Ilie Bolojan announces that the PNL will pay the 14 million lei spent on Nicolae Ciucă’s election campaign, following the HCCJ’s decision

Matei Gaginsky

16 October 2026, 18:55

Politics

Foto: shutterstock.com

Always see our news on Google

PNL President Ilie Bolojan announced Friday evening that the party will pay the 14.1 million lei owed to the state budget for promoting the book by former Liberal leader Nicolae Ciucă. The statement was made on Digi24, after the High Court of Cassation and Justice definitively rejected the PNL’s action against the Permanent Electoral Authority.

The court ruled that the party must repay 14,117,378.04 lei, money spent promoting Nicolae Ciucă’s volume. Bolojan stated that, when he took over the party’s leadership at the end of 2024, the PNL had significant debts. Some of these have been paid, while the rest will be settled, including the amount established by the final ruling.

The Liberal leader said he would not complain about the “difficult inheritance,” but emphasized that the party must stabilize its finances through members’ contributions and stricter management of expenses. He said mechanisms had been created to prevent the PNL from accumulating similar debts again. Bolojan added that, according to the court, the way the promotional billboards were produced did not comply with legal provisions.

Context: PNL has definitively lost the lawsuit against the Permanent Electoral Authority (AEP) regarding the reimbursement of expenses from Nicolae Ciucă’s campaign

PNL has definitively lost the litigation with the Permanent Electoral Authority (AEP) concerning the reimbursement of certain expenses from Nicolae Ciucă’s presidential campaign. The High Court of Cassation and Justice rejected the party’s appeal, upholding the obligation to repay to the state budget the amount established by the courts.

According to the information in the case file, PNL had previously received a reimbursement, while a subsequent audit established that part of the money came from state budget subsidies and could not be reimbursed again. In this context, the litigation was initiated after the AEP decision was challenged, and the ruling was postponed several times until the final decision.