Corrigendum: Interim Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress in Romania under the co-operation and verification mechanism
Date: 2008-02-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU control, Romania, cooperation policy, corruption, exchange of information, judicial reform, rule of law

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 4.2.2008 
COM(2008) 62 final 

INTERIM REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

On Progress in Romania under the Co-operation and Verification Mechanism 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
INTERIM REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL 

On Progress in Romania under the Co-operation and Verification Mechanism  

1. 

INTRODUCTION  

When Romania entered the EU on 1 January 2007, a Cooperation and Verification 
Mechanism (r CVM)1 was set up to help Romania to remedy shortcomings in the area 
of judicial  reform  and the fight  against corruption and to monitor  progress  in these 
areas. 

This report is the second report tabled by the Commission under the Cooperation and 
Verification  Mechanism2.  The  six  months  since  the  first  report  is  considered  to  be 
too short to allow Romania to remedy the shortcomings and for the Commission to 
revisit the assessment made last June. Therefore the report presents a factual update 
of  progress  without  providing  an  assessment  of  results  achieved  under  each  of  the 
benchmarks.  In  addition,  the  present  interim  report  includes  an  overview  of 
assistance  provided  to  Romania  in  the  areas  relevant  for  the  benchmarks.  This  has 
been  done  with  a  view  to  identifying  possible  assistance  gaps  and  providing  a  full 
range of relevant support to Romania. 

2. 

JUDICIAL REFORM AND THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION: STATE OF PLAY  

2.1. 

Follow-up of the June 2007 review: the Action Plan 

Since the Commission's last report in June 2007, a close and permanent dialogue has 
been established with the Romanian authorities in Brussels and Bucharest. Romania 
has  provided  detailed  updates  on  the  state  of  play  to  the  Commission  on  a  regular 
basis. 

The  Romanian  authorities  have  taken  up  the  suggestion  by  the  Commission  to 
establish  an  Action  Plan  on  how  Romania  intends  to  meet  the  benchmarks.  The 
Commission  provided  assistance  to  Romania  in  the  form  of  a  methodological 
evaluation of the Action Plan. Subsequently, in October 2007 following stakeholder 
consultation  a  detailed  report  was  endorsed  by  the  Romanian  government  and 
submitted  to  the  Commission.  The  timely  preparation  and  adoption  of  the  Action 
Plan  which  required  a  concerted  effort  and  mobilisation  of  considerable  resources 
within  a  short  period  of  time  reflects  a  serious  commitment  by  the  Romanian 
authorities3. 

1 

2 
3 

Commission  Decision  2006/928/EC  of  13  December  2006  establishing  a  mechanism  for  cooperation 
and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform 
and the fight against corruption (OJ L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 56). 
The Commission reported for the first time on 27 June 2007COM(2007)378 final 
The action plan can be consulted on the following website: 
http://www.just.ro/Portals/0/Right_Panel/Plan%20de%20actiune/plan_actiune_en_21122007[1].pdf  

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2.2. 

Update on Progress 

2.2.1.  Benchmark 1: Ensure a more transparent, and efficient judicial process notably by 
enhancing  the  capacity  and  accountability  of  the  Superior  Council  of  Magistracy. 
Report and monitor the impact of the new civil and penal procedures codes 

•  Implement  any  necessary  measures,  including  those  provided  for  in  the  relevant 
Action Plan of the Superior Council of the Magistracy adopted in June 2006, that 
ensure a consistent interpretation and application of the law at all levels of court 
throughout  the  country  following  adequate  consultation  with  practising  judges, 
prosecutors and lawyers; monitor the impact of recently-adopted legislative and 
administrative measures 

•  Design  and  implement  a  rational  and  realistic  staffing  model  for  the  justice 

system on the basis of the ongoing needs assessment 

•  Develop and  implement a plan to restructure the  Public Ministry that addresses 

the existing managerial shortcomings and human resources issues 

•  Monitor the impact that the newly-adopted amendments to the Civil and Criminal 
Procedure  Codes  have  on  the  justice  system  so  that  any  necessary  corrective 
measures can be incorporated in the planned new Codes  

