COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2023 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2023 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2023-07-05
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Romania, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 5.7.2023  SWD(2023) 823 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2023 Rule of Law Report       Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2023 Rule of Law Report                        The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2023) 800 final} - {SWD(2023) 801 final} - {SWD(2023) 802 final} - {SWD(2023) 803 final} - {SWD(2023) 804 final} - {SWD(2023) 805 final} - {SWD(2023) 806 final} - {SWD(2023) 807 final} - {SWD(2023) 808 final} - {SWD(2023) 809 final} - {SWD(2023) 810 final} - {SWD(2023) 811 final} - {SWD(2023) 812 final} - {SWD(2023) 813 final} - {SWD(2023) 814 final} - {SWD(2023) 815 final} - {SWD(2023) 816 final} - {SWD(2023) 817 final} - {SWD(2023) 818 final} - {SWD(2023) 819 final} - {SWD(2023) 820 final} - {SWD(2023) 821 final} - {SWD(2023) 822 final} - {SWD(2023) 824 final} - {SWD(2023) 825 final} - {SWD(2023) 826 final} - {SWD(2023) 827 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

Until  November  2022,  reforms  in  Romania  in  the  area  of  justice  and  anti-corruption  were 
followed by the Commission under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) and 
the Rule of Law cycle. They are, since then, being solely monitored under the Rule of Law 
cycle. By a letter of 28 June 2023, the President of Romania informed the Commission about 
the measures taken by Romania to fulfil the last residual commitments that were listed in the 
conclusions of the 2022 CVM report, as well as further measures to continue upholding the 
rule of law. 

The  justice  system  underwent  a  comprehensive  overhaul  through  the  revised  Justice  Laws. 
These  amendments  constitute  significant  progress  to  reinforce  judicial  independence.  There 
were  also  important  steps  taken  to  address  remaining  concerns  about  the  investigation  and 
prosecution  of  criminal  offences  in  the  judiciary.  The  new  Justice  Laws  brought  important 
changes  regarding  the  career  organisation  and  liability  regimes  for  magistrates;  the 
appointment, dismissal, and powers of high-ranking prosecutors;  and the  governance of the 
Judicial  Inspectorate.  A  panel  of  high-level  experts  is  analysing  how  to  implement  the 
recommendations  from  the  Venice  Commission.  The  efficiency  of  the  justice  system  has 
improved  overall,  and  the  development  of  digital  tools  has  progressed  steadily.  Despite 
continued efforts to improve the situation, the increasing shortage of magistrates is generating 
serious concerns, as it could impact the quality and efficiency of justice over time. Some cases 
have been reported of use of disciplinary sanctions in relation to certain magistrates, whilst the 
possibility to request judicial review continues to be ensured. 

The  implementation  of  the  new  Anti-Corruption  Strategy  is  well  on  track.  A  positive  track 
record  continued  to  be  maintained  in  combating  corruption,  including  on  high-level  cases. 
Romania  has  made  significant  progress  in  addressing  operational  challenges  of  the  DNA 
although recruitment remains to be further improved. The reform of the Codes of Criminal Law 
and Criminal Procedure has been adopted. A Government Emergency Ordinance was adopted 
to clarify the statute of limitation, whilst the delayed legislative response led to the closing of 
corruption cases and the annulment of convictions. Under the new system on investigating and 
prosecuting corruption offences within the judiciary, designated prosecutors are addressing the 
backlog of cases, with many unfounded cases being closed, without any procedural incidents 
being  reported  in  the  implementation  process.  There  has  been  no  new  indictment  so  far. 
Continued attention to integrity of law enforcement led to positive results. Steps are being taken 
to  update  and  codify  the  legal  framework  on  integrity  and  progress  has  been  made  on 
digitalisation. However, the enforcement of the lobbying rules for Members of Government 
remains  to  be  improved  and  rules  on  lobbying  for  Members  of  Parliament  remain  to  be 
introduced.  The  National  Integrity  Agency  was  made  the  competent  authority  to  receive 
whistleblower reports and its budget is expected to be increased accordingly. 

No  measures  have  been  taken  to  enhance  the  independent  governance  and  editorial 
independence of public service media. A new audiovisual law was adopted, and the National 
Audiovisual Council’s budget needs to reflect its new tasks. The transparency of the financing 
of media, in particular of audiovisual media by political parties, has not improved significantly 
yet. The situation regarding threats, instances of harassment and violence against journalists 
remains an issue.  

New  instruments  aim  to  improve  the  transparency  and  quality  of  decision-making  and 
legislation.  The  Government  has  committed  to  improve  the  effectiveness  of  public 
consultations.  No  further  steps  were  taken  to  obtain  accreditation  for  the  National  Human 
Rights  Institution.  There  have  been  improvements  regarding  the  legal  framework  for  civil 

1 

 
society organisations (CSOs), although they continue to face challenges related to access to 
public funding and to the lack of predictability in the implementation of the legal framework. 
Initiatives  are  ongoing  to  simplify  procedures  for  recognising  and  funding  associations 
carrying out activities of general interest. 

2 

 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall, concerning the recommendations in the 2022 Rule of Law Report, Romania has made: 

  Significant progress on ensuring that the revision of the Justice Laws reinforces safeguards 
for judicial independence, including to reform the disciplinary regime for magistrates, and 
some progress on taking measures to address remaining concerns about the investigation 
and  prosecution  of  criminal  offences  in  the  judiciary,  taking  into  account  European 
standards and relevant Venice Commission opinions. 

  No progress on introducing rules on lobbying for Members of Parliament. 
  Significant  progress  on  addressing  the  operational  challenges  of  the  National  Anti-
Corruption Directorate, including as regards recruitment of prosecutors, and some progress 
in  closely  monitoring  the  impact  of  the  new  system  on  investigating  and  prosecuting 
corruption offences in the judiciary. 

  No  progress  on  strengthening  the  rules  and  mechanisms  to  enhance  the  independent 
governance  and  editorial  independence  of  public  service  media  taking  into  account  the 
European standards on public service media. 

  No  progress  on  ensuring  effective  public  consultation  before  the  adoption  of  draft 

legislation. 

  No progress on continuing efforts to establish a National Human Rights Institution taking 

into account the UN Paris Principles. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, 
and in addition to recalling the commitments made under the National Recovery and Resilience 
Plan relating to  certain  aspects of the justice system, the anti-corruption framework and the 
legislative process, it is recommended to Romania to: 

  Complete  the  process  initiated  in  view  of  taking  into  account  the  recommendations 
contained in the opinion of the Venice Commission on the Justice Laws, in particular by 
finalising the assessment being carried out by the panel of high-level experts. 

  Take measures, in particular at an operational level, to address remaining concerns about 
the investigation and prosecution of criminal offences in the judiciary, including as regards 
corruption offences, taking into account European standards.  

  Continue efforts to ensure adequate human resources for the justice system, including for 
the  prosecution  services,  taking  into  account  European  standards  on  resources  for  the 
justice system. 
Introduce, without further delay, rules on lobbying for Members of Parliament. 

 
  Step  up  efforts  to  strengthen  the  rules  and  mechanisms  to  enhance  the  independent 
governance  and  editorial  independence  of  public  service  media  taking  into  account  the 
European standards on public service media. 

  Step up efforts to ensure effective public consultations before the adoption of legislation. 
  Step up efforts to obtain the accreditation of a National Human Rights Institution taking 

into account the UN Paris Principles. 

3 

 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The Romanian justice system is structured in four instances, both civil and military: the first 
instance  county  courts,  the  ordinary  and  specialised  tribunals,  the  courts of  appeal1  and  the 
High  Court  of  Cassation  and  Justice.  The  High  Court  of  Cassation  and  Justice  judges  first 
instance and appeal criminal cases for certain categories of persons2, as well as appeal cases 
for certain civil  and  administrative cases. A  fundamental  role of this Court is  to  ensure the 
uniform interpretation and application of the law by the other courts. The Superior Council of 
Magistracy  (SCM),  tasked  with  guaranteeing  judicial  independence,  is  divided  into  two 
sections,  the  section  for  judges  and  the  section  for  prosecutors.  Each  section  has  exclusive 
competence  for  the  recruitment  and  management  of  the  career  of  judges  and  prosecutors 
respectively,  and  acts  as  a  disciplinary  court.  The  prosecution  service  is  headed  by  the 
Prosecutor General of the Public Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation 
and Justice (HCCJ). The Public Prosecutor’s Office includes specialised structures with special 
jurisdiction  and  organisation,  the  National  Anti-Corruption  Directorate  (DNA)  and  the 
Directorate for Investigation and Combating Organised Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT), led 
by chief prosecutors3. There are also military prosecutorial offices. The Prosecutor General and 
the Chief Prosecutors of the specialised structures, DNA and DIICOT, are appointed by the 
President of the Republic, upon a proposal of the Minister of Justice and after having received 
a  non-binding  opinion  of  the  Superior  Council  of  Magistracy.  Romania  participates  in  the 
European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  (EPPO).  The  Romanian  National  Union  of  Bar 
Associations is a legal entity of public interest, comprising all 41 bars in Romania. 

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Romania continues to be average among 
both the general public and companies. Overall, 51% of the general population and 56% of 
companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ 
in 20234. According to data in the 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard, no clear trend can be identified 
in the evolution of the perceived level of independence among the general public since 2016. 
The perceived judicial independence among the general public has increased in comparison 
with 2022 (48%) and remains at the same level as in 2016. The perceived judicial independence 
among companies has increased in comparison with 2022 (49%), but it is lower than in 2016 
(63%). 

Significant progress was made on reinforcing safeguards for judicial independence in a 
comprehensive revision of the Justice Laws. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended to 
Romania to “[e]nsure that the revision of the Justice Laws reinforces safeguards for judicial 

1   Courts of appeal judge at both first instance (more complex cases) and  second instance, in appeals against 

decisions handed down by the lower courts. 

2   The  Criminal  Section  of  the  High  Court  of  Cassation  and  Justice  hears,  as  a  court  of  first  instance,  cases 
involving offences committed by senators, deputies, and Romanian members of the European Parliament, by 
members of the Government, by judges of the Constitutional Court, by members of the Superior Council of 
Magistracy, by judges of the High Court of Cassation and Justice, and by prosecutors of the Prosecutor's Office 
attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice. 

3   Prosecutors’ offices attached to the courts of appeal are headed by general prosecutors, and the ones attached 

to the tribunals and county courts are led by first prosecutors. 

4   Figures 49 and 51, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as follows: very low (below 30% of respondents perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); 
low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

4 

 
                                                           
independence,  including  to  reform  the  disciplinary  regime  for  magistrates,  […]  taking  into 
account  European  standards  and  relevant  Venice  Commission  opinions”5.  As  mentioned  in 
previous Rule of Law Reports6, the three justice laws7, which define the status of magistrates 
and  organise  the  judicial  system  as  well  as  the  Superior  Council  of  Magistracy  (SCM),  are 
central for the independence of magistrates and the good functioning of the judiciary. Romania 
committed  to  amend  its  justice  laws  by  30  June  2023  in  its  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan 
(RRP), as part of the reform aimed at ensuring the independence of the judiciary, enhancing its 
quality  and  efficiency8.  Following  a  public  consultation,  the  draft  laws  were  submitted  to 
Parliament through an accelerated procedure9 and adopted on 17 October 2022. The amended 
laws address several long-standing concerns and bring about positive changes to reinforce the 
efficiency and independence of the judiciary. For example, they provide for more safeguards 
as regards the civil and disciplinary liability of magistrates and the appointment and dismissal 
procedures for high-ranking prosecutors and judges. Provisions were added to make the SCM 
more  transparent  and  accountable10,  as  well  as  to  make  the  Judicial  Inspectorate  more 
accountable and prevent concentration of power in the hands of the Chief Inspector11. The laws 
also  make  several  important  changes  as  regards  the  admission  to  the  magistracy  and  the 
promotion  of  magistrates,  including  to  managerial  positions12.  The  Venice  Commission 

5   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2. 
6   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 4. 
7   Law No. 303/2022 on the status of judges and prosecutors; Law No. 304/2022 on judicial organisation; and 
Law No. 305/2022 on the Superior Council of Magistracy. See 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 3, pp. 3-4 and pp. 4-5 respectively. 

8   On proposal from the Commission, the Council adopted its Implementing Decision 12319/21, of 26 October 
2021,  on  the  approval  of  the  assessment  of  the  recovery  and  resilience  plan  for  Romania,  under  which 
milestone 423, to be achieved by 30 June 2023, refers to the ‘Entry into force of the ‘Justice laws’ (laws on 
the  status  of  magistrates,  judicial  organisation,  Superior  Council  of  Magistracy).  See  Annex  to  Council 
Implementing Decision 12319/21, p. 499. 

9   In its urgent Opinion of 18 November 2022 on the Justice laws (CDL-AD(2022)045), endorsed at its 133rd 
Plenary  Session  (16-17  December  2022),  the  Venice  Commission  “regrets  the  haste  of  the  adoption 
procedure”, noting that “the parliamentary debate was conducted in a rushed manner”. For more details on the 
adoption procedure, see also progress report for Romania under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism 
(CVM) (COM(2022) 664 final), p. 3. 

10   As stated in the 2022 CVM Report, the new composition of the SCM, which started its mandate in January 
2023, has an opportunity to ensure transparency and accountability. See COM(2022) 664 final, p. 17 and p. 
28. The new SCM demonstrated its commitment to give a new impetus to transparency and accountability by 
publishing online in April 2023 an action plan on transparency and accountability. 

11   As underlined in the Commission’s 2022 CVM report, the new leadership of the Judicial Inspectorate has now 
the opportunity to ensure that disciplinary investigations are no longer used as an instrument to exert pressure 
on the activity of judges and prosecutors, in line with the case law of the CJEU. The 2022 CVM report also 
noted that a remaining concern relates to the possibility for the Chief Inspector to overrule a decision to dismiss 
a case, or any decision taken by an inspector following a preliminary investigation. See COM(2022) 664 final, 
pp. 17-19. See Judgment of 11 May 2023, Inspecţia Judiciară, in Case C-817/21, where the CJEU analysed 
the legislation applicable before the entry into force of the revised Justice Laws. 

