AUR calls for an investigation after Marius Lulea found a pig’s head at his gate

Riana Gegiu

19 October 2026, 12:42

Politics

Foto: cdep.ro

Always see our news on Google

AUR spokesperson Ștefăniță Avramescu called on the authorities to investigate the case of the pig’s head found at the gate of the home of Marius Lulea, the party’s co-founder, and hold those responsible accountable. The incident is being investigated by police officers from Ilfov.

Avramescu said on Monday, at a press conference, that he does not understand what involvement AUR or the party’s president, George Simion, could have in this case. The reaction comes after Lulea filed a complaint with the Police and named the party leader in connection with the incident.

Marius Lulea recounted that he found a pig’s head by the entrance gate to his home. He also said that, a few days earlier, he had noticed nearby a poster depicting a threatening-looking figure.

“If something happened there, then the authorities should do their job,” said Ștefăniță Avramescu, maintaining that those responsible must answer for their actions. The AUR spokesperson also cited the existence of a “visceral hatred” toward the party, without, however, identifying anyone responsible for the incident. The police have begun investigations to establish the circumstances and responsibility.

Context: internal tensions within AUR and mutual accusations between George Simion and Marius Lulea

Before the pig’s head incident, Marius Lulea was involved in a public dispute with the AUR leadership. He challenged his expulsion from the party, claiming that he was still a member and publishing documents that he said showed he had paid his membership fees, while the leadership justified the termination of his membership on the grounds that these fees had not been paid.

At the same time, Lulea criticized the party’s direction and spoke about the existence of tensions and “dominant voices” within it, calling for AUR to move away from the “far-right” sphere and adopt a more moderate political line. The dispute was presented as part of a broader conflict concerning the leadership and ideological direction.

Against the backdrop of these frictions, accusations also emerged concerning the way the party is represented in the public sphere, including requests to verify certain individuals who allegedly acted as “representatives” of AUR without having the necessary status. Meanwhile, AUR also responded to external accusations concerning its leader, rejecting the idea of a “witch hunt.”