•  Report  and  monitor  on  the  progress  made,  as  regards  adopting  the  new  Codes 
including adequate consultations and the impact it will have on the justice system 
•  Enhance  the  capacity  of  the  Superior  Council  of  the  Magistracy  to  perform  its 
core  responsibilities  as  well  as  its  accountability.  In  particular,  address  the 
potential  conflicts  of  interest  and  unethical  actions  by  individual  Council 
members.  Recruit  judicial  inspectors,  according  to  the  newly-adopted  objective 
criteria, who should also have a greater regional representation 

A series of training sessions and regular meetings of judges and prosecutors from the 
courts of appeal and the High Court of Cassation and Justice and regional or lower 
level  magistrates  have  taken  place  to  promote  the  unification  of  jurisprudence. 
Similar activities are planned for 2008. 

By January 2008 a new leadership of the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM) was 
elected,  the  budget  for  the  SCM  was  reinforced  and  new  management  plans  were 
published.  A  Communication  Strategy  of  the  SCM  and  of  the  Romanian  Judiciary 
was  approved  in  December  20074  with  the  aim  of  enhancing  transparency  in  the 
justice system. The organisation of the SCM was strengthened with 240 out of 275 
positions filled. 572 openings remain in the prosecution service. Roughly half of all 
recruitments  to  the  judiciary  followed  an  ad  hoc  procedure  in  order  to  fill  existing 
vacancies5 quickly. In these cases openings were filled on the basis of interviews and 
previous  work  experience  without  verification  of  the  qualification  of  the  new 
magistrate  or  training6  The  development  of  a  Human  Resources  Strategy  for  the 

4 

5 

6 

This strategy shall be running until 2012 and is reflected in the Action Plan. It will be implemented by a 
working group appointed by SCM. 
Through  amendment  of  law  3O4  the  requirement  for  the  council  of  the  National  Institute  of  the 
Magistracy  (NIM)  to  agree  on  nominations  and  revocations  of  the  NIM  senior  management  was 
abolished. 
The interview procedure is now abolished through GEO 100/2007 with applicability as of 1 June 2008.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
judiciary  is  awaited  for  January  2009.7  In  November  2007,  the  National  Anti-
Corruption  Directorate  (DNA)  launched  investigations  against  several  prosecutors 
for forgery of competitions for leading prosecutor positions. 

The  general  part  of  the  new  Criminal  Procedure  Code  was  drafted  and  following  a 
public debate submitted to the relevant Commissions in Parliament and the SCM in 
December 20078. Adoption is still pending. 

The  obligation  for  courts  to  publish  (and  update)  jurisprudence  on  the  Internet  is 
foreseen for end 2008.9 

2.2.2.  Benchmark  2:  Establish,  as  foreseen,  an  integrity  agency  with  responsibilities  for 
verifying assets, incompatibilities and potential conflicts of interest, and for issuing 
mandatory decisions on the basis of which dissuasive sanctions can be taken 

•  Adopt legislation establishing an effective and independent integrity agency with 
responsibilities  for  verifying  assets,  potential  incompatibilities  and  conflicts  of 
interest, as well as issuing mandatory decisions on the basis of which dissuasive 
sanctions can be taken 

•  Establish  such  a  National  Integrity  Agency,  ensure  it  has  the  necessary  human 

and financial resources to fulfil its mandate 

The legal framework for the National Integrity Agency (ANI) was approved in May 
200710.  However,  ANI  is  not  yet  operational.  Only  the  Vice-president  has  been 
elected.  Preparatory  activities,  recruitment,  procurement  for  infrastructure  and 
allocation  of  financial  resources  for  premises,  and  budget  -  and  work  on  the 
organizational chart has started11. 