12   The 2022 CVM Report highlights that new rules have been introduced for the promotion of judges to the High 
Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ), where promotions on the basis of a competitive written test have been 
replaced by a selection based on an evaluation of the judicial decisions taken by candidates during their entire 
activity at the Court of Appeal and an interview before the section for judges of the SCM. Once promoted to 
the HCCJ, judges are also excluded from further professional evaluations. CVM report 2022, p. 5. See also 
footnote 31. Under the new Justice Laws, the president, vice-presidents and section presidents of the HCCJ 
are appointed by the SCM section for judges, for a period of 3 years renewable once, following an interview 
consisting  of  supporting  a  managerial  plan,  a  verification  of  managerial  and  communication  skills  and  a 
verification of knowledge specific to the position. This new procedure does not comprise written tests, whereas 

5 

 
                                                           
concluded that on the whole the laws seem to be heading in the right direction13. It nevertheless 
issued several specific recommendations that the Government has committed to further analyse 
and take into utmost account and more generally if further actions are necessary14. Therefore, 
significant progress has been made to address the recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of 
Law Report on the Justice Laws. 

A  panel  of  high-level  experts  was  created  to  analyse  how  to  implement  the 
recommendations of the Venice Commission in the national legislative framework. On 19 
December  2022,  the  Venice  Commission  adopted  an  opinion  in  which  it  analysed  targeted 
aspects of the Justice Laws15. With regard to the new safeguards for the appointment of high-
ranking prosecutors16, the Venice Commission noted that a period of three years’ term of office, 
with a possibility of renewal, creates a potential risk17 and recommended introducing a longer 
appointment  period,  with  no  possibility  of  renewal18.  An  appointment  procedure  was 
conducted under the new rules in December 2022 for the three chief prosecutors19. Under the 
new Justice Laws, deputy managers in courts and prosecutors’ offices20 are appointed by the 
relevant SCM section upon proposal by the court president or head of the prosecutor's office. 
Stakeholders have raised concerns that such a system risks concentrating the decision-making 
power in the hands of the head of the court or prosecutor’s office21. The Venice Commission 
recommended  introducing  a  competitive  selection  for  deputy  managers22.  Furthermore,  the 

previously, candidates to these positions were submitted to the same written examinations as those applying 
to management positions in lower courts. 

13   CDL-AD(2022)045, para. 74. On different aspects covered by the Venice Commission Opinion, see paragraph 

below. 

14   For details see 2022 CVM report COM(2022)664, p. 28. 
15   CDL-AD(2022)045. The scope of the opinion did not cover all the three Justice Laws, but was limited to issues 

raised in PACE Resolution 2466 (para. 10). 

16   For details see 2022 CVM report COM(2022)664, pp. 8-9. 
17   CDL-AD(2022)045, para. 45: “there is a potential risk that a prosecutor who is seeking re-appointment by a 
political body will behave in such a manner as to obtain the favour of that body or at least be perceived as 
doing so”.  

18   CDL-AD(2022)045, paras. 44-47 and 76. 
19   On 30 March 2023, the Romanian President signed the decrees appointing the new Prosecutor General and 
the new Chief Prosecutor of the DNA following positive opinions by the SCM section for prosecutors. In April 
2023,  the  Romanian  President  signed  the  decree  for  the  appointment  of  the  chief  DIICOT  prosecutor, 
following  a  negative  opinion  of  the  SCM  section  for  prosecutors.  The  SCM  section  for  prosecutors  has  a 
stronger  role  in  the  appointment  procedure  under  the  new  Justice  Laws.  It  now  has  to  be  consulted  and 
participates in the selection committee. The SCM’s opinion remains consultative and in case of a negative 
opinion, the Minister of Justice has the obligation to organise a second interview with the candidate concerned, 
taking into account the arguments laid out in the SCM opinion. The Venice Commission however noted that 
this is a relatively weak safeguard, and that the decisive role for the Minister is not in accordance with its 
previous recommendation to attribute a major role to the SCM Section for prosecutors. Still, it considered that 
the sharing of political responsibility between the Minister and the President partly meets its earlier criticism 
and indicated that the role of the SCM strengthened since it will issue an opinion that can force the Minister, 
if the opinion is negative, to reconsider the choice and justify it publicly CDL-AD(2022)045, paras 40-42. 
20   Art. 167 of Law No. 303/2022 applies to vice-presidents and section presidents in first instance county courts, 
ordinary and specialised tribunals and courts of appeal, as well as to all prosecutors in managerial positions in 
prosecutor’s offices attached to the same courts, except for chief prosecutors. 

21   See, for instance, input from Expert Forum for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 11. Information also received 

from magistrates’ association in the context of the country visit. 

22   CDL-AD(2022)045, para. 28-35. The Venice Commission also criticised the lack of clarity in the law as to 
the weight of the management plans in the selection and the possible lack of discretion of the relevant SCM 
section not to appoint the proposed candidate. 

6 

 
                                                           
Justice Laws23 provide that the Prosecutor General may overrule in writing decisions taken by 
any lower prosecutor when he or she deems that the decision is unlawful or unfounded. The 
Venice Commission recommended that the Prosecutor General should not be able to bypass 
the prosecutorial hierarchy when finding prosecutorial measures unlawful or unfounded24. In 
January 2023, the Government set up a panel of high-level national experts to present a report 
on adequate legislative solutions to follow up on the Venice Commission opinions in order to 
further reinforce the efficiency and independence of the judiciary. This panel is expected to 
submit its assessment by 1 September 2023. 

Changes to the civil and disciplinary liability regimes strengthen the independence of the 
judiciary,  while  some  cases  of  disciplinary  sanctions  in  relation  to  certain  magistrates 
continue to raise concerns. As stated above, procedural safeguards were added to the civil25 
and disciplinary26  liability regimes  for magistrates. The  recusal  of SCM members sitting in 
disciplinary panels  can now be requested on the  grounds of a  conflict  of  interest  or lack of 
impartiality, and limitation periods have been introduced to exclude the possibility to trigger 
disciplinary  liability  indefinitely27.  Moreover,  two  disciplinary  offences  which  generated 
concerns respectively for judicial independence and the primacy of EU law were eliminated28. 
The possibility to request the judicial review of disciplinary sanctions continues to be ensured. 
Some cases of disciplinary sanctions have continued to raise concerns. Following disciplinary 
actions opened by the Judicial Inspectorate, the SCM excluded two judges from the magistracy, 
who have challenged these sanctions before the HCCJ29. The HCCJ has annulled disciplinary 
sanctions applied in similar cases in 202230. More recently, the SCM section for judges rejected 

23   Law No. 304/2002, Art. 68(3). Art. 68(4) of the same law gives the chief prosecutors of DNA and DIICOT 

the same power within their respective directorates. 

24   CDL-AD(2022)045, para. 52-53 and 76. 
25   COM(2022)  664  final,  p.  4.  In  particular,  under  Articles  268-269  of  Law  No.  303/2022,  the  magistrate 
concerned is immediately notified of and may intervene in actions for compensation for alleged miscarriage 
of justice against the State. Furthermore, the Ministry of Finance does not have a discretionary power anymore 
to lodge a recourse action against the magistrate but can do so only if the relevant section of the SCM finds 
the existence of bad faith or grave negligence in the miscarriage of justice, on the basis of a report drawn up 
by the Judicial Inspectorate. 

26   Ibid. In particular the decisions of the SCM sections in disciplinary matters must now be reasoned and notified 
without delay to the magistrate concerned, instead of within 20 days, and disciplinary sanctions are removed 
from the magistrate’s record three years from their date of enforcement, if the magistrate is not subject to a 
new disciplinary sanction during this period. This is particularly important for disciplinary sanctions not to 
affect indefinitely the career of magistrates. 

27   Art. 51(2) of Law 305/2022 provides for a limitation period for disciplinary liability of magistrates of 4 years 

from the date of the offence, which may be interrupted and extended to a maximum of five years.  

28   COM(2022) 664 final, p. 4. The offences concerning “actions affecting the honour, professional rectitude, or 
the  prestige  of  justice,  committed  during  the  performance  or  outside  the  performance  of  work  duties”  and 
“non-compliance with the decisions of the Constitutional Court or the decisions issued by the High Court of 
Cassation and Justice in resolving appeals in the interest of the law” were abolished. See also 2022 Rule of 
Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, pp. 6-7. 

29   On 19 December 2022, the section for judges of the SCM excluded three times from the magistracy two judges 
from the Bucharest Court of Appeal who had been dealing with high-profile corruption cases for alleged undue 
delays, non-compliance with provisions on random allocation of cases, as well as bad faith or gross negligence. 
On 15 March 2023, the same two judges were excluded a fourth time from the magistracy, for exercising their 
functions in bad faith. They both appealed the disciplinary sanctions before the HCCJ. 

30   In November 2022, the HCCJ annulled the disciplinary sanctions imposed by the SCM on 14 December 2021 
on three out of five judges of the Constanţa Court of Appeal who had participated in sentencing high-level 
corruption  offences,  and  lowered  the  sanctions  to  warnings  for  the  remaining  two  judges.  The  HCCJ  also 
annulled all three decisions of exclusion from magistracy adopted against a judge, respectively for posting 

7 

 
                                                           
the  disciplinary  action  initiated  by  the  Judicial  Inspectorate  against  a  judge  for  delays  in 
adjudicating cases and gross negligence, taking into account the heavy workload of the judge 
concerned31. Judges’ associations have perceived unannounced searches by judicial inspectors 
in public premises as creating pressure and intimidating the targeted magistrates32.  

Some  progress  was  made  on  the  remaining  concerns  regarding  the  investigation  and 
prosecution of criminal offences by magistrates.  In the 2022 Rule of Law Report, it was 
recommended  to  Romania  to  “take  measures  to  address  remaining  concerns  about  the 
investigation  and  prosecution  of  criminal  offences  in  the  judiciary,  taking  into  account 
European  standards  and  relevant  Venice  Commission  opinions”33.  Following 
the 
dismantlement of the Section for the Investigation of Offences in the Judiciary (SIIJ) in March 
2022, no procedural incidents  have been reported in  the implementation  of the new system 
established  to  investigate  offences  committed  by  magistrates,  which  is  based  on  designated 
prosecutors within the Prosecutor’s Offices attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice 
(HCCJ) as well as the Courts of Appeal34. However, the designated prosecutors are still dealing 
with a significant backlog of cases re-assigned from the former structure35. It will be important 
to  monitor  the  functioning  of  the  new  system  over  time,  in  particular  given  the  absence  of 
additional safeguards in light of the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU36. While the 
designated prosecutors are prioritising manifestly unfounded cases that can be closed without 
referral to court, a large number of such cases possibly based on ‘vexatious complaints’ is still 
open37, and risk exerting pressure on the magistrates concerned. The designated prosecutors 
have not  yet issued any indictment and the new system will have to show its ability to deal 
efficiently with corruption cases within the judiciary. Some concerns were expressed regarding 
the transparency and smooth conduct of appointment procedures of the prosecutors, whereby 
the  Superior  Council  of  Magistracy  (SCM)  proposed  less  candidates  than  the  number  of 
positions  available,  some  of  which  were  not  approved  by  the  Prosecutor  General38.  This  is 

videos related to his private  life on  social  media, allegedly engaging in political activities as a  member of 
NGOs and gross negligence in the exercise in his functions. See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter 
on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 6. 

31   Decision of the SCM section for judges of 3 May 2023 in case  29/J/2022. Under Article 51(3) of Law No 

305/2022, the Judicial Inspectorate may appeal the decision within 15 days from its delivery.  

32   Information received from magistrates’ associations in the context of the country visit. 
33   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2.   
34   For more details on the institutional model, see 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law 

situation in Romania, pp. 4-5. 

35   As of 31 December 2022, out of a total of 8062 cases allocated under Law No 49 of 11 March 2022 on the 
abolition of the Section for the Investigation of Offences in the Judiciary, the designated prosecutors were able 
to close 2472 cases. The remaining backlog varies considerably for each territorial unit, as  the Prosecutor’s 
Office attached to the Bucharest Court of Appeal was for instance only able to close 56 out of 1277 allocated 
cases. See Annex 1 to the input from the Romanian Authorities for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

36   The new structure should be ‘accompanied by specific guarantees such as, first, to prevent any risk of that 
section being used as an instrument of political control over the activity of those judges and prosecutors likely 
to  undermine  their  independence  and,  secondly,  to  ensure  that  exclusive  competence  may  be  exercised  in 
respect of those judges and prosecutors in full compliance with the requirements arising from Articles 47 and 
48 of the Charter’, Judgment of the Court of Justice of 18 May 2021, Asociaţia ‘Forumul Judecătorilor Din 
România’  and  Others,  in  joined  cases  C-83/19,  C-127/19,  C-195/19,  C-294/19,  C-355/19  and  C-379/19, 
ECLI:EU:C:2021:393, para. 223. 

37   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 4. 
38   See contribution from the Romanian Magistrates' Association, the National Union of Romanian Judges, the 
Association of Judges for the Defence of Human Rights and the Romanian Public Prosecutors' Association for 
the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 2-4.  

8 

 
                                                           
particularly  problematic  for  prosecution  services  with  a  high  number  of  cases  regarding 
magistrates, such as the Prosecutor’s Offices attached to the Bucharest Court of Appeal and to 
the HCCJ, which are functioning with a low number of designated prosecutors39. Given the 
absence of procedural incidents reported under the new prosecutorial structure and its results 
in  dealing  with  its  backlog  of  cases,  some  progress  was  made  regarding  the  2022 
recommendation on the investigation and prosecution of criminal offences by magistrates. 

The management of the budget of lower courts was transferred from the executive branch 
to  the  judiciary.  The  revised  Law  on  judicial  organisation  transfers  the  responsibility  to 
manage the budget for the personnel costs and salary rights of the courts of appeal, tribunals, 
specialised  tribunals  and  courts  of  first  instance  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice  to  the  HCCJ. 
While this implies a greater budgetary independence for the justice system, the HCCJ might 
face difficulties in terms of resources to perform this task40, which already generated abundant 
litigation between magistrates and the State regarding salary rights. 

Quality  

Despite continued efforts to improve the situation, the increasing shortage of magistrates 
is  generating  serious  concerns,  as  it  could  impact  the  quality  and  efficiency  of  the 
judiciary  over  time.  Following  an  unprecedented  number  of  retirements  requested  by 
magistrates  over  the  last  year41,  the  situation  of  human  resources  in  the  justice  system  has 
worsened  overall42  and  has  become  critical  in  some  courts  and  prosecution  services43.  The 
situation is particularly concerning at the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the HCCJ44, where 

39   Following the appointment of six designated prosecutors out of 15 within the Prosecutor’s Office attached to 
the  High  Court  of  Cassation  and  Justice,  three  of  them  retired,  and  it  is  now  functioning  with  only  three 
designated prosecutors. Only three are currently assigned to the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Bucharest 
Court of Appeal, which also has the heaviest caseload among territorial units. Information received from the 
Prosecutor General of the Prosecutor's Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice in the context 
of the country visit to Romania. 

