The Constitutional Court's decision saying Ion Muruianu was dismissed from the post of president of the Supreme Court of Justice illegally was addressed to the Parliament, not the Supreme Council of Magistrates, Speaker Mihai Ghimpu said at the Council's meeting on May 11. Ghimpu told the members of the Council they should have consulted the legislative body before canceling the holding of the position of president of the Supreme Court of Justice on an interim basis, Info-Prim Neo reports. “It was a problem between the Parliament and Muruianu. The holding of the duties of ad interim should not have been canceled,” Mihai Ghimpu said, adding it was his own viewpoint, not a reprimand. “No person receives salary after reinstatement if there is no relevant order, as far as I'm concerned.” The Council's member Boris Negru said Ion Muruianu should have been dismissed by the Parliament at the suggestion of the Supreme Council of Magistrates. “If the Council pronounced on the matter before the Parliament, the decision might have been correct. But the Parliament did it before us and we only took cognizance of its decision. We now should implement the decision of the Constitutional Court as its decisions cannot be challenged,” Boris Negru said. The Parliament dismissed Ion Muruianu from the post of president of the Supreme Court of Justice on March 4 this year, arguing that Moldova lost a number of cases tried by him at the ECHR. On April 27, after the Communists Party filed a challenge, the Constitutional Court declared Ion Muruianu's dismissal by the Parliament illegal. Ion Muruianu did not attend today's meeting of the Supreme Council of Magistrates on health grounds.