Saturday, 3 October 2026NewsWorldBusinessTech
Latest

Acting PM Ilie Bolojan Summoned as Witness in DNA Iași Probe

Acting Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan was summoned to testify as a witness before anti-corruption prosecutors at DNA Iași on October 2, 2026, in an ongoing investigation centered on businessman Fănel Bogos and allegations of high-level influence peddling within the central administration.

Veterinary inspectors discovered severe infractions, including poultry infected with salmonella at company farms. Following regulatory fines and the culling of flocks, Bogos allegedly sought to overturn the sanctions and secure approximately 3 million euros in compensation claims.

The criminal inquiry, which escalated through late 2025 and into 2026, involves allegations that poultry businessman Fănel Bogos attempted to use political connections to replace the leadership of the Vaslui County Sanitary Veterinary and Food Safety Directorate (DSVSA Vaslui).

Investigators Trace Political Influence Used to Obtain Benefits

Mihai Barbu, former president of PNL Vaslui, is currently investigated under judicial control for using his political influence to intermediate meetings between the businessman and high-ranking state officials. Investigators assert that Bogos utilized an extensive network of intermediaries to reach decision-makers in Bucharest.

Acting PM Ilie Bolojan Summoned as Witness in DNA Iași Probe
Photo: Lumea Justitiei

The anti-corruption directorate also placed Cristina Trăilă, former deputy secretary-general of the Government, under criminal investigation for complicity in using political authority to obtain undue benefits. Prosecutors maintain that Trăilă supported efforts to replace local veterinary directors with individuals amenable to Bogos’s commercial interests.

Bolojan Defends Victoria Palace Meeting

Bogos eventually secured an audience with Ilie Bolojan at Victoria Palace, an interaction that prosecutors are scrutinizing alongside financial circuits. Speaking publicly about the summons, Bolojan confirmed that his schedule includes dozens of weekly meetings and defended the legitimacy of his administrative process.

The businessman was detained by the anti-corruption agency in November 2025 before being placed under judicial control in March 2026. While defending his actions, the acting prime minister insisted that visitors simply present their grievances without any financial exchanges influencing access to his office.

Bolojan, chemat la DNA Iași în dosarul lui Fănel Bogos

Sure, people talk all kinds of nonsense on the phone, but that's their responsibility. I believe I acted correctly, a man came to an audience, he stated his grievances, we needed to have a different kind of discussion, I noted what he told me, but apart from this discussion there was no other issue implying that someone gave money to get in to see me or that anyone suffered because someone got in to see me, so let's be very clear on this subject! Acting

The defense maintained that the businessman engaged in a brief, principled conversation regarding administrative challenges without any corrupt intent.

Alliance for Union of Romanians Challenges Summons

The timing of the DNA summons drew swift pushback from the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR). In a formal press release, the party led by George Simion argued that the judicial steps against Bolojan coincided directly with his public statements indicating that the rejection of the Siegfried Mureșan Cabinet had opened the path toward early parliamentary elections.

Acting PM Ilie Bolojan Summoned as Witness in DNA Iași Probe
Photo: Ziare.com

While criticizing Bolojan’s past governance, AUR stated that judicial processes should not serve as political tools to force leaders away from supporting early elections.

Vaslui County Council President Ciprian Trifan and PNL Brăila head Alexandru Popa have also appeared before investigators as witnesses as prosecutors continue mapping the network of local and national interactions surrounding the Vaslui veterinary agency.

The Brăila branch leader insisted upon arrival at the institutional headquarters that he had no acquaintance whatsoever with the businessman whose regulatory disputes triggered the multi-agency inquiry.

Why did the summons coincide precisely with the debate over early parliamentary elections?