40   In order to facilitate a smooth takeover of the budgetary tasks, Art. 142 (10) of Law No. 304/2022 on judicial 
organisation foresees that the Ministry of Justice is providing the HCCJ with logistical support, human and 
material  resources  for  a  period  of  up  to  6  months.  This  period  was  extended  until  31  December  2023  by 
Government Emergency Ordinance No. 34 of 12 May 2023. It remains to be seen whether this transitional 
support period will be sufficient. Information received from the HCCJ in the context of the country visit. See 
also input from Funky Citizens for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 14.  

41   In 2022, 451 judges and 256 prosecutors retired. Between 1 January and 31 March 2023, 81 judges and 44 

prosecutors retired. See additional written replies from the SCM. 

42   The deficit of magistrates was estimated at around 2000 positions at the beginning of 2023. Whereas in January 
2022, 4403 out of 5072 judge positions were filled and 669 and were vacant, 4057 were filled out of 5068 and 
1011 were vacant on 31 March 2023. There were 662 vacant prosecutor positions out of 3041 in January 2022, 
and 860 vacant positions out of 3038 on 31 March 2023. See input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law 
Report, p. 10, and additional written replies from the SCM. As regards the situation in previous years, see 
2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 8 and p. 9 
respectively.  

43   In  this  context,  it  is  to  be  noted  that,  according  to  European  standards,  a  sufficient  number  of  judges  and 
appropriately qualified support staff should be allocated to courts. See Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of 
the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, para. 35. Moreover, since a proper functioning of the 
judiciary is strongly dependent on the quality of judges, prosecutors and staff, human resources and the status 
of the judiciary form an important area of the quality  model. See European Commission for Efficiency of 
Justice (CEPEJ), Checklist for promoting the quality of justice and the courts adopted by the CEPEJ at its 11th 
plenary meeting (Strasbourg, 2-3 July 2008), p. 4. 

44   Its occupancy rate on 1 January 2022 was 62,25% and decreased to 43.49% as of 31 December 2022, mainly 
due  to  the  number  of  retirements.  Among  other  causes,  the  public  ministry  also  pointed  to  the  lack  of 

9 

 
                                                           
more than half of the positions required by law are vacant, and where the heavy caseload per 
magistrate  might  have  an  impact  on  the  quality  of  justice.  Similarly,  the  HCCJ  is  facing 
particular  challenges,  as  some  of  its  chambers  might  not  have  a  sufficient  quorum  to  keep 
functioning  following  a  number  of  retirements,  and  possible  further  retirements  in  the  near 
future45. Admissions to the magistracy, primarily through competitions organised by the SCM, 
are currently not sufficient to compensate for the outflow of magistrates, and to address the 
shortages in the short term, in particular given the seniority requirement in higher courts and 
prosecution  services46.  The  increase  of  the  training  period  at  the  National  Institute  of 
Magistracy  (INM)  from  two  to  three  years,  which  will  come  into  force  in  2024,  could  put 
additional pressure on human resources, and the SCM has reiterated its calls to maintain the 
previous two-year period47. Only a few leading judge and prosecutor positions were filled48 
following competitions organised in 2022 and 2023, potentially due to a low pool of eligible 
candidates, as well to a lack of interest to apply for such positions49. In order to mitigate the 
impact of the shortage of magistrates, the Government decided to generalise the recruitment of 
assistant magistrates after the successful implementation of a pilot project in several courts50.  

Digital  tools  for  case  management,  court  statistics  and  online  availability  of  court 
decisions  are  being  further  developed.  The  project  for  the  development  of  a  new  case 
management system (ECRIS V) is being implemented further by the Ministry of Justice, with 
the  collaboration  of  the  SCM,  the  Bucharest  Court  of  Appeal  and  the  Prosecutor’s  Office 
attached  to  the  HCCJ51.  Furthermore,  a  new  version  of  the  STATIS  application,  a  tool 

admissions to the profession during the period when the INM could not organise competitions, the change in 
the conditions for effective promotion in 2018, and the uncertainty as to the conditions for retirement. See 
input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 10. 

45   Due to the high seniority requirement to be appointed to the HCCJ, it will be difficult to address the shortage 
of magistrates, and it would be important to provide incentives for incumbent judges to continue working after 
they are eligible for retirement. Information received from the HCCJ in the context of the country visit. The 
percentage of female judges at the HCCJ is of around 80%, currently the highest percentage among supreme 
courts within the EU. See figure 36, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

46   A competition for admission to the INM was organised between July 2022 and March 2023, for a total of 300 
positions of justice auditors and 26 positions of specialized staff assimilated to judges and prosecutors open 
for  competition.  In  this  respect,  the  INM  recommends  increasing  the  total  number  of  justice  auditors,  but 
assesses that a corresponding increase in its resources would be necessary. See written contribution from the 
SCM and the INM in the context of the country visit, p. 25. 

47   During the parliamentary procedure leading to the adoption of Law 303/2022, the SCM supported the need to 
maintain the two-year training duration, which it considered sufficient for the quality of both theoretical and 
practical  training.  The  SCM  also  considered  an  increased  duration  could  create  the  risk  of  significant 
malfunctions in courts and prosecutor's offices from a human resource perspective. The INM also considers it 
would be preferable to return to the two-year training period. See written contribution from the SCM and the 
INM in the context of the country visit, p. 17 and 25. 

48   In  2022,  two  competitions  were  organised  to  fill  in  vacant  management  positions  as  president  and  vice-
president at courts, resulting in the appointment of 36 candidates. Following a competition organised in 2022 
for the appointment in 213 leading prosecutor positions in prosecutors’ offices attached to the courts of appeal, 
to  the  tribunals,  specialized  tribunals  to  first  instance  courts,  only  60  prosecutors  were  appointed  to  such 
positions. See input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 4-5. 

49   See written contribution from the SCM and the INM in the context of the country visit, p. 3. 
50   Following a pilot project implemented in 19 courts in 2022, which showed the positive impact of the activity 
carried out by this new category of staff on the time needed to draft decisions and solve cases, Government 
Emergency Ordinance No. 127 of 21 September 2022 created 165 contractual staff positions of legal experts 
within the organizational chart of the SCM.  

51   Under milestone 164 of its RRP, Romania committed to fully operationalise ECRIS V by 31 December 2025. 
For more details regarding the aim and steps of the project, see 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on 
the rule of law situation in Romania, pp. 9-10. 

10 

 
                                                           
retrieving  data  stored  in  ECRIS  to  generate  statistical  data52,  is  under  development53.  The 
swifter availability of more precise and targeted case statistics facilitates the management of 
workload  and  human  resources  in  courts  and  allows  identifying  reforms  necessary  to  limit 
repetitive litigation54. The ReJust website, an online portal for the availability of court decisions 
developed and managed by the SCM55, was improved with additional search functionalities56 
and now gives access to all decisions in courts of first instance, tribunals and courts of appeal57. 
The  technical  issues  affecting  the  portal,  which  were  mentioned  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law 
Report58, were solved59. Several projects in the field of digitalisation have been or are being 
implemented by the Prosecutor’s  Office  attached to  the  HCCJ, notably to develop standard 
integrated management tools at the level of the territorial prosecutorial units60. While Romania 
is performing well as regards the availability of secure electronic communications for courts61, 
there  is  room  for  improvement  as  to  their  availability  for  prosecution  services62  as  well  as 
regarding digital solutions in criminal proceedings63. 

Efficiency 

The  efficiency  of  the  justice  system  has  improved.  The  overall  efficiency  in  civil  and 
commercial cases has improved, with the length of proceedings decreasing in all instances64. 
Despite an increase in the number of incoming cases65, the clearance rate for resolving civil 
and commercial cases remains above 100%66, meaning that more cases are resolved than those 
entering the system. However, the number of pending  cases  remains high67. As regards the 
efficiency in administrative cases, there have been significant improvements in first instance 
courts, where the disposition time decreased to 293 days in 2021 (compared to 690 days in 

52   These statistics include incoming, pending, suspended, and solved cases, caseload, and activity volume. 
53   The new version will provide new reports and allow real-time querying of ECRIS data with advanced filters. 

Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 14. 

54   Under a project implemented by the SCM, a new module was added to the STATIS application to generate 
statistics on repetitive cases. A mechanism was created to identify the early inflation of disputes generated by 
regulatory deficiencies and take the necessary measures to relieve the courts of excessive caseload in non-
criminal matters. See input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, Annex 3, pp. 3-4. 
55   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 10. 
56   Besides the search by keyword, it is not possible to filter results by court category, instance,  subject matter, 
procedural stage, solution type and document category, and apply successive filters. The search interface was 
also  modernised and previous technical issues, such as bottlenecks and timeouts,  were solved. See  written 
contribution from the SCM and the INM in the context of the country visit, p. 15. 

57   The  HCCJ  ensures  the  online  availability  of  its  own  decisions,  part  of  which  are  published  on  its  website 

(https://www.iccj.ro). Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 13. 

58   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 10. 
59   Input from  Romania  for the 2023 Rule of Law Report,  p. 15. Information also received from civil society 

organisations in the context of the country visit to Romania. 

60   The  aim  is  to  enhance  the  predictability  of  managerial  decisions,  especially  regarding  human  resource, 
workload  management  capacity,  and  the  distribution  of  tasks  within  each  territorial  unit.  See  input  from 
Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, Annex 5, p. 4. 

61   Figure 44, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
62   Figure 45, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
63   Figure 47, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
64   Figure 5, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
65   Figure 3, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
66   Figure 11, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
67   Figure 13, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

11 

 
                                                           
2020)68,  and  the  clearance  rate  rose  above  100%  in  2021,  after  having  registered  a  sharp 
decrease to 48.4% in 202069.  

There have been no developments regarding the impact of measures taken to address the 
issue of the excessive length of civil and criminal proceedings following final judgments 
of the European Court of Human Rights. As previously noted in the Rule of Law Report70, 
Romania remains under enhanced supervision by the Committee of Ministers of the Council 
of  Europe  for  the  excessive  length  of  civil  and  criminal  proceedings,  and  lack  of  effective 
remedy in this respect71. The impact of the general measures taken to address this issue remains 
to be assessed, and Romanian authorities are still to provide the Committee of Ministers with 
complete  statistical  data  enabling  to  fully  assess  the  situation.  The  latest  assessment  of  the 
Committee of Ministers dates back to 2016, and no further statistical data was submitted since 
then72. 

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  Ministry  of  Justice  coordinates  the  implementation  of  the  National  Anti-Corruption 
Strategy  for  2021-2025.  The  specialised  anti-corruption  prosecution,  the  National  Anti-
Corruption  Directorate  (DNA),  has  the  competence  to  investigate  serious  corruption  cases, 
while the Prosecutor General’s office investigates all other corruption cases. There are also 
specialised prosecution offices at attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ) 
and  courts  of  appeal  for  corruption  offences  committed  by  prosecutors  and  judges73.  A 
specialised  anti-corruption  directorate  (DGA)  is  established  in  the  Ministry  of  Interior, 
competent  for  integrity  and  corruption  issues  within  the  staff  employed  by  the  Ministry, 
including  the  police.  The  National  Integrity  Agency  (ANI)  carries  out  administrative 
investigations  regarding  conflicts  of  interests,  incompatibilities  of  activities  and  unjustified 
wealth,  and  is  responsible  for  the  monitoring  and  verification  of  declarations  of  assets, 
including of all elected officials. The National Agency for the Management of Seized Assets 
(ANABI) ensures the management of seized and confiscated criminal assets and facilitates the 
tracing and identification of proceeds. 

The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in 
the public sector remains high. In the 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency 
International, Romania scores 46/100 and ranks 25th in the European Union and 63th globally74. 

68   Figure 8, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
69   Figure 12, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
70   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 12. 
71   Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 26 November 2013, Vlad v. Romania, 40756/06. 
72   Committee of Ministers, 1259th meeting (7-8 June 2016). 
73  The prosecution offices linked to the HCCJ are competent for offences committed by members of the Superior 
Council of Magistracy who are judges or prosecutors, judges of the HCCJ and prosecutors of the POHCCJ, 
judges of the Courts of Appeal and the Military Court of Appeal and prosecutors of the public prosecutor's 
offices attached to these courts, as well as judges of the Constitutional Court of Romania. Offences committed 
by all other judges and prosecutors in the system are investigated by specially designated prosecutors working 
within the prosecution offices attached to courts of appeal. 

74   Transparency International (2023), Corruption Perceptions Index 2022. The level of perceived corruption is 
categorised  as  follows:  low  (the  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public  sector 
corruption scores above 79); relatively low (scores between 79-60), relatively high (scores between 59-50), 
high (scores below 50).  

12 

 
                                                           
This  perception  has  been  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five  years75.  The  2023  Special 
Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 79% of respondents consider corruption widespread 
in  their  country  (EU  average  70%)  and  49%  of  respondents  feel  personally  affected  by 
corruption in their daily lives (EU average 24%)76. As regards businesses, 92% of companies 
consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 65%) and 75% consider that corruption is 
a problem when doing business (EU average 35%)77. Furthermore, 39% of respondents find 
that  there  are  enough  successful  prosecutions  to  deter  people  from  corrupt  practices  (EU 
average 32%)78, while 27% of companies believe that people and businesses caught for bribing 
a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 30%)79. 

The  implementation  of  the  new  Anti-Corruption  Strategy  is  well  on  track.  The  first 
monitoring report of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NAS) for 2021-2025 is scheduled 
to be adopted in mid-2023, covering the first implementation year80. Under its Recovery and 
Resilience Plan, Romania has committed to completing at least 70% of the measures in the 
anti-corruption strategy by the end of 202581. As part of the measures taken, the Ministry of 
Justice is developing a new draft of the protocol on legal education in schools, as well as a 
national risk map to identify corruption risks in the area of public procurement, the latter to be 
co-financed by the Commission82.  

Romania committed to take legislative action on bribery of foreign public officials. The 
negotiation process for accession by Romania to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation 
and Development (OECD) started in January 2022. Within that framework, Romania aims to 
accede  to  the  OECD  Anti-Bribery  Convention83  and  its  Working  Group.  According  to  the 
OECD, the scope of the offence of foreign bribery in the legislation in Romania is too restricted 
and the sanctions too low. In March 2023, the Working Group decided to accept Romania’s 
request84. Romania became an associate member in the Working Group in May.  

