The former head of the IGSU sued the Ministry of the Interior. He alleges that he was removed from office for political reasons

General Dan Paul Iamandi is asking the court to suspend the decisions by which in April it was replaced after 8 yearsfrom the leadership of the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations (IGSU). The case is being tried in Iasi, where the magistrates of two courts failed to determine who has jurisdiction in such a case and asked the High Court of Cassation and Justice to decide who should settle the case.

• In April, General Dan Iamandi was seconded to a directorate of the Department of Emergency Situations (DSU), headed by Raed Arafat. The decision was taken by the Minister of the Interior, Cătălin Predoiu, who did not publicly communicate the reasons.
• Contacted by HotNews, Cătălin Predoiu did not want to comment on General Iamandi's approach. He said that the MAI communicated to the court the documents containing the institution's point of view, including the report of the Control Body sent to the IGSU in October 2025, after the explosion in the Rahova neighborhood. The conclusions of the checks were not made public by the ministry.
• The former head of the IGSU complained to the judges that the change from position by secondment “was carried out illegally” and that the minister's order “does not comply with the requirements of a fair and thorough justification, which could justify the ordered measure”.

Allegations of political interference

In the lawsuit filed in Iasi with the Ministry of the Interior, General Iamandi requests the suspension of the two orders of the Minister of the Interior, namely the one by which he was removed from the management of the IGSU and the one by which the new inspector general of the IGSU was appointed.

His lawyer cited political interference in court “including in military matters” and spoke of “ministers changing commanders who no longer correspond politically”. These data can be found in the file pending before the Iași Court of Appeal, consulted by HotNews.

“The plaintiff did not have the real opportunity to express a possible refusal regarding the secondment and to prove the circumstances that justify such a refusal. He was informed of this aspect on 14.04.2026, at 16:04, with immediate effect, without being able to have a meeting or a previous notification issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs. He was simply called to the Personal Service, putting this detachment order in front of him, to sign it”, it is mentioned in the documents submitted to the court by the general's lawyer.

“A form of removing someone because they are no longer politically relevant”

The lawyer argued before the judges that General Iamandi was removed “because he no longer corresponds from a political point of view and the orders given to him”:

“To change the supreme commander of this entity (IGSU no) only on the basis of an order that is not motivated, without justifying the need for his replacement, is only a form of removing someone because he no longer corresponds from a political point of view, but the law must be respected. The appointment of such a commander must be made by the prime minister and the same revocation. The detachment cannot be ordered because he no longer corresponds from the political point of view and the orders given to him. (…) He condemns the interference of politicians, including in military matters. This commander is one of the people who appear before the president of Romania, being assimilated to those commanders of military units who must answer 24/7 to the president of Romania and the prime minister. Ministers, who change and replace people as you and with whom they want, must respect the law.”

Law 80/1995 regarding the Statute of military personnel provides, in article 78: “Appointment and dismissal in military units, with the exception of public positions where the appointment is made according to the law, as well as the detachment of military personnel under the conditions of article 77, are done, in time of peace and in time of war, according to the powers established by order of the Minister of National Defense.” In the present case, it is about the Minister of the Interior, because the IGSU is a military structure of the MAI.

The former head of the IGSU complained about the manner in which he was changed from his position, claiming that “if he no longer corresponded qualitatively” to his position “he should have been presented with an activity report, charged with those violations of the law and replaced.”

“This secondment basically represents a removal in a pejorative sense from the position and the appointment of another person who corresponds from a political point of view”, added Iamandi's lawyer.

What Cătălin Predoiu says

The lawyer who represented the Ministry of the Interior in the process specified that Iamandi was requested to be seconded to a structure “for carrying out missions that require the experience of the inspector general” and claimed that his salary rights were not affected by the move.

Contacted by HotNews, the Minister of the Interior, Cătălin Predoiu, did not want to comment on General Iamandi's accusations, nor the reasons why he was changed from the head of the IGSU. Predoiu said that the Ministry of the Interior communicated to the court the documents containing the institution's point of view, including the report of the Control Body sent to the IGSU in October 2025, after the explosion in the Rahova neighborhood.

The control body verified the management of the institution in the last two years, possible financial irregularities, the management of European projects, the manner of carrying out the missions of the firefighters, the compliance with operational procedures and the command structure. However, the conclusions of the checks were not made public by the MAI.

The judges passed their files to each other

The Iași Court of Appeal, where Iamandi was initially addressed, decided on April 28 that it is not within its competence to judge such a case. The court cited the general's status as a public servant and ruled that, “regarding a decision of the supreme court,” it was within the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear such a case.

Therefore, the file was sent to the Iași Court. However, the judges there held the opposite, reasoning that, being an administrative act issued by a central public authority, the process must be judged by the Court of Appeal.

Being a conflict of jurisdiction between the two courts, the Iasi Court decided on May 12 to send the file to the High Court of Cassation and Justice to determine who should resolve this case.

Four-star General Dan Iamandia led the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations for 8 years. He was considered close to DSU chief Raed Arafat. The two collaborated in the management of the interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic, the operations carried out in the context of the war in Ukraine and the tragedies at Crevedia and Ferma Dacilor. Relations between Iamandi and Arafat have deteriorated over the past year, IGSU sources told HotNews, in the context of debates on the reorganization of the emergency system.