We use analytics to improve Pollar and, with your consent, the Meta pixel to measure sign-ups and purchases that come from our ads. You can change this anytime in Settings. Privacy policy

Search⌘K
HomeFor YouLiveBriefAsk
MapMarketsThreadsSoundsFilms
DomesticGeopoliticsEconomySocietyScience & TechInfrastructureSportCultureLifestyle
Support Pollar
ContactPublisher
HomeBriefLiveThreadsSearch

For membersThe first 30 seconds for everyone. Synthetic voice (AI).

In brief

  • On Thursday, 22 October 2026, the court found a constitutional conflict between Parliament and the government by a 5 to 4 vote, upholding Sorin Grindeanu's referral.

  • Emergency Ordinance GEO 38/2026 was published in the Official Monitor on 8 May 2026, three days after the 5 May 2026 censure motion removed the Bolojan government.

  • The court postponed its decision on the Ombudsman's referral, which argued the ordinance lacked a Legislative Council opinion and was issued by a dismissed government.

  • Romania has a 16.7 billion euro SAFE allocation, and contracts worth more than 9 billion euros have been signed that could be put at risk by the ruling.

Bucharest
Bucharest · Romania
How it came to this
  1. 8 MayOrdinance GEO 38/2026 published in the Official Monitor
  2. 20 MayGrindeanu files the referral with the Constitutional Court
  3. 22 OctCourt finds a constitutional conflict between Parliament and the government, 5 to 4

The court's finding

On Thursday, 22 October 2026, Romania's Constitutional Court (CCR) found that a constitutional conflict exists between Parliament and the government over the emergency ordinance on the SAFE defence programme. The vote was 5 to 4. The referral came from Sorin Grindeanu, leader of the PSD and president of the Chamber of Deputies, who argued that the government led by Ilie Bolojan had exceeded its powers. Court sources told HotNews.ro that the court admitted the referral. The court postponed a separate decision on a referral from the Ombudsman, who had asked for the ordinance to be declared unconstitutional.

Grindeanu's argument

Grindeanu's referral raised two problems. The first concerns the adoption and publication of the ordinance after Parliament withdrew its confidence in the government through a censure motion on 5 May 2026. The second is that the ordinance regulated matters already under debate in Parliament, where the solutions were already on the agenda of plenary sittings in both chambers. The referral was addressed at the time to the court's president, Simina Tănăsescu, and described the cabinet in these terms:

“a Government that, under Article 110 paragraph (4) of the Constitution, was no longer empowered to exercise anything other than acts of current administration of public affairs.”

Sorin Grindeanu, PSD leader and president of the Chamber of Deputies

Grindeanu argued that the interim government could not issue legislative acts of this kind and should have been limited to the day-to-day running of public affairs.

How the ordinance came about

Emergency Ordinance GEO 38/2026 was adopted by the interim government on 4 May, according to HotNews.ro, and was modified on 5 May, the day of the censure motion. Its final form was sent for publication and appeared in the Official Monitor (Monitorul Oficial) on 8 May 2026, three days after the government was removed. Grindeanu filed his referral on 20 May. The Ombudsman's challenge cited the absence of a request for an opinion from the Legislative Council and the constitutional ban on ordinances issued by a dismissed government.

What is at stake for SAFE

Romania has a 16.7 billion euro allocation under SAFE, and contracts worth more than 9 billion euros have already been signed. The programme consists of loans rather than grants, with a maximum interest rate of 3% and a 10-year grace period, so repayment would begin only in 2035 and run for about 30 years. Unconstitutionality would not end the programme or automatically cancel signed contracts. It would, however, remove for the future the ordinance's mechanisms that allow the state to expropriate certain industrial assets or take stakes in strategic companies, which could block projects that depend on them.

SAFE funding for RomaniaEUR billion
SAFE allocation16.7
Contracts signed (more than)9
SAFE allocation
16.7 EUR billion
Contracts signed (more than)
9 EUR billion

Data from the article text

Open questions

The Thursday finding concerns the conflict between the two branches. Whether the ordinance itself is unconstitutional is the question raised by the Ombudsman's referral. The court has not yet ruled on that referral, and the SAFE contracts already signed remain the largest exposure in the case.

Next in today’s edition

Websites go dark worldwide as PHP flaws prompt shutdownsJapan's Finance Ministry, Dutch government services and parts of Wikipedia were among those that pulled systems offline after two critical PHP vulnerabilities surfaced on Wednesday, 21 October.Digital · 2 h ago
Today’s BriefPutin offers November Ukraine talks after freeing American prisonerLive · 5 storiesLuisa González arrested in Ecuador

Sources and context

  • Mediafax.ro3 h agoConstitutional Court finds a constitutional conflict between Parliament and the Government in the SAFE ordinance caseCurtea Constituțională constată un conflict constituțional între Parlament și Guvern în cazul ordonanței SAFE · original in Romanian
  • Libertatea3 h agoCCR agrees with Grindeanu: Constitutional conflict regarding the last GEO adopted by the Bolojan Government, related to the SAFE ProgramCCR i-a dat dreptate lui Grindeanu: Conflict constituţional la ultimul OUG adoptat de Guvernul Bolojan, legat de Programul SAFE · original in Romanian
  • HotNews.ro4 h agoCCR agrees with Grindeanu in the dispute with Bolojan over the SAFE ordinanceCCR îî dă dreptate lui Grindeanu în disputa cu Bolojan pe ordonanța SAFE - HotNews.ro · original in Romanian
  • G4Media.ro4 h agoBREAKING | The Constitutional Court found that there is a constitutional conflict between Parliament and the Government related to the SAFE Ordinance (sources)BREAKING | Curtea Constituțională a constatat că există un conflict de natură constituțională între Parlament și Guvern legat de Ordonanța SAFE (surse) · original in Romanian
Sorin Grindeanu
PSD leader and president of the Chamber of Deputies who referred the ordinance to the Constitutional Court
Ilie Bolojan
Leader of the interim government whose ordinance was challenged, and PNL president

Pollar is free and carries no ads in the text. Its members keep it going.

Support Pollar

Published today at 14:03.

Report an error in the text

Text generated by AI from the reports of the publishers listed and checked automatically, with no human editor. How Pollar is made

In this text

  1. 1The court's findingThe court's finding
  2. 2Grindeanu's argumentGrindeanu's argument
  3. 3How the ordinance came aboutHow the ordinance came about
  4. 4What is at stake for SAFEWhat is at stake for SAFE
  5. 5Open questionsOpen questions

Based on reports by

Mediafax.ro, Libertatea, HotNews.ro, G4Media.ro

List of sources

Government · Bucharest

Romania's Constitutional Court finds conflict over SAFE ordinance

The Constitutional Court ruled 5 to 4 that a constitutional conflict exists between Parliament and the government over the emergency ordinance on the SAFE defence programme. The case was brought by Sorin Grindeanu after the interim government led by Ilie Bolojan issued the ordinance following a censure motion.

Bucharest

Ask about this text

AI text based on reports by Mediafax.ro, Libertatea, HotNews.ro and other publishers. Published today at 14:03.

Ask your own question
What was the vote count in the Constitutional Court ruling?
How much money has been allocated to the SAFE programme?
How it is made