A positive track record continued to be maintained in combating corruption, including 
as  regards  high-level  cases.  As  referred  to  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report85,  the  DNA 
continued  to  increase  the  number  of  indictments  and  courts  made  more  final  judgments  in 

75   Romania increased its score with one point this year, just like last year. It also increased the global ranking 
which was 66 last year. The ranking in the EU remained the same. The score significantly increases/decreases 
when it changes more than five points; improves/deteriorates (changes between 4-5 points); is relatively stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

76   Special Eurobarometer 523 on Corruption (2023). The Eurobarometer data on citizens’ corruption perception 

and experience is updated every year. The previous data set is the Special Eurobarometer 523 (2022). 

77   Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023). The Eurobarometer 
data  on  business  attitudes  towards  corruption  as  is  updated  every  year.  The  previous  data  set  is  the  Flash 
Eurobarometer 507 (2022). 

78   Special Eurobarometer 534 on Corruption (2023).  
79   Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023).  
80  Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19. 
81   Annex to the Council Implementing Decision 12319/21 on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and 

resilience plan for Romania, target 428. 

82  Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, annex 7. 
83  OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transaction. 
84   The full assessment report highlighted some issues in relation to the definition of foreign public official and 
the low sanctions for the offence of foreign bribery; (OECD) Romania: Accession to the OECD Anti-Bribery 
Convention,  Full  assessment  report,  DAF/WGB(2023)12.  Romania  will  need  to  take  further  legislative  or 
other measures to address these issues. 

85  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 13. 

13 

 
                                                           
corruption cases, however, without reducing the serious backlog of cases86. The mandate of the 
previous Chief Prosecutor ended in February 2023, and a new Chief Prosecutor took office in 
April 2023. The prosecution of corruption and corruption-assimilated offences by the General 
Prosecution  Service  shows  similar  results87.  In  the  reporting  period,  there  were  numerous 
indictments and convictions in high-level corruption cases. The HCCJ dealt with 5 cases of 
high-level  corruption  offences,  involving  28  defendants,  of  which  5  were  sentenced  to 
imprisonment and 18 were acquitted. For the 5 remaining defendants, the criminal proceedings 
were terminated88, mostly for reasons of expiry of the statute of limitations89. 

Significant  progress  has  been  made  on  the  DNA’s  operational  challenges  although 
recruitment remains to be further improved. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended 
to Romania to ‘address the operational challenges of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate, 
including as regards recruitment of prosecutors […]’90. The SCM and the Prosecutor General 
report that the lack of resources in the judiciary, with more people retiring than recruited, has 
a negative impact on the effective prosecution of corruption offences91. As for the DNA itself, 
in March 2023, of the 195 prosecutor posts foreseen in the DNA, 158 posts were filled and 37 
posts were vacant, making up for an occupancy rate of 81%92. This is an increase in comparison 
to the same months in 2021 and 2022, when the occupancy rate was 75%93 and comes closer 
to the commitment of Romania under the RRP to increase it to 85% by 30 June 202394. The 
DNA reported that at the end of June, the occupancy rate was 85%95. The trend is positive but 
further  efforts  are  needed  as  resources  are  still  insufficient  to  handle  the  caseload,  and  as 
recruiting  prosecutors  within  the  DNA  remains  difficult.  The  seniority  requirement  to  be 
appointed to the DNA remains an important reason for the limited number of applications to 
fill vacancies96. Prosecutors must have at least ten years seniority and three years of mandatory 
training  in  the  INM.  Transitional  provisions  were,  however,  introduced,  that  provide  for  a 

86   Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 25-26, and information received from DNA in the 
context of the country visit.  The number of pending cases was 6 129 in 2022, compared to 6 076 in 2021. 
During 2022, a total of 404 (317 in 2021) cases concerning 779 (730 in 2021) defendants were sent to trial. Of 
these, 565 (same as in 2021) were prosecuted by indictment and 214 (165 in 2021) by plea agreement.  The 
courts rendered 348 (255 in 2021)  final judgments and 439  (427 in 2020)  defendants  were convicted. The 
number of files older than 5 years from the date of notification has decreased substantially: 263 (compared to 
323 in 2021). 

87  During 2022, a total of 1 662 (1 493 in 2021) cases involving non-serious corruption offences were solved, of 
which 266 (201 in 2021) indictments and plea agreements were issued, by which 327 (253 in 2021) defendants 
were sent to trial. There were 203 (142 in 2021) final judgments, by which 184 (151 in 2021) individuals were 
convicted (input from Romania for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 26). 

88  Input from Romania to the 2023 Rule of Law report, p. 27. 
89  Input received from the HCCJ in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
90   2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2. 
91  Input received from SCM and Prosecutor General in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
92  Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania.  
93  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 16. 
94    Milestone  429  of  Romania’s  RRP  requires  an  ‘Occupation  rate  of  85%  of  National  Anti-Corruption 

Directorate prosecutor positions attained’ (by 30 June 2023). 

95   With 167 posts filled. Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit. 
96  For the vacancy of 41 prosecutor positions in December 2022, only 32 candidates applied. The Constitutional 
Court  declared  unconstitutional  a  law  decreasing  the  seniority  requirement  to  seven  years,  and  it  was  not 
changed in the Justice laws. See 2022 CVM Report, p. 22. The Strategy for the development of the judiciary 
2022-2025 (adopted in April 2022) lists, within the objective of stepping up the fight against corruption,  the 
action called “Modification of the appointment procedure and seniority requirements for DNA prosecutors”. 
According to input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law report,  the  seniority  requirements are seen as 
important for the quality of the prosecution act. 

14 

 
                                                           
training requirement of two years instead of three until 2024 and include the training period in 
the  calculation  of  seniority  until  202697.  Other  factors  explaining  the  limited  number  of 
applications include the high workload and pressure, negative reporting on prosecutorial work 
in the media, and the lack of benefits to compensate for these aspects98. Since December 2022, 
oral  interviews for the DNA are no longer broadcast, which is  expected to  encourage more 
people  to  apply99.  Given  remaining  shortages  of  prosecutors  in  the  DNA,  delegation, 
secondment,  and  transfer  remain  important  tools.  However,  since  the  competence  for  the 
delegation of prosecutors, including within the DNA, passed from the SCM to the Prosecutor 
General’s Office, all requests for delegation to the DNA have been rejected100. According to 
the  EPPO,  the  cooperation  with  national  authorities  is  good101.  Therefore,  there  has  been 
significant progress to address the recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report on 
the operational challenges faced by the DNA. 

The  reform  of  Romania’s  Codes  of  Criminal  Law  and  Criminal  Procedure  has  been 
adopted. As explained in the 2022 Rule of Law and CVM Reports102, Romania needed to align 
several  provisions  in  the  Code  of  Criminal  Law  and  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  with  the 
relevant decisions of the Constitutional Court of Romania under its Recovery and Resilience 
Plan103. The government adopted draft amendments to the two Codes on 28 December 2022. 
For the fight against corruption, the most important amendments covered the crime of abuse of 
office  (Articles  297  and  298  of  the  Criminal  Code)  and  the  use  of  intelligence  activities  as 
evidence (Article 139 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). On 11 April 2023, the HCCJ referred 
certain  amendments  to  the  Codes  to  the  CCR  for  a  constitutionality  review  prior  to  their 
promulgation104. On 17 May 2023, the CCR held that the amendments on the crime of abuse 
of office are constitutional, and that some more amendments would be necessary to guarantee 
the  possibility  of  review  of  the  legality  of  evidence  gathered  in  intelligence  activities105. 
Following this decision, the Government explained that the necessary amendments would be 

97  As described in the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress in 
Romania under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM (2022) 664 final, 22.11.2022, pp. 22-23. 

98   Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
99   Information received from the Prosecutor General in the context of the country visit. 
100  Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. Previously, when the power 

of delegation was with the Superior Council of Magistracy, DNA requests were mostly admitted. 

101  Written input from the EPPO for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. According to the EPPO’s 2022 Annual Report, 
the  majority  of  the  EPPO  cases  in  Romania  concern  fraud  (more  than  140),  and  there  are  relatively  less 
corruption cases (12).  

102  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 14. 2022 CVM Report, 

p. 11. 

103  Annex to Council Implementing Decision 12319/21 on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and 
resilience  plan  for  Romania,  milestone.  Milestone  424,  entitled  ‘Amendment  of  the  Criminal  Code  and 
Criminal  Procedure  Code’,  states  that  those  amendments  must  enter  into  force  by  31  December  2022  and 
‘bring the provisions of the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code that entered into force in 2014 in 
line with the Constitutional provisions, in accordance with the relevant national Constitutional Court decisions 
on the constitutionality aspects of the recent changes made to the Criminal Code and Criminal procedure.’ The 
Commission will only assess the fulfilment of the milestone upon the submission by Romania of the relevant 
payment request.  

104  HCCJ,  Decision  No.  2  of  11  April  2023  seizing  the  Constitutional  Court.  See  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report, 

Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 14. 

105  Press release of the CCR of 17 May 2023; judgment published in the Official Journal No. 490, on 6 June 2023.  

15 

 
                                                           
made  and  that  the  draft  Criminal  Codes  would  be  adopted  by  the  end  of  the  current 
parliamentary term106. They were adopted on 28 June 2023.   

A Government Emergency Ordinance was adopted to clarify the statute of limitation, but 
the delayed legislative response led to the closing of corruption cases and the annulment 
of convictions. Under Article 155(1) of the Criminal Code, the statute of limitations could be 
interrupted by “any procedural act”, and a new statute of limitations period would begin to run. 
In  2018,  the  Constitutional  Court  of  Romania  (CCR)  declared  this  legislative  solution 
unconstitutional,  due  to  a  lack  of  clarity  and  predictability107.  A  Government  Emergency 
Ordinance was eventually adopted on 30 May 2022 to provide the necessary clarity108. The 
CCR issued a new decision on 26 May 2022109 stating that as of the moment it rendered its first 
decision in 2018, there was no legislative provision that could have allowed for the statute of 
limitations for criminal liability to be interrupted. Only the general provision on the statute of 
limitation was therefore applicable (Article 154 of the Criminal Code). In October 2022, the 
High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ) issued an interpretative decision that confirmed 
that until the adoption of the Government Emergency Ordinance on 30 May 2022, there was 
no legal ground for the interruption of the statute of limitations110. The effects of the CCR and 
HCCJ decisions will therefore continue in the future for all offences committed until May 2022. 
The National Anticorruption Directorate estimated that following these decisions, 557 criminal 
cases could be closed. While the exact prejudice would need to be assessed case by case, the 
National  Anticorruption  Directorate  estimates  damage  in  these  cases  to  around  EUR  1.2 
billion111.  Until  May  2023,  courts  already  terminated  81  finalised  cases,  involving  186 
defendants112. To mitigate the impact, the DNA has asked to suspend 208 cases where the issue 
of the statute of limitations was raised, pending a referral to the Court of Justice of the European 
Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling113. 

Corruption trials have been deferred due to judicial reorganisation, risking delays and 
even  reaching  the  statute  of  limitation.  Corruption  charges  can  only  be  brought  before 
specialised judges  and, previously, all criminal division panels were considered specialised. 
However, Law 304/2022 significantly reduced the number of panels that can hear corruption 
cases. Subsequently, the SCM decided that cases pending before panels no longer considered 
competent should be taken over by panels set up in line with the new law. This transfer entails 

106  Letter from the Minister of Justice C. Predoiu of 24 May 2023 to the European Commission. 
107  CCR Decision no. 297/2018; https://www.ccr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Decizie_297_2018.pdf. 
108  Government  Emergency  Ordinance  no.  71:  It  specifies  that  the  stature  or  limitations  in  Article  155  of  the 
Criminal Code can be interrupted by the “performance of any procedural act in question which, according to 
the law, must be communicated to the suspect or defendant”. 

109  CCR Decision no. 358/2022; https://www.ccr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Decizie_358_2022.pdf. 
110  HCCJ,  Decision  no.  67  of  the  25th  of  October  2022;  https://www.iccj.ro/2022/10/25/decizia-nr-67-din-25-
octombrie-2022-privind-natura-juridica-a-normele-care-reglementeaza-efectul-intreruptiv-de-prescriptie-al-
actelor-de-procedura-respectiv-daca-sunt-norme-de-drept-substantial-sus/. The new element of this decision 
was that the statute of limitation could also not be interrupted in relation to offences committed before the first 
CCR decision in 2018. 

111  DNA press release, 28 October 2022; http://www.pna.ro/comunicat.xhtml?id=11549. 
112  Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. Some examples of terminated 
cases include the charges of abuse of office against the former head of DIICOT and the conviction of 5 years 
for influence peddling against the former president of the Chamber of Deputies and former deputy governor 
of the National Bank of Romania. 

113 The reference is C-107/23 PPU Lin. Advocate General Sanchez Bordona rendered his opinion on 29 June 2023, 

ECLI:EU:C:2023:532. 

16 

 
                                                           
the resumption of the proceedings, with all the arguments and evidence having to be presented 
anew before the new panel. Although the law set a 30-day time limit, not all pending cases 
have been transferred yet. In May 2023, 230 cases falling under the DNA’s competence had 
been transferred, out of all 527 ongoing cases in first instance proceedings and 190 cases in 
appeal  proceedings.  Delays  in  transfers  and  the  resumption  of  proceedings  might  result  in 
reaching the statute of limitation in certain cases114. 

