COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 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 2025 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2025-07-08
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Romania, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, freedom of the press, human rights, independence of the judiciary, pluralism in the media, rule of law, whistleblowing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 8.7.2025  SWD(2025) 923 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 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 2025 Rule of Law Report                              The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2025) 900 final} - {SWD(2025) 901 final} - {SWD(2025) 902 final} - {SWD(2025) 903 final} - {SWD(2025) 904 final} - {SWD(2025) 905 final} - {SWD(2025) 906 final} - {SWD(2025) 907 final} - {SWD(2025) 908 final} - {SWD(2025) 909 final} - {SWD(2025) 910 final} - {SWD(2025) 911 final} - {SWD(2025) 912 final} - {SWD(2025) 913 final} - {SWD(2025) 914 final} - {SWD(2025) 915 final} - {SWD(2025) 916 final} - {SWD(2025) 917 final} - {SWD(2025) 918 final} - {SWD(2025) 919 final} - {SWD(2025) 920 final} - {SWD(2025) 921 final} - {SWD(2025) 922 final} - {SWD(2025) 924 final} - {SWD(2025) 925 final} - {SWD(2025) 926 final} - {SWD(2025) 927 final} - {SWD(2025) 928 final} - {SWD(2025) 929 final} - {SWD(2025) 930 final} - {SWD(2025) 931 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

Significant  steps  have  been  taken  by  Romania  to  complete  the  process  initiated  in  view  of 
taking  into  account  the  recommendations  of  the  Venice  Commission  on  the  Justice  Laws, 
which addressed concerns for the independence, quality and efficiency of the justice system. 
Legislative steps are explored to further strengthen safeguards pertaining to the independence 
of high-ranking prosecutors and the judicial police and an evaluation of the implementation of 
the Justice Laws will be considered by the Ministry of Justice after a sufficient period of time 
from  their  adoption,  taking  into  account  the  need  to  maintain  the  stability  of  the  legal 
framework.  The  transparency  of  case-law  on  disciplinary  sanctions  has  improved,  due  to 
awareness raising efforts. The Ministry of Justice showed openness to adapt its reform of IT 
systems in courts to ensure that judicial independence is guaranteed. Some further efforts were 
made  to  ensure  adequate  human  resources  for  the  justice  system,  including  with  new 
recruitments,  despite  budgetary  restrictions.  Several  initiatives  have  been  taken  to  facilitate 
access to legal aid. The length of proceedings increased compared to previous years.  

The implementation of the 2021-2025 Anti-Corruption Strategy remains on track and a new 
Strategy  is  under  preparation,  building  on  the  ex-post  evaluation  of  the  current  strategy. 
Authorities maintain a positive track record in combating corruption, including as regards high-
level corruption cases. However, following rulings on the statute of limitations, national courts 
have closed many corruption cases and annulled convictions. There have been further steps 
taken  in  relation  to  the  system  for  investigating  and  prosecuting  criminal  offences  in  the 
judiciary. The updating of the legislative framework on integrity is in discussion, with a draft 
law addressing revolving doors being elaborated. The National Integrity Agency maintained 
its record in managing conflicts of interest and asset declarations, however, a Constitutional 
Court  ruling  will  require  Romania  to  re-assess  what  was  seen  as  a  strong  asset  declaration 
system.  Some  initial  steps  have  been  taken  to  introduce  rules  on  lobbying  for  Members  of 
Parliament  and  legislation  to  improve  the  transparency  of  political  party  financing  remains 
pending in Parliament. Corruption and fraud have been identified by the national authorities as 
risks in the public procurement process with some measures ongoing to address them. 

There have been no steps to enhance the independent governance and editorial independence 
of public service media. The financing of private media by political parties and state authorities 
has led to an increase of untransparent political advertising. While the National Audiovisual 
Council  would  benefit  from  more  human  resources  and  a  long-awaited  new  IT  system, 
information  on  media  ownership  beyond  the  audiovisual  sector  is  still  insufficient.  Media 
actors have yet to agree on self-regulation. Issues on transparency and access to information 
remain,  pending  discussions  on  a  new  Code  of  Administrative  Procedures.  Threats  and 
instances  of  harassment  of  journalists  remain  an  issue  and  political  pressure  on  editorial 
independence affects journalists’ work. 

Some steps have been taken to improve public consultations, while a number of shortcomings 
remain in practice. Legislative unpredictability, the frequent use of Government Emergency 
Ordinances, problems  with the quality of legislation and regulatory burden, remain primary 
concerns for businesses and civil society organisations. Presidential elections were repeated in 
2025, following the Constitutional Court’s decision to annul the first round of elections held in 
2024. A final decision is still pending regarding the accreditation of National Human Rights 
Institutions. A Strategy for Open Government was adopted to address the increasing challenges 
for civil society organisations. 

