CHIŞINĂU (Imedia) - The scandal surrounding the dismissal of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) President has taken a new turn. The Constitutional Court said Parliament's March 4 decision to dismiss Mr. Muruianu was unconstitutional.

„Parliament has broken the law on the status of the judge, which clearly says that a judge must be dismissed in the same way in which he was confirmed. The law clearly says that the SCJ President can be let go only at the proposal of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC). In Mr. Muruianu's case, the SJC did not come forth with such an initiative," said Constitutional Court (CC) judge Victor Puscas.

Justice Minister Alexandru Tanase replied, however, that the CC's decisions are not retroactive. Mr. Tanase added that he was surprised by the fact that CC judges decided to examine a normative individual act, after systematically avoiding to do so in the last ten years.

On April 16, however, the Monitorul Oficial (Official Monitor) published a CC decision that included a modification of internal standards which allowed it to examine such acts.

„This decision, which revises procedures and allows for individual acts to be examined, has actually opened an extremely large door. I do not know of states where such practices exist. I expect to see a similar demand from [former secret service head] Mr. Resetnicov, a number of similar requests, and the contestation of the presidential decree from former judge Dorin Popovici," Mr. Tanase added.

Mr. Popovici was dismissed because he issued decisions regarding anti-Communist protesters in April 2009 in police stations, which is against the law.

Mr. Tanase has also said that the CC decision was questionable because one of the judges' six-year mandate expired on April 21, which is when the judge, Alina Ianucenco, was appointed.

CC head Dumitru Pulbere said that Mr. Ianucenco's mandate is valid and that it will expire on May 14, which is when Ms. Ianucenco made her vows six years ago.

Meanwhile, the SCJ rushed to publish a press release announcing that Ion Muruianu has been reinstated immediately after the CC's decision, despite the fact that both the Justice Ministry and the CC agree that the decision is not retroactive.

Commentary:

Igor Botan: The CC's decision has long-term effects

Igor Botan, executive director of the Association for Participatory Democracy, says that the CC's decision about Mr. Muruianu „has long-term effects."

„This is a show of solidarity by the community of judges toward the legislative power. Moreover, the rules of the game were changed during the game. The CC did not reexamine its jurisdiction when the problem of Mr. Muruianu's dismissal was being discussed in Parliament, and waited for him to be dismissed in a certain manner that did not allow for the decision to be contested either administratively or even in the Constitutional Court.

On April 16, however, the CC adopted a special decision that changed its own jurisdiction to examine normative individual acts, which now allows for the Muruianu case to be examined. So the judges have cast an extremely strong blow on the legislative power," Mr. Botan adds.

The analyst says that he expects a new set of decisions by the Court that will say that  legislative acts are unconstitutional. „Political forces are definitely going to think about using this procedure because it has turned into a Pandora's box," Mr. Botan stresses.

Mr. Botan concludes that the ruling Alliance for European Integration (AEI) cannot do anything about this decision and needs to „confirm with the CC's decision and to hurry to call early elections because the AEI is in a very serious decline."

Igor Munteanu: Installing a new SCJ would be the solution to this conflict

Igor Munteanu, executive director of the Viitorul Institute for Social Initiatives, thinks that „the CC has actually made a path to be able to examine such cases when it decided to examine legislative ordinary acts."

„It has actually created an instrument to allow it to be able to intervene in the case of political decisions, which is not normally typical for a Constitutional Court. It has become possible here, however. Another aspect has to do with the fact that this has been about a person that has been commented upon in the press so much and which has created a certain degree of an imbalance in public opinion via a number of statements that are not honorable for any public person. This is all the more important considering the fact that the SCJ president needs to be the mirror of the community of judges.

Still, it is difficult to believe that a person like Muruianu can come back to this important position. From that standpoint, the Justice Ministry's attitude is perfectly understandable because it is trying to promote radical reform to ensure the independence of the judicial system. There is, however, another aspect. A Justice Minister cannot criticize a CC so harshly because that is an extremely important organization and its decisions are final. The political factor is involved here, as well, and when there are suspicions of some political influences on the decisions of the CC there is a convulsion in the entire judicial system in the country. I think that is the best explanation for the reasons why such conflicts appear," Mr. Munteanu argues.

He adds that given the circumstances, „Parliament needs to make sure that the CC decision conformed with the procedure."

„Another aspect is that the decision does not have retroactive effects. So installing a new SCJ president would be the solution for this conflict," Mr. Munteanu concludes.

File:

SCJ head Ion Muruianu was dismissed with the vote of 52 members of the AEI on March 4.

Communist M.P.s left the room shortly before the vote, accusing interim President and Speaker Mihai Ghimpu of breaking legislative rules because he did not allow them access to the microphone.

The five former Communist M.P.s who quit the party recently, headed by Vladimir Turcan, and joined by the Moldova Unita [United Moldova] Party announced that they would not vote for Mr. Muruianu's dismissal because the SJC did not yet make a decision in that regard.

Justice Minister Alexandru Tanase said, however, that the SJC decision would have been needed if Mr. Muruianu were going to be dismissed as a judge. Mr. Muruianu was being let go as head of the SCJ, and „his dismissal from an administrative position is not an involvement in the legal community," Mr. Tanase noted .

At the same time, Mihai Ghimpu mentioned that „according to legislation, the SJC proposes only the appointment of the SCJ head, not his or her dismissal."

Later, Communist M.P.s asked the CC to rule on the constitutionality of Mr. Muruianu's dismissal. The Court said the decision was unconstitutional on April 27.

During his annual speech in front of judges on February 13, 2010, Mr. Muruianu said, with regards to Moldova's constant losses at the European Court of Human Rights that „there are a number of stupid speculations and insinuations, some more shocking than others, but they all follow at least three purposes: 1. advertising for some lawyers, 2. the phariseic polishing of the image of some people and the destruction of the image of others at any price, and 3. the premeditated defamation of the entire legal system and, as a result, of the state. A diabolical and destructive role in this situation is played by the media, which, by definition, are the guarddogs of society, often turn into /.../ rabid dogs that become dangerous for society with the lies that they spread and by the intoxication, with disinformation, of public opinion regarding the entire community of judges."

As a result of these statements, a number of journalists asked for Mr. Muruianu's dismissal.