There  has  been  some  progress  as  regards  the  recommendation  on  the  new  system  for 
investigating and prosecuting corruption offences in the judiciary. In the 2022 Rule of Law 
Report, it was recommended to Romania to ‘[…] closely monitor the impact of the new system 
on  investigating  and  prosecuting  corruption  offenses  in  the  judiciary’115.  As  mentioned 
above116, designated prosecutors are dealing with a significant backlog of cases. They have so 
far not issued any new indictment and the new system has therefore yet to show its ability to 
deal efficiently with corruption cases within the judiciary. The Superior Council for Magistracy 
(SCM) has difficulties filling the positions of designated prosecutors at the HCCJ. At the end 
of 2022, there were 8 prosecutors appointed out of the 14 posts available117, whereas 42 out of 
45  prosecutors  were  appointed  at  the  local  prosecution  offices.  The  SCM  notes  that  the 
prospects  are not promising because only few prosecutors apply118, and the pool of eligible 
applicants is very limited due to strict seniority requirements119. The SCM considers that it is 
too  early  to  carry  out  a  comprehensive  evaluation  of  the  new  structure120.  As  previously 
reported,  when  the  SIIJ  was  replaced  in  March  2022,  the  rule  was  maintained  that  if  other 
persons  are  investigated  for  corruption  together  with  judges  and  prosecutors,  the  whole 
corruption file would be transferred from the DNA to the designated prosecutors. A new rule 
was  created  that  allowed  for  the  separation  of  the  cases,  where  possible121.  The  DNA 
transferred  16  cases  to  the  new  prosecutors  up  until  April  2023,  of  which  four  cases  were 
separated122. All in all, there has therefore been some progress to address the recommendation 
made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report on the impact of the new system on investigating and 
prosecuting corruption offenses in the judiciary. 

Continued  attention  to  integrity  of  law  enforcement  led  to  positive  results.  The  Anti-
Corruption Directorate (DGA) in the Ministry of Interior carried out 94 professional integrity 
tests on its employees (including police officers) in 2022. In two cases, the employee received 

114  Information  received  from  DNA  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Romania.  Both  the  transfer  and  the 
resumption of the proceedings is dependent on the administrative actions of the courts and the date set for the 
hearings in each case. 

115  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2. 
116  See above p. 7 and footnote 35.  
117  There  were  only  3  prosecutors  operational  in  March  2023,  according  to  the  joint  written  input  from  the 
Romanian  Magistrates'  Association,  the  Romanian  Public  Prosecutors'  Association,  the  National  Union  of 
Romanian Judges and the Association of Judges for the Defense of Human Rights in the context of the country 
visit to Romania. 

118  Input provided by SCM in the context of the country visit to Romania and SCM’s annual report for 2022. 
119  At least 12 years’ experience is required for those designated to work for the prosecutors’ offices attached to 
the courts of appeal and at least 15 years’ experience is required in respect of the Prosecutor’s Office attached 
to the High Court of Cassation and Justice. 

120  Written input from the SCM in the context of the country visit to Romania, March 2023. 
121  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 16. 
122  Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. In one case, the proceedings 
are pursued by DNA, whereas DNA closed the other three cases, in relation to offences under its jurisdiction. 
In the same timeframe DNA received 149 complaints concerning alleged offences committed by judges or 
prosecutors, all of which were redirected to the new structure.  

17 

 
                                                           
sums of money or benefits in order not to perform the duties of the service, and in one case 
there were indications of violations of professional ethics. In 2022, 34 integrity incidents were 
reported, compared to 50 in 2021 and 47 in 2020123. The DGA organised 4 687 information 
and training activities in 2022 to promote integrity, which were attended by 66 274 people from 
the Ministry of Interior124. The DGA presented in 2022 a report on the risks and vulnerabilities 
identified  at  the  level  of  the  Ministry  of  the  Interior  and  its  units,  the  causes  generating 
vulnerabilities as well as the prevention and control measures.  

Steps are being taken to update and codify the legislative framework on integrity, but this 
will not cover revolving doors. The evaluation of the existing framework on integrity showed 
that the fragmentation of the rules on integrity makes it difficult to comply and follow-up with 
the legal obligations, that there are gaps in the personal scope of asset declaration obligations, 
and inconsistences in the regime of incompatibilities125. In February 2022, the ANI started the 
implementation of a project on updating the integrity legislation. The project is scheduled to 
be finalised by the end of 2023, and its main output will be a legislative proposal, that should 
enter into force by the end of 2024, in line with Romania’s commitments under the RRP126. 
The  project  is  limited  to  the  core  of  ANI’s  mandate,  namely  conflicts  of  interests, 
incompatibilities of activities and unjustified wealth. Though this would represent a significant 
consolidation, it would not cover other aspects of integrity rules, such as on revolving doors 
(post-employment rules)127, which will therefore remain limited and scattered over different 
laws128. It is to be noted that in November 2022, the Senate adopted rules with objective criteria 
to decide on requests for lifting parliamentary immunities, mirroring the rules already adopted 
in 2019 by the Chamber of Deputies.  

Important steps were made towards the digitalisation of the disclosure and verification 
of  asset  declarations.  The  National  Integrity  Agency  (ANI)  continues  to  investigate 
incompatibilities, conflicts of interest and unjustified wealth129. Since January 2022, asset and 
interest declarations have to be filled in electronically, and from 1 January 2024, ANI will no 
longer accept declarations signed by hand, which will reduce the risk of errors and improve the 
searchability  of  information130.  By  31  December  2022,  over  10.8  million  asset  and  interest 
disclosures  were  published131.  ANI  finalised  a  risk  analysis  platform  to  help  with  the 

123  Anti-Corruption Directorate, Ministry of Interior, Annual Report 2022, p. 8-9. 
124  Ibid, p. 5. 
125  Input received from ANI in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
126  Milestone no. 431 of Romania’s RRP states: ‘Consolidated laws on integrity shall enter into force. The update 
of  the  integrity  legislation  shall  be  realized  based on  a  prior  evaluation  and  analysis  of  the  integrity  laws, 
together with an initial clustering of the normative acts. Within the second phase of the project, the existing 
laws shall either be unified and updated, or new normative acts shall be proposed.’ 

127  Input from ANI in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
128  As  noted  with  concern  in  the  2021  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 
Romania, p. 16, 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 18.  

129  Written input from Romania in the context of the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19. 
130  Input  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice  and  ANI  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Romania.  This  date  was 
postponed from 2023 to 2024 in order to grant all stakeholders the opportunity to allow for electronic signature.  
131  Written input from Romania in the context of the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 21. Declarations are maintained 

on ANI’s website for the duration of the term of office and three years after its termination. 

18 

 
                                                           
verification of the disclosures, which will be operational by the second half of 2023132. A vice-
president for the ANI was appointed in December 2022 for 4 years133.  

The  National  Integrity  Agency  is  the  competent  authority  to  receive  whistleblower 
reports. The law on whistleblowers’ protection was amended in December 2022, making ANI 
the body responsible for external reporting134. The law requires ANI to set up by February 2023 
a specialised structure comprised of approximately 15 integrity inspectors. In March 2023, two 
integrity inspectors were operational, and a competition to recruit five more inspectors resulted 
in the appointment of one inspector. ANI asked for additional funds to comply with its new 
obligations  (EUR  700.000),  which  are  expected  to  be  provided  in  the  second  semester  of 
2023135. The law was again changed in March 2023 to clarify the provisions on anonymous 
reporting  and  to  bring  it  fully  in  line  with  the  provisions  of  Directive  (EU)  2019/1937,  as 
required by Romania’s RRP136.  

The  enforcement  of  the  lobbying  rules  for  Members  of  Government  remains  to  be 
improved.  An  Interest  Groups’  Transparency  Register  for  meetings  with  Members  of 
Government is in place on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) (since October 
2016). The General Secretariat of the Government replaced this MoU by an order in September 
2022137, which also extends the range of dignitaries who can create an account in the platform 
to  the  local  government  level.  Local  level  officials  are,  however,  not  obliged  to  register  an 
account of their meetings. Members of Government also remain free to register meetings or 
not, and there is no verification of the completeness or accuracy of the records138. 

There  has  been  no  progress  yet  to  introduce  rules  on  lobbying  for  Members  of 
Parliament. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended to Romania to ‘introduce rules on 
lobbying for Members of Parliament’139. There are still no rules on the engagement of members 
of Parliament with lobbyists and other third parties seeking to influence the legislative process, 
as  well  as  no  clear  restrictions  on  gifts,  hospitality,  favours  and  other  benefits140.  The 
Legislative Council of the Parliament reported that there are no plans to  address  this in  the 
foreseeable future141. As noted in the 2022 Rule of Law Report, important legislative reforms 
in Romania, such as the introduction of lobbying rules, need to receive clear high-level political 

132  Input received from ANI in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
133  Written input from Romania in the context of the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 18 referring to Senate’s Decision 

no. 174/19.12.2022.  

134  As mentioned in the 2022 Rule of Law Report Romania, p. 20 the law of June 2022 that aimed to transpose 

Directive (EU) 2019/1937 was criticised, including by the EPPO. 

135  According  to  ANI,  the  Ministry  of  Finance  informed  the  ANI  in  January  2023  that  additional  financial 
resources can be allocated on the occasion of the first budget rectification for the year 2023, which usually 
happens in the second part of the year. 

136  Annex to Council Implementing Decision  12319/21 on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and 

resilience plan for Romania, milestone 430. 

137  RRP Milestone 410 - Entry into force of instructions for the use and proper enforcement of the Single Register 

of Transparency of Interests. 

138  SG Order on minimum transparency rules on the recommended framework of collaboration between decision-
makers at central and local government level and interested persons from civil society stakeholders to promote 
public policy initiatives. 

139  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2. 
140  GRECO (2023) Fourth Evaluation Round - Third Interim Compliance Report, p. 4.  
141  Information received from the Legislative Council in the context of the country visit to Romania.  

19 

 
 
                                                           
support142.  Therefore,  there  has  been  no  progress  yet  on  the  implementation  of  the 
recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  

Legislation was proposed to improve the transparency of political party financing and 
the enforcement of related rules. The framework for political party financing, as described 
in the 2022 Rule of Law Report143, did not change. However in November 2022, the Permanent 
Electoral Authority (PEA) published144 draft legislation aiming to address some of the concerns 
raised in the 2022 Rule of Law Report. It would for example require political parties to be more 
transparent on how they spend money. Political advertising, including favourable media reports 
and coverage, would have to be marked as such. The draft also seeks to raise the monetary 
sanctions for non-compliance with the legal provisions. Some NGOs believe that the law does 
not go far enough, including by not reducing the overall public funding budget, which grew 
from EUR 47 million in 2021 to EUR 51 million in 2022145. The project has been submitted 
by the PEA to the Government for approval, and it was sent to the Senate on 25 April 2023. 

Corruption  risks  highlighted  included  environmental  protection  and  protection  of 
cultural heritage. The National Anticorruption Strategy (NAS) 2021-2025 gives priority to 
preventive measures in sectors exposed to corruption: public health system, education system, 
the  financing  of  political  parties  and  election  campaigns,  public  administration,  business 
environment, environmental protection, and protection of cultural heritage, the last two being 
newly introduced146. According to the DNA, corruption is for instance used to enable the illegal 
logging  and  fraudulent  exploitation  of  timber147.  The  NAS  2021-2025  also  acknowledges 
corruption as a facilitator of organised crime groups. The DIICOT reported that 11% of the 
analysed criminal groups in 2022 have used corruption to facilitate or cover up their crimes 
(compared to 15% in 2021)148. Among the cases indicted in 2022, the DNA sent to court 15 
offences of setting up organised crime groups, but it has no joint cases with DIICOT149. The 
Flash Eurobarometer on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU shows that 40% of 
companies  in  Romania  (EU  average  26%)  think  that  corruption  has  prevented  them  from 
winning a public tender or a public procurement contract in practice in the last three years150. 
The  number  of  integrity  warnings  issued  by  the  electronic  system  to  prevent  conflicts  of 

142  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 13. According to the 
OECD,  Romania  should  develop  a  strategy  to  increase  support  from  top  leadership  in  implementing  the 
National  Anti-Corruption  Strategy.  (2023)  OECD  Working  Party  of  Senior  Public  Integrity  Officials 
“Stocktaking of the Public Integrity System in Romania”, p, 11. 

143  Ibid, p. 20.  
144 The President of the Permanent Electoral Authority (PEA) resigned in January 2023, after ANI found a conflict 
of  interest  when  he  appointed  his  sister-in-law  to  the  PEA.  See  G4Media  (2023),  “Florin  Mitulețu  Buică 
resigned from the leadership of the Permanent Electoral Authority”. 

145  Written input from Expert Forum in the context of the 2023 Rule of Law report questionnaire and “We demand 

real transparency in the funding of political parties! | Expert Forum”. 

146  Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 23. According to the NAS 2021-2025, illegal logging, 
air pollution, destruction of rivers and illegal closing of landfills are serious problems involving the use of 
corruption.  Vulnerabilities  in  the  cultural  field  were  often  the  result  of  a  lack  of  anti-corruption  education 
provided to the people involved, as well as to a lack of adequate prevention tools.  

147  Information received from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
148  2022 Annual Activity Report DIICOT, p. 25. 
149  Written input from DNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
150  Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023). This is 14 percentage 
points above the EU average. In the context of the European Semester, a Country Specific Recommendation 
is  addressed  to  Romania  to  improve  the  efficiency  of  public  procurement  and  ensure  full  and  sustainable 
implementation of the national public procurement strategy. 

20 

 
                                                           
interests  in  public  procurement  has  stabilised  over  the  last  three  years,  with  22  integrity 
warnings in 2022, in comparison to 26 in 2021, and 20 in 2020151. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM 

The right to freedom of expression as well as the right of access to any information of public 
interest is enshrined in the Constitution152. The media regulator (National Audiovisual Council) 
is  the  sole  regulatory  authority  in  the  field  of  audiovisual  media  services.  The  mission  and 
composition of the media regulator are set out in the Audiovisual Law153. The organisation and 
functioning of the Romanian Broadcasting Society and the Romanian Television Society are 
regulated by Law 41/1994. Access to information is regulated by Law No 544 of 12 October 
2001 on free access to information of public interest154. 

A  new  audiovisual  law  was  adopted,  and  the  National  Audiovisual  Council  (CNA)’s 
budget needs to reflect its new tasks. Romania transposed the Audiovisual Media Services 
Directive  (AVMSD)155  on  11  July  2022  with  the  new  Audiovisual  Law156.  In  March  2023, 
Parliament appointed a new president of the CNA. The Audiovisual Law provides157 that the 
Council’s activity is to be financed from the state budget, so that it can perform its functions 
effectively and contribute to the activity of the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual 
Media Services (ERGA). The increase in the 2022 budget for the CNA did not allow the CNA 
to hire staff or improve its technology systems, despite the additional tasks entrusted to it under 
the new law. The CNA is currently preparing public consultations on secondary legislation, 
which  will  clarify  the  implementation  of  the  new  legislative  provisions  in  areas  such  as 
accessibility, promotion of European works or media literacy158.  