2.2.3.  Benchmark 3: Building on progress already made, continue to conduct professional, 

non-partisan investigations into allegations of high-level corruption 

•  Continue 

to  provide  a 

track  record  of  professional  and  non-partisan 
investigations into high-level corruption cases. Ensure the legal and institutional 
stability  of  the  anti-corruption  framework,  in  particular  by  maintaining  the 
current  nomination  and  revocation  procedure  for  the  General  Prosecutor  of 
Romania,  the  Chief  Prosecutor  of  the  National  Anti-Corruption  Directorate  and 
other leading positions in the general prosecutor's office 

The work of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) shows a positive track 
record  over  the  past  six  months12.  By  October  2007  the  DNA  had  requested 

7 

8 

9 
10 
11 
12 

Activity 1.4 of part V of the Action Plan. In addition a new organizational chart of the Public Ministry 
was approved (Order no. 2477/C/1.10.07) . 
There  is  no  practice  of  systematic  prior  consultation  of  the  SCM  by  the  Minister  of  Justice  on  key 
legislation  for the  judiciary. Such  systematic  consultation would  allow  the  SCM  to  better  exercise  its 
role of guardian of the Romanian judiciary. 
Action Plan part II, point 2.1).  
Law 144/207 of 25 May, 2007. 
To speed up the Agency's set up Government Emergency Ordinance no 138/6.12.2007 was adopted.  
During June 1st and October 31st, 2007, 148 defendants were indicted by DNA in 64 files. In the same 
period the courts rendered 31 non-final conviction decisions regarding 53 defendants in DNA cases. 22 
final decisions were rendered by courts regarding 31 defendants. Final acquittals were rendered in the 
same reference period regarding 10 defendants. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
permission to start criminal investigations on eight serving or former Ministers. This 
was  granted  by  the  Romanian  President  in  January13.  The  decision  on  lifting 
immunities was taken following an intense legal and political debate. In the past six 
months  several  of  these  cases  which  involve  serving  or  former  members  of  the 
government  have  been  sent  back  by  the  courts  to  the  prosecution  on  grounds  of 
procedural errors. This, in addition to the immunity issue, has provoked considerable 
debate and controversy14. It is not clear whether the courts' argumentation means that 
the  evidence  is  inadmissible,  requiring  new  investigations,  or  whether  the 
prosecution can remedy the situation without having to restart the process.15 

In  October  2007  the  Romanian  Parliament  adopted  a  series  of  amendments  to  the 
Criminal  Procedure  Code  and  to  the  Penal  Code.  The  law  on  amendments  to  the 
Criminal  Procedure  Code  has  not  yet  been  promulgated  by  the  President  who  has 
sent  it  back  for  review.16  The  amendments  foresee  significant  changes  to  the  legal 
framework  for  the  investigation  and  prosecution  of  criminal  cases.  They  stipulate 
inter alia that criminal investigations would in principle be limited to 6 months, no 
search or interception/taping would be allowed without the prior information of the 
suspect17  and  fraud  below  9MEUR  would  be  considered  a  minor  offence  with  a 
maximum  penalty  of  5  years.  If  promulgated,  these  amendments  would  have  a 
substantial negative affect on the efficiency of criminal investigations in Romania in 
general.  They  would  also  affect  joint  investigations  with  Member  States,  the  fight 
against terrorism and the prosecution of cross-border crime.  

It is no longer possible for the prosecution to use technical evaluations by the fiscal 
administration on the extent of damages.18 

2.2.4.  Benchmark  4:  Take  further  measures  to  prevent  and  fight  against  corruption,  in 

particular within the local government 

•  Assess the results of the recently-concluded awareness-raising campaigns and, if 
necessary, propose follow-up activities that focus on the sectors with a high risk 
of corruption 

•  Report on the use of measures to reduce the opportunities for corruption and to 
make  local  government  more  transparent,  as  well  as  on  the  sanctions  taken 
against public officials, in particular those in local government 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 
18 