1 

 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall, concerning the recommendations in the 2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania has made: 

•  Significant progress on completing the process initiated in view of taking into account the 
recommendations  of  the  Venice  Commission  on  the  Justice  Laws,  including  through 
consultations  and  evaluations  in  view  of  further  improving  the  Justice  Laws  at  a  next 
opportunity.  

•  Some  further  progress  on  ensuring  adequate  human  resources  for  the  justice  system, 
including for the prosecution services, taking into account European standards on resources 
for the justice system. 

•  Some further progress on taking measures, in particular at an operational level, to ensure 
efficient investigation and prosecution of criminal offences in the judiciary, including as 
regards corruption offences, taking into account European standards. 
•  No progress on introducing rules on lobbying for Members of Parliament. 
•  No  progress  on  strengthening  the  rules  and  mechanisms  to  enhance  the  independent 
governance  and  editorial  independence  of  public  service  media  taking  into  account 
European standards on public service media. 

•  Some progress on ensuring effective public consultations before the adoption of legislation. 
•  No  progress  on  taking  forward  the  process  for  obtaining  accreditation  for  two  National 

Human Rights Institutions, taking into account the UN Paris Principles. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, in 
addition to recalling the relevant commitments made under the Recovery and Resilience Plan 
and  the  relevant  country-specific  recommendations  under  the  European  Semester,  it  is 
recommended to Romania to: 

•  Take forward legislative steps to strengthen safeguards to ensure the independence of high-

ranking prosecutors and for the organisation and functioning of the judicial police. 

•  Take measures to ensure efficient investigation and prosecution of criminal offences in the 

• 

judiciary, including as regards corruption offences. 
Introduce rules on lobbying for Members of Parliament and ensure the effectiveness of the 
asset declaration system. 

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

•  Step up efforts  to  address  the frequent  use of government  emergency ordinances and to 

ensure effective public consultations before the adoption of legislation.  

•  Take  forward  the  process  for  obtaining  accreditation  for  the  National  Human  Rights 

Institutions, taking into account the UN Paris Principles. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Romania continues to be average among 
both the general public and companies. Overall, 44% of the general population and 51% of 
companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ 
in  20252.  The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  the  general  public  has  significantly 
decreased  in  comparison  with  2024  (52%)  and  2021  (51%).  The  perceived  judicial 
independence among companies has decreased in comparison with 2024 (56%) although it has 
increased in comparison with 2021 (45%).  

Significant progress has been made to complete the process initiated in view of taking into 
account  the  recommendations  of  the  Venice  Commission  on  the  Justice  Laws3.  The 
Ministry of Justice assessed the report of the panel of high-level experts which was set-up to 
look at adequate legislative solutions to follow up on the Venice Commission’s opinion on the 
Justice  Laws4.  Based  on  this  assessment,  the  Government  initiated  steps  to  strengthen 
safeguards pertaining to the mandate of high-level prosecutors5. In agreement with the panel 
of experts, which had concluded that the safeguards already in place were sufficient and that 
the current system would allow to have a management team that cooperates effectively6, the 
Ministry of Justice did not consider it necessary to introduce a competitive selection for deputy 
managers of courts and prosecution offices. Based on the constitutional grounds of legality and 
hierarchical control, the Ministry of Justice chose to maintain the prerogative of the Prosecutor 
General to bypass the prosecutorial hierarchy when he or she finds that prosecutorial measures 
are  unlawful  or  unfounded7.  The  entry  into  force  of  the  Justice  Laws  in  20228  addressed 
concerns for the independence, quality and efficiency of the justice system9. The Government’s 
assessment of the expert panels’ report completes the process launched in January 2023 to take 
into  account  the  recommendations  made  by  the  Venice  Commission  to  further  improve  the 
laws10, marking significant progress on the recommendation made in the 2024 Rule of Law 
Report.  

Legislative steps are explored to strengthen safeguards pertaining to the independence of 
high-ranking  prosecutors  and  the  judicial  police.  Following  the  Ministry  of  Justice’s 
assessment of the panel  of experts’  report, the  Ministry of Justice  elaborated  a draft law to 
extend the mandate of high-ranking prosecutors for a non-renewable period from three to five 

1   An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be here.  
2   Figures 50 and 52, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard and 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%). 

3   The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Romania to “Complete the process initiated in view of taking 
into  account  the  recommendations  of  the  Venice  Commission  on  the  Justice  Laws,  including  through 
consultations and evaluations in view of further improving the Justice Laws at a next opportunity”. 