There  have  been  no  significant  changes  in  the  implementation  of  the  legal  framework 
concerning transparency of media ownership. Issues regarding the transparency of media 
ownership  referred  to  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report  remain159.  Similarly  to  the  previous 
version  of  the  law,  the  new  Audiovisual  Law  provides  that  all  legal  persons  holding  an 
audiovisual licence are obliged to make public the name of the outlet, its legal status and place 
of business, the name of its legal representative and of the major associates or shareholders, 
the  names  of  the  persons  running  the  company  and  of  those  who  mainly  assume  editorial 
responsibility as well as a list of the publications edited by the legal person in question and of 
other  programme  services  offered160.  The  CNA  has  published  a  document  with  incomplete 
information on the shareholding structure of companies holding audiovisual licenses. Although 

151  Written input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 22. When the system was initially launched 
in 2018, there were 69 integrity incidents, followed by 40 in 2019. See the 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 21. 

152  Art. 30 and 31 of the Romanian Constitution. 
153  Audiovisual Law No. 504/2022, of 11 July 2022. 
154  Romania ranks 53rd in the 2023 Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index compared to 56th in 

the previous year.  

155  Directive (EU) 2018/1808 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down 
by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media 
services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) in view of changing market realities 

156  Audiovisual Law No. 504/2022, of 11 July 2022. 
157  Art. 16, Audiovisual Law No. 504/2022. 
158  Information received from CNA in the context of the country visit to Romania.  
159  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 21. 
160 Article 48 of Audiovisual Law No. 504/2022, of 11 July 2022. 

21 

 
                                                           
the CNA must ensure the transparency of the organisation, functioning and financing of the 
media  in  the  audiovisual  sector,  including  providers  of  video-sharing  platforms,  some 
audiovisual operators oppose the publication of some information collected by the CNA, as 
they consider it personal data161. No media specific rules apply to print and digital media, which 
are subject to general rules governing transparency of ownership included in national company 
law. According to the CNA, information on media ownership is available in the National Trade 
Register Office, although this requires the payment of a fee162. As regards media concentration, 
the Audiovisual Law163 aims to protect pluralism and cultural diversity by limiting ownership 
concentration and by ensuring that the audience share in the audiovisual field does not create 
dominant positions in the shaping of public opinion. The same Law also sets the criteria for 
defining market shares of the services as well as the threshold to consider that an operator holds 
a dominant position. However, these provisions only cover broadcast media, and there are no 
cross-media  concentration  regulations164.  Moreover,  according  to  the  Media  Pluralism 
Monitor, plurality of media providers, which is an indicator reflecting media concentration, has 
an 83% risk score 

There  has  been  no  progress  on  the  2022  recommendation  to  enhance  the  independent 
governance  and  editorial  independence  of  public  service  media.  The  2022  Rule  of  Law 
Report  recommended  to  Romania  to  ‘strengthen  the  rules  and  mechanisms  to  enhance  the 
independent governance and editorial independence of public service media taking into account 
the European standards on public service media’165. A bill166 of June 2021 to reform the law 
on public broadcasting and radio companies167 continues to be168 discussed by the legislator 
and  no  further  mechanisms  to  ensure  the  independence  of  public  service  media  have  been 
adopted. As stated in the Rule of Law Report of 2022, the system for appointing and dismissing 
the Board of Directors of the public service broadcaster is still subject to political influence. 
Public  service  media,  in  particular  the  public  TV,  suffers  from  a  lack  of  credibility  and 
relevance in the market169. Even if journalists can do their job in a way that can be considered 
independent, they are not responsible for the decision on what kind of topics and content is 
broadcasted170.  Therefore,  no  progress  has  been  done  on  the  implementation  of  the 
recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report.  

The  financing  of  media,  in  particular  audiovisual  media,  by  political  parties  lacks 
transparency. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a resolution in 
October  2022  which  stated  that  ‘media  freedom  and  pluralism  need  to  be  strengthened.  In 
particular,  the  use  of  public  funds  by  political  parties  to  finance  media  and  influence  their 

161  Information received in the context of the country visit to Romania from the CNA. 
162  Ibidem. 
163 Art. 44, Audiovisual Law No. 504/2022. 
164 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 16. 
165  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2. 
166  Pl-x. nr. 262/2021, Legislative proposal to amend Law no. 41/1994 on the organization and functioning of the 

Romanian Broadcasting Company and the Romanian Television Company. 

167  Law No. 41, of 17 June 1994, on the organization and functioning of the Romanian Broadcasting Company 

and the Romanian Television Company. 

168  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 22. 
169  Information received in the context of the country visit to Romania from the NCA; 2023 Media Pluralism 

Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 8.  

170  Information received in the context of the country visit to Romania from TVR. 

22 

 
                                                           
content on the basis of secret contracts is of the utmost concern’171. The resolution asked the 
Romanian authorities ‘to ensure specific safeguards for editorial independence and introduce 
legal  requirements  to  disclose  secret  contracts  between  political  parties  and  the  media  that 
involve the transfer of public funds to the latter’172. The MPM reported that some outlets  – 
including television channels – have received money from major political parties in exchange 
for the production or publication of certain kinds of material173. It is also not always possible 
for the public to know what is news and what is, effectively, an advertisement174. The CNA 
cannot intervene in such cases, since, while it can monitor broadcasters’ contracts, it cannot 
intervene on the editorial line of broadcasters. Civil society organizations were very critical 
about the lack of transparency on this issue175 and indicated that authorities refuse to provide 
information  on  these  agreements  due  to  data  protection  considerations176.  According  to  the 
CNA177, the new provisions of the Audiovisual Law, which prohibit the sponsoring of news 
programmes and information programmes on political themes178, address this concern. 

There  have  been  no  significant  improvements  to  the  legal  framework  on  access  to 
information.  A  bill179  intended  to  update  the  freedom  of  information  act180  is  still  not 
approved. In May 2022, the relevant Committee of the Chamber of Deputies adopted a positive 
report on the proposal. In November 2022181, the Government issued a negative opinion182. A 
Government Decision of June 2022183 amended the methodological norms for the free access 
to  information  of  public  interest  to  optimise  the  procedure  for  the  ex  officio  display  of 
information of public interest at the level of public entities. Stakeholders express concerns that 
the current law is not efficiently enforced in practice and that the protection of personal data is 
often used as a blanket reason to refuse access to documents184. 

The situation regarding threats, instances of harassment, and violence against journalists 
remains an issue185. Since the publication of the 2022 Rule of Law Report, one new alert was 
activated  in  the  Council  of  Europe’s  Platform  to  Promote  the  Protection  of  Journalism  and 

171  Resolution  2466  (2022)  of  the  Parliamentary  Assembly  of  the  Council  of  Europe:  The  honouring  of 

membership obligations to the Council of Europe by Romania, para. 11. 

172  Ibidem, p. 16.4.4. 
173  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 222.  
174  Ibidem. 
175  Contribution from Expertforum and Funky Citizens for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p.p. 16-17 and p. 20 

respectively. 

176  Information  received  from  civil  society  organisations  (Expertforum,  Funky  Citizens)  in  the  context  of  the 
country visit to Romania; Contribution from Centre for Public Innovation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, 
p. 18. 

177  Information received from CNA in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
178  Art. 34(4), Audiovisual Law No. 504/2022. 
179  PL-x 529/2020 Draft Law  for the transparency of information of public interest and the ease  of access for 
citizens by amending and supplementing Law no. 544/2001 on free access to information of public interest. 

180  Law No 544 of 12 October 2001 on free access to information of public interest. 
181  Contribution from Centre for Public Innovation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p.p. 18-20.  
182 In its negative reply, the Government referred to its Decision of June 2022 and to Law No 179/2022 on open 
data  and  the  re-use  of  public  sector  information  and  argued  that  adoption  of  the  proposal  could  lead  to 
confusion in the application of Laws No 544/2001 and No 179/2022. The legislative procedure can be followed 
at https://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck2015.proiect?idp=18851&tot=1. 

183  Government Decision no. 830/27.06.2022. Input from Romania, p. 35.  
184  Contribution from Civil Society Development Foundation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 24. Information 
received  from  individual  journalists  and  civil  society  organisations  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to 
Romania. 

185  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 10. 

23 

 
                                                           
Safety of Journalists, which refers to online threats against journalists186. The platform registers 
15 active alerts. Regarding the two alerts referred to in the 2022 Rule of Law Report187, the 
first case188 remains under investigation, while the second case was closed in November 2022, 
after the court found that accusations were unfounded189. The use of strategic lawsuits against 
public participation (SLAPPs) by some politicians to undermine the work of certain journalists 
and their watchdog role remains an issue190. There is no anti-SLAPP legislation in place191. In 
December 2022, the Parliament adopted a new cyber security law that among others can be 
relied  on  to  deal  with  cases  of  propaganda  or  disinformation  campaigns192.  The  Romanian 
Ombudsman  challenged193  the  law  before  the  Constitutional  Court,  arguing  that  it  does  not 
clearly  identify  the  subjects  targeted  by  it  and  tasks  several  bodies,  such  as  the  Romanian 
Intelligence  Service  (SRI),  to  ensure  national  security  by  countering  “propaganda  or 
disinformation  campaigns”,  failing  however  to  define  what  constitutes  such  campaigns. 
Stakeholders express concerns that this leaves room for a broad interpretation and could give 
bodies  such  as  the  SRI  a  wide  discretion  in  determining  the  actions  falling  within  that 
category194. The Constitutional Court ruled on the constitutionality of the law on 28 February 
2023195. 

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Romania is a semi-presidential representative democratic republic. The Romanian Parliament 
is bicameral, comprising the Senate (the upper house), and the Chamber of Deputies (the lower 
house). The Government, Deputies, Senators, or a group of no less than 100.000 citizens have 
the  right  of  legislative  initiative196.  The  Constitutional  Court  is  competent  to  review  the 

186  In November 2022, journalist Parászka Boróka was intimidated by the statements of a leading politician. The 
statements were condemned by the Prime Minister of Romania and the local police opened an inquiry. Council 
of  Europe,  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists,  Romania. 
https://fom.coe.int/en/alerte/detail/107638614;globalSearch=false;  2023  Media  Pluralism  Monitor,  country 
report for Romania, p. 14. 

187  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 23. Contribution from 

the Romanian Institute for Human Rights for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 14. 

188 Case against Emilia Sercan. 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, page 14. 
189  Case against Alin Cristea Contribution from Fundatia pentru Dezvoltarea Societatii Civile for the 2023 Rule 

of Law Report, page 19; 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, page 14. 

190  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 7. 
191 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 14. 
192  Law No. 58 of 14 March 2023 on the cybersecurity and cyber defence of Romania, and amending certain 

legislative acts. 

193  Sesizarea de neconstituționalitate referitoare la prevederile Legii privind securitatea şi apărarea cibernetică a 
României precum şi pentru modificarea şi completarea unor acte normative (PL-x nr. 773/2022, L828/2022) 
– 27 December 2022.  

194  . 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, pp. 15  and 24. Activewatch, 9 March 2023. 

https://activewatch.ro/articole/legea-securitatii-cibernetice/.  

195  Romanian  Constitutional  Court,  Press  Release,  28  February  2023,  page  2.  https://www.ccr.ro/wp-

content/uploads/2023/02/comunicat-de-presa-28-februarie-2023.pdf. 

196  Art. 74, Constitution of Romania. The citizens who exercise their right to a legislative initiative must belong 
to  at  least  one  quarter  of  the  country's  counties,  while,  in  each  of  those  counties  or  the  Municipality  of 
Bucharest, at least 5 000 signatures should be registered in support of such initiative. 

24 

 
 
                                                           
constitutionality  of  laws  and  to  settle  conflicts  of  constitutional  nature  between  public 
authorities197. 

New instruments aim to improve the transparency and quality of decision-making and 
legislation, though the use of government emergency ordinances (GEOs) has increased. 
Several  measures, addressing commitments in  Romania’s national  Recovery and Resilience 
Plan198,  were  taken  to  address  the  long-standing  concerns  regarding  the  stability  and 
predictability of legislation199. In this context, a new law200 tasked the Legislative Council with 
publishing  on  its  website  consolidated  normative  acts  after  they  are  amended201,  thus 
contributing to the transparency of legislation. However, the use of GEOs increased, both in 
number  (192  in  2022,  compared  to  145  in  2021)  and  proportionally  to  the  total  number  of 
normative acts (31% in 2022, compared to 8.6% in 2021)202. The quality of law-making and 
frequent changes in legislation remains a significant reason for concern about the effectiveness 
of  investment  protection  among  companies  in  Romania203.  According  to  the  Legislative 
Council, a large number of GEOs were adopted to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic and with 
the situation generated by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, as well as to implement 
milestones and targets under Romania’s RRP or to transpose EU directives in view of imminent 
infringement proceedings. In several cases, the Legislative Council issued opinions assessing 
that  the  draft  GEOs  did  not  present  valid  reasons  justifying  the  extraordinary  situation  that 
cannot be postponed204. As noted in the 2022 Rule of Law Report, the extensive use of this 
instrument continues to raise concerns, notably due to the derogatory rules on shortened public 
consultations, limited constitutional review and delayed approval by Parliament, although they 
produce effects immediately205. As required also by Romania’s Recovery and Resilience Plan, 
a new methodology for the use of GEOs was adopted in September 2022 and is expected to 
foster good practices in their elaboration, substantiation and consistent use206.  

197  Constitution of Romania, Art. 146. A partial renewal of CCR members will take place this year, with two 
judges already proposed by the political parties and endorsed by the Parliament. The selection procedure was 
challenged at the Constitutional Court.  

198  Annex to Council Implementing Decision  12319/21 on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and 

resilience plan for Romania, milestones 401, 404, and 412 (2021). 

199  Previous  Rule  of  Law  Reports  highlighted  the  issues  linked  with  frequent  amendments  to  legislation,  the 
extensive use of fast-track procedures and government emergency ordinances. See 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule 
of  Law  Reports,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Romania,  p.  15,  p.  20  and  pp.  24-25, 
respectively. 

200  Under Law No. 343 of 9 December 2022, after amendments come into force, laws, as  well as ordinances, 
emergency ordinances and Government decisions are displayed, in a consolidated version, on the website of 
the Legislative Council in editable format within 15 days, or 25 days for complex laws. 

201  Milestone  412  of  Romania’s  RRP  required  the  “Entry  into  force  of  the  legislative  amendments  to  ensure 
publication  of  the  full  text  of  the  laws  after  amendments”.  Under  milestone  412  of  its  RRP,  Romania 
committed to amend Law 24/2000 by 30 September 2022 to require the republication of consolidated version 
of laws whenever they are amended. See Annex to Council Implementing Decision 12319/21, p. 488.  