By  Government  Ordinance no 95 of 4  October  2007, promoted  by  the  former  Minister  of  Justice  the 
procedure for lifting procedural immunity of ministers had been amended in the sense that the existing 
advisory committee had been replaced by a new committee consisting of judges. This law was declared 
unconstitutional  by  the  Romanian  Constitutional  Court.  Following  the  resignation  of  the  Minister  of 
Justice who is himself implicated in one of the eight cases and the nomination of an interim minister in 
January, the President lifted the immunity of all defendants in January. 
The main rationale is non-respect by the prosecution (DNA) of a new judgement of the Constitutional 
Court on the withdrawal of immunity of the defendants which requires withdrawal of immunity also for 
previous  members  of  government.  This  new  judgement  was  however  rendered  after  the  respective 
procedures were launched by DNA. 
Relative nullity sanctions procedural infringements that have not caused fundamental damage to basic 
rights  and  can  be  repaired. In  the  case  of  absolute  nullity  and  infringement  of  e.g. basic  rights of  the 
defendant repair is not possible and the case is sent back to the prosecution to redo the investigation.. 
In case the law on the amendments is voted in favour a second time, presidential promulgation becomes 
obligatory under art 77 of the Romanian Constitution. 
Failure to conform would result in the nullity of the investigation. 
Government Ordinance no 47 of August 28, 2007. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
the  Minister  of 

A new protocol with NGOs on the National Integrity Centre was signed in November 
in  project 
by 
implementation.19  The  Green  Help  line,  initially  designed  as  a  general  anti-
corruption  call-in  line  has  been  broadened  to  cover  general  citizens'  enquiries  in 
relation to the work of the Ministry of Interior.20 

following  a  considerable  delay 

Interior 

Preparatory  work  on  a  national  anti-corruption  strategy  focussed  on  vulnerable 
sectors and local public administration has encountered delays but has started21. It is 
scheduled for adoption by the government in March 2008 

3. 

SUPPORT UNDER THE COOPERATION AND VERIFICATION MECHANISM 

Substantial  support  has  been  made  available  to  Romania  in  the  area  of  justice  and 
home  affairs  by  both  EU  programmes  such  as  Phare  and  the  Transition  Facility  as 
well as by Member States.22 This area remains the main focus of EU post-accession 
support:  almost  half  of  the  budget  of  the  EU's  Transition  Facility  for  Romania  is 
dedicated to this sector, including a special envelope for projects directly supporting 
progress under the CVM benchmarks.  

Projects implemented in the area of justice and home affairs cover the entire range of 
benchmarks. A closer analysis of projects implemented since 200423 shows that some 
areas, such as judicial reform (BM 1) have received significant levels  of assistance 
and may be approaching the saturation point. Substantial funds have also been made 
available  for  the  building  up  of  capacity  in  the  fight  against  high-level  corruption 
(BM  3)  and  local  corruption  (BM  4).  However,  some  vulnerable  sectors  such  as 
education have not yet received anti-corruption support. The new National Integrity 
Agency (BM 2) which is expected to become operational only in the first half of this 
year has so far received little support.  

The  support  provided  has  had  an  impact  on  progress  by  Romania:  Judicial  Reform 
has  enjoyed  sustained  international  support  and  is  an  area  where  there  has  been 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

A public awareness campaign improving the fight against corruption took place between October 2007 
and January 2008.  
To  which  degree  these  changes  will  still  allow  for  a  partnership  with  Civil  Society  and  continue  to 
provide a service on the follow-up of corruption signals could not be established. 
This initiative represents the main measure proposed in the Action Plan under benchmark 4, see activity 
number 5. 
PHARE alone has made available over 187 MEUR to justice and home affairs in Romania since 2004. 
The  Transition  Facility  will  be  implemented  until  2010.  In  the  framework  of  the  structural  funds, 
specific attention and support is given for setting-up of a sound and transparent financial management 
of  EU  funds  which  is  a  process  linked  to  the  fight  against  corruption.  Technical  assistance  will  be 
provided for project monitoring, evaluation and control, as well as for developing of an effective Single 
Management Information System able to provide also transparent information on fund interventions and 
absorptions. TAIEX organized a substantial number of activities in the area of justice and home affairs 
in Romania and still keeps budget available for activities in the future. 
In  order  to  identify  possible  assistance  gaps  and  to  ensure  that  a  full  range  of  support  is  available, 
relevant EU and bilateral assistance provided to Romania since 2004 is summarized in a list attached to 
this report. The list has been established on the basis of information available within the Commission 
and on the basis of information communicated by Member States. Not all data on individual projects 
could be listed and aggregated data has been given preference to allow better readability. However, the 
full available set of information has been shared with Romania and the suggestions in this chapter have 
been discussed with the Romanian authorities and are supported by them. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
relatively  stable  progress.  The  National  Anticorruption  Directorate,  also  a  recipient 
of  substantial  funds,  has  been  able  to  build  up  capacity  for  the  investigation  and 
prosecution of high-level corruption cases in a relatively short period of time.  

