…it has never been declared either constitutional or unconstitutional, either when it was permitted, without any restriction, or when it was completely prohibited, on pain of loss of powers of elected officials. one,” he said.

Tony Greble also explained what would happen if the ordinance was ruled unconstitutional after it went into effect, and some local elected officials would have the option of switching to another party.

“Decisions of the Constitutional Court are valid for the future and do not have retroactive effect, so what happened under the current law retains the character of legality. “From the moment of entry into force and publication of the decision of the Central Committee of the Supreme Court in the Official Gazette, everyone is obliged to comply with the prescriptions arising from the decision of the Constitutional Court,” he said.

Tony Greble stressed that the AEP was “no stranger to political controversy” and that Friday’s decision was a decision of political expediency, not constitutionality.

“The event can be considered constitutional, it is a decision of political opportunities, which belongs to political competitors. I do not want to enter into this discussion, because the government will remain neutral, equidistant and equal in relation to all political competitors,” Greble said.