202  In 2022, 192 GEOs were adopted for a total of 621 normative acts, as compared with 145 GEOs for a total of 

1685 normative acts in 2021. Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 38-39. 

203  Figure  54,  2023  EU  Justice  Scoreboard  indicates  that  ‘Frequent  changes  in  legislation  or  concerns  about 

quality of the law-making process’ are of concern to 32% of companies in Romania. 

204  Ibid.  
205  For more details, see 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, pp. 
24-25. See also contribution from the Centre for Public Innovation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 21. 
206  Milestone 411 of Romania’s RRP required the “entry into force of the Methodology for the use of Emergency 
Ordinances”, intended to “specify the circumstances under which these ordonnances may be used and how 
their impact shall be assessed (ex post, ex ante) as well as the associated procedures for their preparation and 

25 

 
                                                           
There  has  been  no  progress  so  far  in  ensuring  effective  public  consultations,  but 
commitments  were  made  to  improve  such  processes.  The  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report 
recommended  to  Romania  to  “[e]nsure  effective  public  consultation  before  the  adoption  of 
draft  legislation”207.  As  underlined  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report208,  although  legislation 
foresees  mandatory  public  consultations  before  the  adoption  of  draft  legislation,  their 
effectiveness can still be improved, both as regards their length and the authorities’ feedback 
on the input collected. The Romanian Institute of Human Rights reported that, although the 
law  stipulates  that  the  explanatory  memorandum  of  a  draft  legislative  act  must  include  the 
results  of  the  public  consultation209,  the  relevant  authorities  are  often  overlooking  this 
obligation, and the reasons for rejecting certain proposals does not always appear clearly210. In 
2022,  a  large  number  of  normative  acts  were  adopted  through  expedited  procedures,  with 
shortened  public  consultations  and  parliamentary  debates,  irrespective  of  their  normative 
impact211. The possibility, introduced in 2022, to derogate from the minimum 30-day public 
consultation  period  in  case  of  emergency212,  was  also  used  several  times,  and  stakeholders 
raised concerns that the requirement of “exceptional circumstances requiring the adoption of 
immediate  solutions”  is  too  widely  defined213  and  often  relied  upon  without  adequate 
reasoning214. Romania’s RRP includes several projects aimed at improving the quality of public 
consultation  processes215.  Therefore,  no  progress  has  yet  been  made  to  address  the 
recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report to ensure effective public consultation 
before the adoption of draft legislation. 

On  1  January  2023,  Romania  had  113  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, an increase of seven compared to the previous 
year216. Romania’s rate of leading judgments from the past ten years that remained pending 

approval and the role of Government Secretariat General and Ministry of Justice for ensuring gatekeeping and 
overall  quality  control”.  See  Annex  to  Council  Implementing  Decision  12319/21,  pp.  487-488.  The 
methodology, adopted through Government Decision 1173 of 21 September 2022, is not creating new rules, 
but  consolidating  all  the  applicable  rules  deriving  from  the  Constitution,  legislation  and  other  relevant 
regulatory acts, and describing the procedures for their initiation and adoption. 

207  Ibid., p. 2. 
208  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, pp. 25-26. 
209  Art. 31(1)(e), Law No. no. 24 of 27 March 2000 on the rules of legislative technique for the elaboration of 

normative acts. 

210  Written input from the Romanian Institute of Human Rights for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 14. 
211  For  instance,  the  public  consultation  process  for  the  draft  Justice  Laws  drew  criticism  from  magistrates’ 
associations  and  civil  society,  as  well  as  from  the  Venice  Commission,  which  lamented  “the  haste  of  the 
adoption procedure”, noting that “the parliamentary debate  was conducted in a rushed manner”. See CDL-
AD(2022)045,  para.  12-13,  contribution  from  Expert  Forum  for  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  10,  and 
contribution from the Civil Society Development Foundation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 10. 

212  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, pp. 25-26. 
213  The constitutional challenge lodged by the Ombudsperson in March 2022 is still pending. Input from Romania 

for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, Annex 10, p. 1.  

214  Written input from the Centre for Public Innovation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 15, and 2022 Annual 

Civic Space Report – Romania, p. 11. 

215  Under Target 406 of its RRP, Romania committed to “conduct annual training sessions for staff of civil society 
organizations to increase their capacity and skills to participate effectively in public consultation processes” 
by 31 December 2024 and, under Target 407, to improve the “process of public consultation and involvement 
of interested stakeholders […] through 20% increase in the number of draft legislative acts subject to public 
consultation  and  involvement  of  stakeholders  at  central  level”  by  31  March  2026.  Annex  to  Council 
Implementing Decision 12319/21, pp. 482-484. 

216  The  adoption of necessary execution  measures  for a  judgment by the European  Court of Human  Rights is 
supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It is the Committee’s practice to group 

26 

 
                                                           
was at 60% (compared to 57% in 2022), and the average time that the judgments had been 
pending implementation was 4 years and 8 months (compared to over 4 years and 2 months in 
2022)217. The oldest leading judgment, pending implementation for 17 years, concerns the right 
to protection of property due to expropriations and nationalisations218. On 15 June 2023, the 
number  of  leading  judgments  pending  implementation  has  increased  to  119219.  Romania 
remains under enhanced supervision from the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe 
for the longstanding structural problem of non-implementation or delayed implementation of 
final  domestic  court  decisions  delivered  against  the  State  or  legal  persons  under  the 
responsibility of the State220.  

There has been no further progress on obtaining accreditation for the National Human 
Rights Institution. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended to Romania to “[c]ontinue 
efforts  to  establish  a  National  Human  Rights  Institution  taking  into  account  the  UN  Paris 
Principles”221. As underlined in previous Rule of Law Reports222, Romania currently does not 
have an institution accredited as a National Human Rights  Institution223, as the applications 
lodged in 2020 by the Romanian Institute for Human Rights (RIHR) and by the Ombudsperson 
before the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions’ (GANHRI) Sub-Committee 
on  Accreditation  (SCA)  are  still  pending.  Several  changes  to  the  legislation  governing  the 
RIHR would be necessary for it to comply with the UN Paris principles224 and therefore receive 
a positive assessment, in particular the principles relating to the powers conferred to it and to 

cases against a State requiring similar execution measures, particularly general measures, and examine them 
jointly. The first case in the group is designated as the leading case as regards the supervision of the general 
measures and repetitive cases within the group can be closed when it is assessed that all possible individual 
measures needed to provide redress to the applicant have been taken. 

217  All figures are calculated by the European Implementation Network and are based on the number of cases that 
are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2023. See the Contribution from the European 
Implementation Network for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 6. 

218  Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 21 July 2005, Strain and Others v. Romania, 57001/00, 

pending implementation since 2005. 

219  Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC-EXEC). 
220  The leading case in the relevant group of cases gave rise to the Judgment of the European Court of Human 
Rights of 6 September 2005, Săcăleanu group v. Romania (Application No. 73970/01). In its last examination 
of  March  2023,  the  Committee  of  Ministers  noted  that  national  authorities  are  still  to  provide  information 
concerning  the  outstanding  individual  measures.  As  regards  general  measures,  in  September  2022,  the 
Romanian  authorities  indicated  that  steps  were  under  way  to  establish,  within  the  Government  Secretariat 
General,  a  structure  tasked  with  ensuring  the  execution  of  the  relevant  national  judgments.  No  further 
information  was  communicated  to  the  Committee  of  Ministers,  which  however  noted  that  draft  proposals 
submitted to public consultation envisage setting up a mechanism with powers of prevention and control, to 
ensure the implementation of pecuniary and non-pecuniary awards by public debtors. Draft laws initiated by 
Parliament also foresee shortening the deadlines for payment by public authorities and making the Ministry of 
Finance responsible for making the payment in case the public authority does not comply with its obligations. 

221  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 2. 
222  Ibid., p. 28. 
223  The  Romanian  Institute  for  Human  Rights  (RIHR)  is  a  non-accredited  associate  member  of  the  European 
Network  on  National  Human  Rights  Institutions  (ENNHRI).  In  2020,  both  the  RIHR  and  the  Romanian 
Ombudsperson) applied for accreditation before the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions 
(GANHRI) Sub-Committee on Accreditation. See 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter 
on the rule of law situation in Romania, p. 17, pp. 23-24 and p. 28 respectively. 

224  The Paris principles require NHRIs to be independent in law, membership, operations, policy and control of 
resources; to have a broad mandate; pluralism in membership; broad functions; adequate powers; adequate 
resources; cooperative methods; and engage with international bodies. 

27 

 
                                                           
the political representation in its management board225. Several draft laws were discussed in 
Parliament and rejected 226. Since the 2022 Rule of Law report, no further steps have been taken 
to  ensure  compliance  with  the  UN  Paris  principles,  taking  into  account  the  SCA 
recommendations of 2011227. RIHR reports that this is negatively impacting its functioning and 
its efforts to comply with UN Paris principles and seek accreditation228. Although the role of 
the RIHR was recently extended229, the law governing its functioning and activities has not 
been  modified  since  its  creation  in  1991,  and  it  currently  faces  an  acute  deficit  of  staff, 
particularly due to insufficiently attractive remuneration230. Similarly, no further developments 
have  been  registered  regarding  the  application  lodged  by  the  Ombudsperson  before 
GANHRI231. Therefore, there has been no progress yet in addressing the recommendation made 
in the 2022 Rule of Law Report on establishing a National Human Rights Institution. 

While  improvements  to  the  legal  framework  have  been  reported,  civil  society 
organisations  continue  to  face  legal  and  financial  challenges.  The  civil  society  space 
continued to be assessed as narrowed232. Civil society organisations (CSOs) are reporting that, 
although legislation has  improved in  the last  years, they are  experiencing difficulties in  the 
procedures regarding their registration, dissolution and other related procedures, such as access 
to registries and the amendment of constitutive documents233. This is mainly due to the lack of 
clarity  and  predictability  in  the  implementation  of  the  legal  framework,  resulting  in  a  high 
administrative burden, lengthy court proceedings and a non-uniform judicial practice regarding 
CSOs234. As regards access to funding, larger CSOs are more likely to obtain public funding, 
while smaller ones are relying mostly on private donations, for which public policies create a 

225  Contribution from RIHR for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 9. See also International Coordinating Committee 
of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Report and Recommendations of 
the Session of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), May 2011, pp. 20-21. 

226  Contribution from RIHR for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 8-9. 
227  In its 2011 report, the SCA recommended in particular to amend national legislation on RIHR to confer it a 
human rights protection mandate (including the power to address recommendations to public authorities and 
to analyse the human rights situation in Romania), to modify the appointment process and composition of its 
General  Board,  and  to  include  safeguards  for  the  tenure  and  immunity  of  its  members.  See  International 
Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Report 
and Recommendations of the Session of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), May 2011, pp. 20-21. 

228  Contribution from RIHR for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 3. 
229  In  2022,  the  Ministry  of  Justice  tasked  the  RIHR  with  monitoring  the  implementation  of  Commission 
Recommendation (EU) 2022/758 of 27 April 2022 on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who 
engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (‘Strategic lawsuits 
against public participation’). Contribution from the Romanian Institute for Human Rights for the 2023 Rule 
of Law Report, p. 15. 

230  The RIHR currently has a staff deficit of 60%, 70% of the vacancies being specialised positions. Contribution 

from the Romanian Institute for Human Rights for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 10. 
231  Information received from the Ombudsperson in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
232  Rating by CIVICUS; ratings are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed 

and closed. 

233  Written contribution from the Center for Not-for-Profit Law Association for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 
19.  Other  issues  identified  include  the  lack  of  digitalisation  of  the  procedures  for  registering,  dissolving  a 
CSOs and operating amendments as well as deficiencies in the public registries of CSOs.  

234 This concerns in particular their registration, dissolution or amendments to their constitutive documents.It is 
also  reported  that  the  inconsistency  and  uncertainty  in  existing  procedures,  exacerbated  by  frequent 
amendments  to  relevant  legislation,  make  it  difficult,  particularly  for  smaller  CSOs,  to  comply  with 
administrative  requirements.  2022  Annual  Civic  Space  Report  –  Romania,  p. 4,  and  contribution  from  the 
Civil Society Development Foundation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 22. 

28 

 
                                                           
favourable  philanthropic  environment235.  However,  the  Government  itself  concluded  that 
legislative changes over the last years have weakened the ability of CSOs to ensure an adequate 
level of financial sustainability236. Finally, a recently adopted law limiting the possibility of 
CSOs  to  challenge  building  permits,  including  on  environmental  grounds237,  is  generating 
concerns within civil society, and more than 100 CSOs have signed an open letter calling the 
Romanian President not to promulgate the law238. Another legislative proposal, which would 
have severely limited CSOs’ right to access to justice by restricting their legal standing and by 
extending their patrimonial liability, was eventually withdrawn by the senators who initiated 
it. 

Initiatives are ongoing to simplify procedures for recognising and funding associations 
carrying out activities of general interest. The General Secretariat of the Government (GSG) 
committed  to  implement  a  project239  to  standardise  the  administrative  procedures  for  the 
recognition of public utility status to associations and foundations240, which gives them special 
rights and obligations241. Given the discrepancies in the way each competent public authority 
implements the legal framework for public utility status242, the main objective of the project is 

235  Donations  are  encouraged  in  Romania  particularly  thanks  the  ease  of  operation  and  political  environment 
favourable to philanthropic organisations, as well as tax benefits. Index for Civil Society Sustainability 2021, 
p. 9. 

236  General Secretariat of the Government, Public policy proposal regarding the standardization and efficiency of 
the  financing  mechanism based on  Law  no. 350/2005, p. 5.  The study notes that  the taxation of part-time 
employment and new rules for granting sponsorships from companies have contributed to weakening of the 
ability of CSOs to operate. A draft law that would have obligated CSOs to publish a registry of persons using 
the possibility to redirect 3,5% of their income tax for donations, which generated concerns as to the practical 
impossibility for CSOs to collect such information, was withdrawn by its initiators. 

237  The Law amending Law No. 50/1991 on the authorization of the execution of construction  works, Law No. 
554/2004 on Administrative Litigation, and Law No. 350/2001 on territorial planning and urban planning, was 
adopted  by  Parliament  on  21  November  2022,  and  declared  constitutional  by  Decision  No.  40  of  the 
Constitutional Court of 22 February 2023. It imposes a 30-day deadline, only on CSOs, to challenge building 
permits or urbanism documents in court, and reduces from five to one year the limitation period for the right 
to challenge the decisions approving land use and urban planning documents. 