Future  support  should  be  focused  on  supporting  the  National  Integrity  Agency  and 
the  fight  against  corruption.  It  should  directly  address  the  priorities  and  needs 
identified  in  the  Action  Plan  which  has  been  drafted  by  Romania.  In  general, 
preference should be given to smaller, well targeted assistance missions that respect 
the  absorption  capacity  of  Romanian  institutions  and  allow  full  ownership  in  the 
integration  of  results.  An  interdisciplinary  approach  should  be  sought  e.g.  focusing 
on both judges and prosecutors in the fight against high level corruption. A managed 
phasing-out of support in saturated areas seems appropriate.  

Support  should  continue  in  the  form  of  exchange  of  best  practice,  training  and 
scholarships. Larger projects in the area of local corruption should be complemented 
by  flexible  and  well-targeted  short-term  or  medium-term  projects  that  address 
specific aspects or focus on particularly vulnerable areas and sectors. 

Romania  is  encouraged  to  make  full  use  of  the  substantial  EU  assistance  budget 
which is still available through the Transition Facility and TAIEX. These funds allow 
for short-term missions at short notice as well as for medium-term assistance projects 
of up to 6 months ("twinning light"). 

The Commission would advise Member States to consider more direct and practical 
support  to  Romania  in  the  form  of  exchange  of  best  practice,  trainee-  and 
scholarships and institutional partnerships with key departments such as the National 
Integrity Agency or the National Anti-Corruption Department. 

4. 

CONCLUSION  

In its first year of EU membership Romania has continued to make efforts to remedy 
weaknesses  that  would  otherwise  prevent  an  effective  application  of  EU  laws, 
policies and programmes. However, in key areas such as the fight against high-level 
corruption, convincing results have not yet been demonstrated. 

The technical update which is provided in this report does not constitute an in depth 
assessment of progress under the benchmarks but the situation on the ground gives 
rise to concerns which need to be addressed before the Commission carries out a full 
assessment  in  June.  Delays  have  occurred  in  implementing  a  coherent  recruitment 
strategy for the judiciary (benchmark 1), in the establishment of a National Integrity 
Agency  (benchmark  2)  and  in  developing  an  overall  strategy  and  implementing 
flagship  projects  to  fight  local  corruption24  (benchmark  4).  Romania  should 
particularly step up its efforts in the fight against high-level corruption (benchmark 
3) and should strengthen its efforts to maintain the legal and institutional stability of 
the Romanian anti-corruption framework. 

The  Commission  recognises  the  important  effort  that  has  been  made  to  produce  a 
credible  Action  Plan  which  describes  the  activities,  deadlines  and  institutions 

24 

Action Plan: benchmark 4, activity 5. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
responsible  for  achieving  the  benchmarks.  However,  the  action  plan  needs  more 
coherence  in  some  parts  and  needs  to  fill  some  gaps.25  The  Commission  proposes 
that Romania corrects the action plan on these points. 

