I don't know if anyone has spotted this yet:
1. The communists have appeal to the constitutional court, suggesting that the AIE's decision to continue the meeting of Parliament on the 28th of August breached their legal right to have 10 days to form their faction.
2. The decision to continue was expressed in the form of a vote which took place under the session presidency of Ion Hadarca.
3. Ion Hadarca was presiding over the session as 'senior deacon', in the absence of Ivan Calin, who had walked out with the Communist deputies.
Here's the important bit. By attacking the outcome of the vote to continue, the communists are necessarily accepting as legal everything that had happened up to that point in time, i.e. the continuation of the session under Hadarca's presidency and the organization (if not the outcome) of a vote on continuation. They are also accepting that Calin's decision to terminate was illegal.
If the Communists had been smart, they would have attacked Hadarca's assumption of the role of "Senior Deacon" and his putting of the continuation motion to a vote.
Pedantic stuff, I know, but I just thought it might give the AIE some more ammo.