238  The  open 

letter 

to 

the  Romanian  President,  signed  by  112  CSOs,  can  be 

found  here: 

https://www.declic.ro/scrisoare-deschisa-adresata-administratiei-prezidentiale/.  

239  The project, which is part of an Open Government Partnership, is foreseen in a National Action Plan 2022-

2024 of July 2022. Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 42. 

240  Art. 39 of Government Ordinance 26/2000 on associations and foundations provides that the request for public 
utility status must be sent to the GSG and granted by Government Decision. Under Art. 38 of Government 
Ordinance 26/2000, an association or foundation can be recognized as being of public utility if the following 
conditions are met: a) carrying out activities in the general interest; b) having operated for at least 3 years and 
achieved  part  of  the  set  objectives;  c)  presenting  an  activity  report  showing  significant  activity;  d)  having 
adequate  material,  logistics,  members  and  staff  for  the  proposed  purpose;  f)  collaborating  with  public 
institutions or associations or foundations; and f) having achieved significant results in view of the proposed 
purpose or presenting letters of recommendation from competent authorities.  

241  Under Art. 41 of Government Ordinance 26/2000, the public utility status gives the right to be assigned free 
use of public property and to mention such status in all documents issued, as well as a series of obligations as 
regards the level of activity, reporting, and cooperation with public authorities. However, CSOs point out to 
the  lack  of  perceived  benefits  attached  to  the  status,  and  the  difficulties  in  accessing  public  resources  that 
should  be  made  available  by  local  administrations.  Contribution  from  the  Center  for  Not-for-Profit  Law 
Association for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19, and 2022 Annual Civic Space Report – Romania, p. 5. 
242  The GSG found it necessary to clarify the stages of the procedures for obtaining the public status, noting the 
absence  of  designated  structure,  within  each  competent  authority,  for  granting,  monitoring  and  evaluating 
public  utility  status,  and  the  resulting  lack  of  objectivity  and  transparency  in  the  implementation  of  those 
procedures.  See  National  Action  Plan  2022-2024,  p.  10.  CSOs  also  pointed  out  the  difficult  and  non-
transparent procedure of obtaining the public utility status. Contribution from the Center for Not-for-Profit 

29 

 
                                                           
to  develop  a  single  digital  tool  for  the  management  of  applications  as  well  as  a  centralised 
coordination mechanism within the GSG to support those authorities and streamline exchanges 
with applying legal entities. However, a draft law tabled by parliamentarians, that would oblige 
CSOs  with  a  public  utility  status  to  publish  any  public  good  they  have  received,  and  the 
Government to verify at least every three years if the CSO still has public utility, is criticised 
by CSOs for the undue administrative burden it might create243. In addition, the GSG has issued 
a policy proposal to standardise, streamline and make more transparent the allocation of non-
refundable  public  funds  for  non-profit  activities  of  general  interest244.  Following  a  study  in 
which  an  extensive  analysis  of  the  issues  in  the  implementation  of  Law  No.  350/2005  was 
conducted245,  as  well  as  a  public  consultation  process  involving  central  and  local  public 
administration institutions and civil society organisations, the GSG made concrete proposals 
to improve the applicable legal framework and procedures246.  

Law Association for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19, and 2022 Annual Civic Space Report – Romania, p. 
5. 

243  2022  Annual  Civic  Space  Report  –  Romania,  p.  5.  Legislative  proposal  Pl-x  nr.  122/2023  to  amend 
Government  Ordinance  26/2000  was  rejected by  the  Senate  and  is  currently  examined  by  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies.  It  received  a  negative  opinion  from  the  Government,  which  considers  the  new  obligations 
unnecessary and inconsistent with the applicable legal framework. 

244  Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 43. The regime for this type of funding is regulated 
by Law No. 350/2005 of 2 December 2005 regarding the  regime of  non-refundable financing  from public 
funds allocated for non-profit activities of general interest. 

245  Among  other  issues,  the  study  assesses  a  lack  of  transparency  in  the  drafting  of  documents,  evaluation  of 
projects and allocation of funds, the short duration of the funding contracts, the high administrative burden, 
the reduced amount of funding allocated for each project, and the lack of clear criteria for evaluating the quality 
of the mode of implementation and services provided as part of the financed projects. See General Secretariat 
of  the  Government,  Public  policy  proposal  regarding  the  standardization  and  efficiency  of  the  financing 
mechanism based on Law No. 350/2005, pp. 18-21. 

246  In particular, it is proposed to harmonise all the procedures and criteria for the allocation of non-refundable 
funding, to lower the administrative burden and to create a single digital portal for lodging and processing 
funding applications.  

30 

 
                                                           
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2023 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2023-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en. 

found 

be 

at 

Activewatch (2023), FreeEx Digest no. 2, https://activewatch.ro/articole/legea-securitatii-cibernetice/. 

Anti-Corruption Directorate (2023), 2022 Annual report Bilant-DGA-2022-pentru-BIRP.pdf (mai-
dga.ro). 

Center for Not-for-Profit Law Association (2023), Contribution from the Center for Not-for-Profit Law 
Association for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Centre for Public Innovation (2023), Contribution from the Centre for Public Innovation for the 2023 
Rule of Law Report. 

Civil  Society  Development  Foundation  (2023),  Contribution  from  the  Civil  Society  Development 
Foundation for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Civil  Society  Development  Foundation  (2022)  Index  for  Civil  Society  Sustainability  2021, 
https://www.fdsc.ro/library/files/index-usaid-romnia-fdscro-1669107244.pdf.  

Civil Society Development Foundation (2023), 2022 Annual Civic Space Report – Romania. 

Constitutional Court of Romania (2023), Press release of the 17 May 2023 Comunicat-de-presa-17-
mai-2023.pdf (ccr.ro). 

Council of Europe: Parliamentary Assembly (2022), Resolution 2466: The honouring of membership 
obligations to the Council of Europe by Romania. https://pace.coe.int/en/files/31399/html. 

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, Romania.  

Council of the European Union (2021), Annex to the Council Implementing Decision 12319/21 on the 
approval  of the assessment  of the recovery  and  resilience  plan  for  Romania, target  428  NEW  CID 
ANNEX ROMANIA RRF 13 09 2021 (europa.eu).  

Directorate for Investigating Organized Crime and Terrorism (2023),  DIICOT 2022 Annual Activity 
raport2022.pdf (diicot.ro). 

DNA (2022), Press release of the 28 October 2022 http://www.pna.ro/comunicat.xhtml?id=11549.  

DNA (2023), Written contribution from DNA.  

Expert Forum (2023), contribution from Expert Forum for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

European Commission (2022), Special Eurobarometer 523 Corruption_ebs_523_report_en (3).pdf.  

European Commission (2022), Flash Eurobarometer 507 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption 
in the EU  Businesses Attitudes towards Corruption_fl_507_report_en (1).pdf.  

31 

 
European Commission, Recommendation (EU) 2022/758 of 27 April 2022 on protecting journalists and 
human rights defenders who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court 
proceedings (‘Strategic lawsuits against public participation’), OJ L 138, 17.5.2022, p. 30–44. 

European Commission (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502 ebs_502_report_en (1).pdf.  

European Commission (2020), Flash Eurobarometer 482 fl_482_en.pdf.  

European Commission (2022), 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Romania. 

European  Commission  (2022),  Report  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
Council  on  Progress  in  Romania  under  the  Cooperation  and  Verification  Mechanism  https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52022DC0664.   

European Parliament (2022), Flash Eurobarometer: News & Media Survey 2022. 

European Public Prosecutor’s Office (2023), Written contribution from EPPO.  

European 
https://www.eppo.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2023-02/EPPO_2022_Annual_Report_EN_WEB.pdf.  

Prosecutor’s 

(2023), 

Annual 

Public 

Office 

2022 

Report  

Expert Forum (2022), ‘We demand real transparency in the financing of political parties!’  Solicităm 
transparență reală în finanțarea partidelor politice! | Expert Forum.  

Expert Forum (2023), Contribution from Expert Forum for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Funky Citizens (2023), Contribution from Funky Citizens for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

General Secretariat of the Government (2022), Public policy proposal regarding the standardization 
and  efficiency  of  the  financing  mechanism  based  on  Law  no.  350/2005,  https://sgg.gov.ro/1/wp-
content/uploads/2022/04/Propunere-de-politica-publica-privind-uniformizarea-si-eficientizarea-
mecanismului-de-finantare-in-baza.docx.  

Government Decision 1173, of 21 September 2022, for the completion of the Regulation on procedures, 
at the level of the Government, for the elaboration, approval and presentation of draft public policy 
documents,  draft  normative  acts,  as  well  as  other  documents,  with  a  view  to  adoption/approval, 
approved 
561/2009, 
https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/259551.  

Government 

Decision 

No. 

by 

Government Ordinance 26/2000 on associations and foundations, Official Gazette No. 39 of 31 January 
2000, https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/20740.  

Government  of  Romania,  (2022),  National  Action  Plan  2022-2024, is  part  of an  Open  Government 
Partnership, https://ogp.gov.ro/nou/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/PNA-OGP-2022-2024.pdf.  

GRECO (2023), Fourth Evaluation Round - Third Interim Compliance Report GRECO (coe.int).  

G4Media  (2023),  Florin  Mitulețu  Buică  resigned  from  the  leadership  of  the  Permanent  Electoral 
Authority BREAKING Florin Mitulețu Buică și-a dat demisia de la conducerea Autorității Electorale 

32 

 
Permanente în urma scandalului legat de angajarea cumnatei sale, după ce G4Media a arătat că este 
vizat de o plângere penală ANI/ Buică spusese despre angajare că este ”legală și morală”.  

High Court of Cassation of Justice, Decision No. 2 of 11 April 2023 to seize the Constitutional Court, 
https://www.iccj.ro/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Hotarare-SU-nr-2-11.04.2023.pdf.  

International  Coordinating  Committee  of  National  Institutions  for  the  Promotion  and  Protection  of 
Human  Rights  (2011),  Report  and  Recommendations  of  the  Session  of  the  Sub-Committee  on 
Accreditation 
(SCA), 
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/NHRI/GANHRI/SCA_REPORT_MA
Y_2011_-_FINAL_%28with_annexes%29.pdf.  

Minister of Justice C. Predoiu (2023), Letter of 24 May 2023 to the European Commission. 

OECD (1997), Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business 
Transactions 210X297 (oecd.org).  

OECD (2023), Working Party of Senior Public Integrity Officials - “Stocktaking of the Public Integrity 
System  in  Romania”  GOV-PGC-INT(2023)3.Stocktaking  of  the  Public  Integrity  System  in 
Romania.pdf.  

OECD (2023),  Romania: Accession to the OECD Anti- Bribery Convention, Full assessment report 
Romania Accession to the Anti Bribery Conv Full assessemnt report DAF-WGB(2023)12.en.pdf.  

Reporters without Borders (2022) – Romania - https://rsf.org/en/country/romania. 

Romanian 
content/uploads/2023/02/comunicat-de-presa-28-februarie-2023.pdf. 

Constitutional 

(2023), 

Court 

Press 

statement, 

https://www.ccr.ro/wp-

Romanian Government (2023), Input from Romania for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Romanian  Institute  of  Human  Rights  (2023),  Contribution  from  the  Romanian  Institute  of  Human 
Rights for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Romanian Magistrates' Association, the National Union of Romanian Judges, the Association of Judges 
for  the  Defence  of  Human  Rights  and  the  Romanian  Public  Prosecutors'  Association  (2023), 
contribution from the Romanian Magistrates' Association, the National Union of Romanian Judges, the 
Association  of  Judges  for  the  Defence  of  Human  Rights  and  the  Romanian  Public  Prosecutors' 
Association for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Romanian  People’s  Advocate  institution  –  Office  of  the  Ombudsman  (2022).  Notification  of 
unconstitutionality regarding the provisions of the Law on Cyber Security and Defence of Romania, as 
well as for the modification and completion of some normative acts (PL-x no. 773/2022, L828/2022) – 
December 27, 2022 - https://avp.ro/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Sesizare-de-neconstitutionalitate.pdf. 

Romanian Superior Council of Magistracy (2023), Written contribution from the Romanian Superior 
Council of Magistracy from the SCM.  

33 

 
  
Superior 

of  Magistracy, 
Romanian 
https://www.csm1909.ro/PageDetails.aspx?PageId=299&FolderId=10289&FolderTitle=Principalele-
directii-de-actiune-si-obiective-ale-CSM. 

Council 

action 

2023-2029, 

plan 

for 

Romanian  Superior  Council  of  Magistracy  (2022),  Annual  report  for  2022,  Raport-2022_2023-02-
03.pdf (juridice.ro).  

Transparency International (2023), 2022 Corruption Perception Index.  

34 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Romania 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March 2023 with: 

  Association of Romanian Judges 
  Association “Mișcarea pentru apărarea statutului procurorilor” 
  Bar Association 
  Center for independent journalism 
  Constitutional Court 
  Expertforum 
  Foundation for the Development of Civil Society 
  Freedom House 
  Funky citizens 
  High Court of Cassation and Justice 
 
Initiative for Justice Association 
  Judicial Inspectorate 
  Legislative Council 
  Ministry of Justice 
  Ministry of Culture 
  National Agency for the Management of Seized Assets 
  National Anti-corruption Directorate 
  National Anti-corruption Strategy 
  National Audiovisual Council 
  National Integrity Agency 
  National Integrity Council 
  National Union of the Romanian Judges 
  Ombudsperson 
  Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice 
  Romanian Institute for Human Rights 
  Radio Romania 
  Rise Project 
  Romanian Judges’ Forum Association 
  Romanian Television Society 
  Secretariat General of the Government 
  Superior Council for the Magistracy 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

  ALDA (European Association for Local Democracy) 
  Amnesty International  
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe  
  Civil Society Europe 
  Culture Action Europe  
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom  
  European Civic Forum  

35 

 
 
ILGA Europe  
International Commission of Jurists 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)  
International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network 
International Press Institute  

  European Federation of Journalists  
  European Partnership for Democracy  
  European Youth Forum  
  Free Press Unlimited 
  Front Line Defenders 
 
 
 
 
 
  JEF Europe  
  Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa 
  Philea  
  Reporters Without Borders  
  SOLIDAR 
  Transparency International EU 

36