25 

Some legal and political initiatives pursued in fact, contradict the objectives foreseen in the Action Plan. 
In addition, the Action Plan omits the key issue of legal and institutional stability of the anti-corruption 
framework (benchmark 3) The plan also misses an indication of when and if sector strategies to replace 
those which have recently expired on judiciary reform and anti-corruption will be prepared. For local 
corruption  (benchmark  4),  the  Action  Plan  does  not  provide  sufficient  detail.  The  Action  plan  also 
introduces  some  activities  and  indicators  that  seem  not  sufficiently  targeted  to  deliver  the  intended 
result. This relates in particular to indicators such as media leaks on confidential information (BM 3; 
chapter  I,  point  1.2).  A  study  on  the  individualisation  of  penalties  for  corruption  offences  (BM  3; 
chapter II, point 1) can only be a first step in addressing the problem of possible leniency in judging 
high-level corruption as mentioned by the Commission's CVM report of 27 June 2007. The Action Plan 
should be continuously updated and performance against its indicators should be rigorously monitored 
by a strong central operational coordination mechanism. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ANNEX  

Overview of EU Assistance provided to Romania in the area of Judicial Reform and the 
Fight against Corruption26 

Benchmark 1: Judicial Reform  

EU projects have provided institutional capacity building to the Senior Council of Magistracy 
and the Romanian judiciary training institutions. A substantial budget was reserved for the IT 
equipment of courts and prosecutors offices. Several larger bilateral projects and a number of 
smaller  initiatives  complemented  this  institution-building  effort.  Future  projects  continue  to 
focus on capacity building, on the transparency of the judicial process and address particular 
areas such as judiciary statistics, probation system or witness protection. Judicial Reform has 
been a strong focus of assistance. 

Phare 2004-2006: 

• 

Institutional Capacity Building and IT and office equipment for the Superior Council of Magistracy 
(several projects, ongoing: 2.4 MEUR) 

• 

IT and Office Equipment for the Superior Council of Magistracy (Until Nov06: 600,000 EUR) 

•  Strengthening the institutional and legislative framework in the field of international judicial 

cooperation (Nov06-May08: 1,2 Mio EUR) 

• 

• 

Institution Building and Equipment for the National Institute of Magistracy and to the National School 
of Clerks (several projects, ongoing: total 5.24 Mio EUR) 

IT equipment, training and development of case management and documentation software at courts and 
prosecutors' offices (several projects, ongoing: total 28,72 Mio EUR) 

•  Assistance to set up an efficient legal aid system (Until Nov06: 1,25 Mio EUR) 

•  Mediation as an alternative dispute resolution (275.000 EUR until June 2007) 

• 

Increasing the Transparency of Courts' and prosecutors' offices (Nov07-Dec08: 1 Mio EUR) 

•  Assistance to the High Court of Cassation and Justice: Training and Capacity Building (Nov07-Dec08: 

700,000 EUR) 

•  Further consolidation of the institutional and administrative capacity of the Ministry of Justice (Phare 

2006: 0.4 MEUR) 

Transition Facility 2007: 

•  Unification of the Jurisprudence of Courts and Prosecutor Offices in Romania (600,000 EUR) 

26 

PHARE: Budgetary figures include Romanian national co-financing.  
Bilateral Projects: Only larger bilateral projects are taken up in this list. In addition, various assistance 
missions, study visits and smaller activities have taken place. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  Strengthening the Public Ministry’s institutional capacity (170,000 EUR) 

• 

Improving the System of Romanian Judicial Statistics (560,000 EUR) 

•  Strengthening the Romanian Probation System and the Inter-Institutional Cooperation on Victim 

Protection (570,000 EUR) 

•  Assistance for Enhancing the Respect of Human Rights in Prisons and Improving the Efficiency of the 

Romanian Penitentiary System (660,000 EUR) 

(cid:131) 

Improving the Witness Protection Capacity (250.000 EUR) 

Main Bilateral Projects: 

•  Consulting Services for Revision of the Penal Procedure Code 

(Jan-Nov07: 299,500 EUR) 

•  Strengthening the functioning of the Romanian Judiciary and its 
representative body – Superior Council of Magistracy (750,000 
EUR) 

•  Development of Judiciary Training Capacities (Mar-Nov07: 40,000 

EUR) 

•  Several Projects on: Management and media training for 

magistrates, Increasing Integrity within the Judicial System, 
Strengthening the Probation Service, Assistance to the Anti-Money 
Laundering Office, Court Management (635,000 EUR ) 

•  The implementation of basic procedural rules for protecting the 

financial interests of the EU (May-Oct07: 82,000 EUR) 

