The Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) has admitted, on Tuesday, the notifications made by the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) and the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) regarding the unconstitutionality of the law on private pension payments. In previous sessions, the decision was postponed.
CCR judges partially admitted the notification, noting that the provisions that include positive discrimination towards cancer patients compared to those with other life-threatening illnesses are unconstitutional, according to official sources cited by G4Media.
The CCR decision was made by a majority vote, according to the same sources.
Judges from the High Court of Cassation and Justice and the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) referred the matter to the CCR regarding the bill on private pension payments from Pillars II and III.
The bill adopted by Parliament in October provides that individuals who choose to withdraw money from Pillar II – the mandatory privately managed pillar – will initially receive only 30% of the amount, with the remainder staggered over eight years. As an exception, cancer patients can receive the entire amount in a single withdrawal.
At the same time, individuals who have a fund smaller than the equivalent of 12 monthly social benefits can receive the entire amount as a one-time payment.
– President of the Private Pensions Association: Funds are very liquid and can handle payments, including upcoming peaks. There is no risk of running out of money.
– Bolojan on the private pensions scandal: It would be easier for me to wash my hands.
– AURSF and Claudiu Năsui (USR) criticize the new private pensions law: Lobbyists have won again. Romanians lose again.
### What were the ICCJ’s arguments
**1. Lack of clarity and predictability of the law**
– The law does not meet accessibility, clarity, and precision criteria.
– General references to other regulations are used without specifying the applicable legal framework.
– The legal regime applicable before and after the law comes into force is not specified.
**2. Violation of the right to property**
– Mandatory signing of a payment fund contract is required without the option of full fund withdrawal.
– Limits on the advance that can be received as a lump sum payment and the amount of the monthly pension without participants’ consent.
– These measures represent an interference with the right to private property, recognized by Law 411/2004.
– The lack of a clear purpose and adequate compensation may amount to indirect expropriation.
**3. Violation of the principle of legality and legal security**
– The law does not provide a coherent framework regarding ongoing legal situations.
– Transitional provisions protecting rights accrued under previous legislation are missing.
– Legal insecurity is created, affecting citizens’ ability to understand and enforce their rights.
**4. Undermining citizens’ legitimate trust**
– Pension fund participants have made financial plans based on the previous legal framework.
– Changes are made without public consultation and without a reasonable transition period.
– Citizens’ trust in the stability and predictability of the legal system is undermined.
### AUR’s Arguments – Who Benefits from the Adopted Law
According to AUR’s explanations, the law violates the rights of Romanians who have contributed to pension Pillars II and III.
„Through this project, the Bolojan Government is stealing the pensions of Romanians from Pillars II and III! If it had been a legislative project truly for the benefit of taxpayers, AUR parliamentarians would have voted ‘for’ adoption, but the legislative initiative represents only a perfidious attempt by the ruling parties to steal the hard-earned money of Romanian taxpayers,” AUR stated.
In the party’s view, the real beneficiaries of the new regulations are fund administrators, who will collect commissions ranging from 0.21% to 0.27% and profit from keeping the money in accounts for as long as possible.
Additionally, AUR believes that the Romanian state is the main winner, as the law would be a means of rescuing a „indebted and financially unbalanced” public system.
„Now, what we see is a blatant violation of both the trust of Romanians and an illegitimate takeover of control over the money and a punishment for those who have worked honestly and put money aside.
Instead of providing security, the adopted law reduces the control Romanians have over their own money and sets a dangerous precedent: rules can be changed at any time, even before you receive the rights you have contributed to for a lifetime. In practice, the Government is telling you that, in fact, your money is no longer yours,” AUR asserts.
„We do not accept the sacrifice of every Romanian’s savings in the name of austerity, while the great fortunes remain untouched, and the state’s privileged ones comfortably collect their fat incomes,” AUR concludes.