{“A diabolic and destructive role… is played by the mass media that are the guard dogs of the society, but sometimes turn into rabid dogs that become dangerous for the society through the lies that they spread.”} This statement made by the president of the Supreme Court of Justice Ion Muruianu at the February 13 general assembly of judges in front of video cameras has really terrifying hidden motives behind if judging by the reasons that provoked it, the goals pursued and the possible effects on the Moldovan society. It should be noted that not the press was the target for Ion Muruianu's attacks. Nobody in Moldova will try conclusions with a helpless press without economic and professional potential. Why does it happen so? This is a theme for another analysis, but the effect of such a state of affairs is very clear: during the last years (not only the last eight years, but also the last 20 years) the press in Moldova did not have the capacity to touch a hair of the head of one official, not mentioning an entire functionary or politician or even categories of officials or politicians. In the best case, the press plays the role of 'driving belt' from the politicians to the society and back. The real target was most probably the present government that has done nothing yet to put things in order after the departure of the old government, but states its intentions to bring changes and shakes verbally the pillars of the old sociopolitical construction. There is a direct connection between Muruianu's reaction expressed last weekend and the statements made by Acting President Mihai Ghimpu during the program “In profunzime” earlier last week. Ghimpu said the prosecutors and judges formed a professional clique that does not allow things in Moldova to develop, including in investigating the April 2009 events. It is true that Ghimpu's assertions were not diplomatic, but rather dangerous for the Moldovan society if such a clique exists indeed. You cannot stir up a wasps' nest without being stung. We cannot yet say that “Muruianu” stung. Maybe it was a warning, like the 'rabid dogs' are liquidated... . It was rather a test, a defiance, a demonstration of strength against a weak adversary. It was a calculated move designed to show that there is no other force in Moldova that could defeat that one – neither in the Parliament, nor in the Government, the civil society or society in general, not mentioning the press. The force of one side derives from the weakness of the other side. In other conditions or in another country, not even an ordinary judge would have afforded to make such statements, even if they correspond to his convictions. The level from which the statements were made in Moldova points to the existence of a wide category of persons who have the same views. From now on, “Muruianu” will be a generic name and only the next steps will show whom and what it represents. Maybe the independence of the judiciary, the conservatism of the profession or the revanchism of the past in general… Ion Muruianu's clumsy attempt to justify himself later confirms rather than refutes the danger posed by this category. One thing is for sure – the Moldovan society walked into a new trap, this time 'democratic' . The largest part of the judges in Moldova are named to posts 'for life', until they turn 65. It is presumed that this condition would guarantee sufficient independence in their work that would be used to protect the human rights and freedoms. However, it seems that this democratic principle generates dangers. The aforementioned viewpoints might offend representatives of the judiciary who consider they do their jobs honestly and do not pose a threat to the society. But none of them tried to dissociate themselves from the “Muruianu” phenomenon and nobody dared to demand that Muruianu should be dismissed. Actually, only one political party, from the extra-parliamentary Opposition, expressed its official stance, seeking Muruianu's dismissal. The press, which is weaker and less independent than the judges and the ruling politicians, also did it. “Muruianu” threw down the gauntlet. Who will pick it up? The optimistic variants include: a rather large group of judges who can influence things during another general assembly of judges, the Supreme Council of Magistrates, the civil society, the human rights and mass media NGOs, representatives of the press, the Parliament, the political parties, especially the parliamentary ones, who have the power to decide, etc… The pessimistic variant does not provide a chance for the Moldovan society to have a normal life in a state of law with democratic values and decent living conditions from all viewpoints.