After the AUR, Sorin Grindeanu also attacks the Bolojan Government's ordinance on defense investments at the Constitutional Court

The referral to the Constitutional Court was submitted by the PSD leader, Sorin Grindeanu, as president of the Chamber of Deputies. He claims that the Bolojan Government was no longer able to adopt the ordinance for the SAFE program, because it had been dismissed by a motion of censure. The ordinance was appealed to the CCR, the other day, for the same reason, and by the People's Advocate, at the request of the AUR.

• The ordinance on defense investments through the SAFE program was adopted by the government on May 4, a day before it was dismissed by the PSD-AUR motion of no confidence. The government made changes compared to the original form, changes that needed a new opinion from the Legislative Council. The GEO was thus given without this opinion, which was issued after the Government had become interim.
• After receiving the opinion, the ordinance was then put back on the agenda, on May 8, by the Bolojan Government, which argued that this was to take note of the missing opinion, after which it was published in the Official Gazette.

Sorin Grindeanu notified the CCR after the PSD had asked the president of the Senate, Mircea Abrudean (PNL), to take such a step.

Grindeanu claims in the referral to the Constitutional Court that after the adoption of the censure motion, the Government “was no longer able to exercise acts of current administration of public affairs, with the categorical exclusion of any delegated legislation competence”.

The PSD leader claims that the Executive adopted the emergency ordinance regarding the defense industry after being dismissed by a motion of no confidence, “thus violating the Constitution and disregarding the obligation of constitutional loyalty to the Parliament”.

In the referral to the CCR, Grindeanu claims that the final form of GEO 38/2026 was adopted between May 5-8, 2026, after the Bolojan Government was dismissed by the Parliament through a motion of no confidence.

“By the continuation of the Government's exercise of primary regulatory powers, we appreciate that it has replaced the role of the Parliament.

In this sense, we consider that the issuance of the cited normative act violates the principle of separation and balance of powers in the state, enshrined in art. 1 paragraph (4) of the Basic Law, disregarding one of the prerogatives of this principle, namely the loyal collaboration and mutual respect that must govern the relations between the state institutions and authorities”, claims Grindeanu.