The Ombudsperson submitted to Romania's Constitutional Court a challenge regarding the Government's Emergency Ordinance on the reform of central and local public administration.
In the referral, the institution argues that several provisions of the ordinance - including articles I.32, VI.3-4, VIII.2, VIII.5, VIII.7, XII, XIII, XVII and XLIV - violate constitutional principles. These include legal certainty and legitimate expectations, equality before the law (Art. 16), the right to private property (Art. 44), social protection (Art. 47), the protection of persons with disabilities (Art. 50), the rules on restricting certain rights and liberties (Art. 53), and Art. 115(6) on emergency ordinances.
According to the Ombudsperson, the ordinance breaches the principle of legitimate expectations and affects human dignity, a fundamental constitutional value.
The institution notes that Emergency Ordinance 7/2026 amends 34 different regulatory acts from various fields. Because it modifies numerous heterogeneous acts, from fiscal and budgetary rules to the decentralisation and reorganisation of public institutions, the ordinance lacks a clear, single regulatory purpose. This, the Ombudsperson argues, goes beyond the constitutional limits of emergency legislation and encroaches on Parliament's primary law-making role.
The challenged provisions, it says, create legal uncertainty and undermine citizens' trust in the stability of the legislative system.
The Ombudsperson also stresses that fundamental rights must be viewed as a coherent system grounded in human dignity, which has genuine normative force.
In conclusion, the institution argues that, through its broad scope and significant social impact, the emergency ordinance disregards the Constitutional Court's requirement that legislation have a clear "object - subject" structure. By prioritising administrative objectives over individual rights, the delegated legislator effectively reduces the citizen "from a rights-bearing subject with inherent dignity into an instrument of fiscal adjustment", in violation of Article 1(3) of the Constitution.
Comentează