•  Support for improving the capacity of the Ministry of Justice 

(36,000 EUR) 

•  Assistance to the National Institute for Magistracy of Romania 

• 

Improving the Human Rights Situation in Prisons (07-08: 50,000 
EUR ) 

•  Several smaller training projects, internships, organisational audits, 

study visits, seminars 

Main Projects with a total budget of at least 45.41 MEUR 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Benchmark 2: Integrity Agency  

A single large project includes support to the creation of the National Integrity Agency. Two 
bilateral projects complement the institution-building effort through support in related areas. 
Given that the National Integrity Agency will become operational only in the course of 2008, 
follow-up support should be considered. 

Phare 2004-2006: 

• 

Improving the fight against corruption – assistance to the National Integrity Agency and the DNA 
(Aug06-Jan08: 0.6 Mio EUR concerning ANI) 

Main Bilateral Projects: 

•  Enhancing the Monitoring Role of Civil Society (88,000 EUR) 

•  Protection of whistleblower program 

Main Projects with a total budget of at least 1.6 MEU 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
Benchmark 3: High-Level Corruption 

Several  projects  supported  building-up  capacity  at  the  Romanian  National  Anti-Corruption 
Prosecution Services (DNA). This support continues through smaller projects. 

Phare 2004-2006: 

• 

Improving the fight against corruption – assistance to the National Integrity Agency and the DNA 
(Aug06-Jan08: 1 Mio EUR concerning DNA) 

•  Strengthening the institutional capacity of DNA (Sept05-Feb07: 1,2 Mio EUR) 

• 

IT equipment and software for the DNA (Until Nov06: 1,75 Mio EUR) 

Transition Facility 2007: 

•  Enhancement of National Anticorruption Department Investigative Capacities (560,000 EUR) 

Bilateral Projects: 

•  Several individual advisory missions, seminars and study visits 

Main Projects with a total budget of at least 6.5 MEUR 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
Benchmark 4: Local Corruption 

Several large EU projects are being implemented or in preparation. Bilateral support shows a 
particular emphasis on the area of local corruption. Several projects have been implemented 
with central and local administration. 

Phare 2004-2006: 

• 

Improving the fight against corruption: Corruption Awareness among central and local public 
administration (since Nov06: 1,6 Mio EUR) 

•  Supply of IT equipment for the General Directorate for Anticorruption / Ministry of the Interior (Phare 

2006: 0.3 MEUR) 

•  Strengthening administrative mechanisms and legislation to better foster and protect the public integrity 

system in public administration. (Phare 2006: 1.3 MEUR) 

•  Strengthening the fight against corruption on the preventive side (Phare 2006: 1 MEUR) 

•  Corruption in the Public Administration (Sept07-: 1,2 Mio EUR) 

•  Development of the Anti-corruption General Directorate of the Ministry of Interior and Administrative 

Reform (MIRA) (Jun07-Jul08: 1,1 Mio EUR) 

Transition Facility 2007: 

•  Building Civil Society Support against Corruption (2,5 Mio EUR) 

•  Bringing  Anti-Corruption  Capacities  in  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs  up  to  EU  Standards  (250,000 

EUR) 

•  Strengthening the Capacity to Fight Economic and Financial Crime (200.000 EUR) 

Bilateral Projects 

•  Resident adviser on corruption with MoI (until Jun08) 

• 

Improving Transparency and Accountability of Local Government (ended Aug07: 
135,000 EUR) 

•  Tackling corruption within the Customs Administration (ended Jul07: 52,500 EUR) 

•  Reducing corruption within the Health Sector (until Mar08: 58,500 EUR) 

•  National Integrity Centre (ended Aug07: 115,000 EUR) 

•  Romanian Youth Versus Corruption; Together against corruption; Anti-corruption 

educational campaign (Integrity Centres) 

• 

Improving Romanian local government integrity (MPP) (04-06: 320,000 EUR) 

•  Regional Transparency Councils 

EN 

13 

   EN 

Main Projects with a total budget of at least 9.9 MEUR