Former Sports Minister harshly criticizes Constitutional Court ruling, claims Romanian athletes are being sacrificed

The decision of the Romanian Constitutional Court (CCR) to declare unconstitutional the law requiring sports clubs to include at least 40% Romanian athletes in teams participating in national competitions has sparked strong reactions in the sports world, with former Sports Minister Eduard Novak issuing direct accusations regarding economic interests and political influence that may have contributed to blocking the project. In a message posted on social media, Novak expressed disappointment over the invalidation of an initiative he had promoted during his ministerial term. The former official argued that the law was intended to protect and encourage domestic athletes but was halted because of the interests of powerful clubs and politically influential owners: "That's it, we believed, we fought, we believed in this project, but apparently it is not wanted. I'll tell you why it is not wanted: because the financial interests are too great, there are clubs with political influence. How can a law that passed through other institutions be unconstitutional? I propose that we abolish all courts in Romania and leave all arbitration and decisions to the CCR. Only the CCR matters. Bravo, you won! What can we still hope for after elections were also annulled by the CCR? Dear athletes, dear parents, do not lose hope, maybe one day you too will get a place on teams to play.”

Among those explicitly criticized were former minister Ionuţ Stroe, as well as sports-related businessmen such as Dan Şucu and Mihai Rotaru: "You won, Mr. Stroe, congratulations, you achieved yet another thing besides appearing in underwear. You are an extraordinary man. At the same time, I want to congratulate Mr. Şucu, who intervened, Mr. Rotaru, and all those club owners who intervened to block Romanian athletes. I want to tell you that you are merely running a sporting adventure, you have nothing to do with performance sport, you are sabotaging Romanian athletes. You won, I wish you great success and congratulations.”

CCR's arguments: the law violates European norms

The Constitutional Court upheld the challenge filed by President Nicuşor Dan and ruled that the law contradicts Romania's obligations within the European Union.

According to the CCR, the law: discriminated against athletes from other EU member states;limited the free movement of workers;violated European anti-discrimination law;infringed on the right to work of European citizens.

The judges concluded that imposing a quota based on citizenship creates preferential legal treatment for Romanian citizens, which is incompatible with European treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Nicuşor Dan: support for sport must remain constitutional

President Nicuşor Dan emphasized that supporting Romanian sport is a legitimate goal, but it must be achieved through methods consistent with European legislation. He cited models used in other European countries, where the focus is placed on: investment in sports academies;development of junior training centers; education of local athletes; incentives for clubs that promote homegrown players.

A dispute between sports protectionism and European market rules

The law reflected a protectionist approach aimed at increasing Romanian athletes' chances of competing professionally but came into direct conflict with the fundamental principles of the European single market.

Supporters argued that: clubs prefer foreign athletes for immediate performance; young Romanians are being marginalized; national sport risks losing long-term competitiveness.

Opponents argued that the law:restricted competition; reduced sporting quality;

exposed Romania to European legal disputes.

The CCR's ruling now obliges political and sports leaders to identify alternative solutions for supporting Romanian athletes without violating European law.

Experts estimate that the focus will shift toward: sports infrastructure funding;

youth development programs; fiscal incentives; "locally trained player” regulations similar to the UEFA model.

The invalidation of the "40% Romanian athletes” law represents a defeat for supporters of direct protectionist measures but also sends a clear signal that national sports policies must be harmonized with European Union regulations.