4   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p. 4. 
5   See following paragraph for more details. 
6   Panel of high-level experts, para. 20-37. 
7   Letter of 16 December 2024, reference Ares(2024)9046611. 
8   Also a commitment under Romania’s Recovery and Resilience Plan (Milestone 423). The Commission will 

assess the fulfilment of the milestone when Romania submits the relevant payment request. 

9   2022 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p.5. 
10   Venice Commission (2022). 

3 

 
 
 
years11, in line with the recommendations made by the Venice Commission. Consultations are 
continuing with the institutions of the judicial system in order to reach a broad consensus. The 
Ministry of Justice also agreed with the panel’s conclusions that a future law regulating the 
organisation and functioning of the judicial police, should provide that judicial police officers 
are  not  obliged  to  report  on  their  activity  to  the  Minister  of  Interior.  Such  legislation  is 
important  to  further  improve  the  safeguards  provided  for  in  the  Justice  Laws.  Taking  into 
account the need to maintain the stability of the legal framework, the government indicated 
that an evaluation of the implementation of the Justice Laws will be considered after a sufficient 
period of time since their adoption. The Ministry of Justice considers that at least a five-year-
period would be the most appropriate to evaluate the implementation of the Justice Laws12, but 
for  now,  no  framework  has  been  set-up  for  that  purpose13.  Stakeholders14,  including  from 
outside  the  justice  system,  have  stressed  the  importance  of  looking  in  particular  into  the 
promotion of judges, pointing to the fact that individual applications considered by the Superior 
Council  of  the  Magistracy  (SCM)  are  not  anonymised15.  A  key  concern  is  the  level  of 
transparency in the promotion of judges to the High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ), 
which  rests  on  an  evaluation  of  their  judgments  and  an  interview  with  the  SCM  section  of 
judges. The Venice Commission had reiterated the principle of broad and fair representation of 
all levels and types of courts in judicial councils16. Some associations of magistrates have called 
for a more balanced representation of the lower courts in the SCMs judges' section17. Under 
the  Justice  Laws,  an  audit  on  the  allocation  of  files  within  the  Judicial  Inspection  is  to  be 
performed  within  the  two  years  of  their  implementation18,  however  no  steps  have  yet  been 
taken to carry that out.  

The transparency of case-law on disciplinary sanctions has improved, yet magistrates still 
consider that they face undue pressure from within the judiciary. To disseminate the case-
law  developed  on  disciplinary  liability  and  increase  awareness,  the  HCCJ  published  on  its 
website a summary of judgments rendered in disciplinary matters for the period 2021-2024 and 
annual  bulletins  on main decisions taken. The SCM is  also  developing an IT application to 
publicise  the  case-law  in  disciplinary  matters,  which  will  soon  be  available  to  judges  and 
prosecutors on the Rejust application. Some magistrates continue to express concerns about 
undue pressure they face from within the judiciary19, echoed by stakeholders20. The SCM also 

11   The draft provides for transitional measures under which high ranking prosecutors in their first term of office 

could, at the end of their three-year mandate, be reconducted for a five-year term. 

12   The Justice Laws were adopted in October 2022. 
13   Country visit Romania, Ministry of Justice. 
14   Civil Liberties’ Union for Europe (2025). Expert Forum (2025), written input, p. 7. Country visit Romania, 
Magistrates’ associations (Asociaţia ‘Iniţiativa pentru Justiţie’, Asociaţia Forumul Judecătorilor din România, 
Asociaţia Miscarea pentru Apărarea Statutului Procurorilor). 

15   Civil Liberties’ Union for Europe (2025) and country visit to Romania, Magistrates’ associations (Asociaţia 
‘Iniţiativa pentru Justiţie’, Asociaţia Forumul Judecătorilor din România, Asociaţia Miscarea pentru Apărarea 
Statutului  Procurorilor)  and  NGOs  (Civic  Radauti  Association,  Expert  Forum  and  Centrul  de  Resurse 
Juridice). 

16   Venice Commission, CDL-AD(2023)015, CDL-PI(2022)005 and CDLAD(2021)043. 
17   Country visit Romania, Magistrates’ associations (Asociaţia ‘Iniţiativa pentru Justiţie’, Asociaţia  Forumul 
Judecătorilor din România, Asociaţia Miscarea pentru Apărarea Statutului Procurorilor) and NGOs (Civic 
Radauti Association, Expert Forum and Centrul de Resurse Juridice).  

18   Country visit Romania, Judicial Inspection. 
19   Country visit Romania, Magistrates’ associations (Asociaţia ‘Iniţiativa pentru Justiţie’, Asociaţia  Forumul 
Judecătorilor din România, Asociaţia Miscarea pentru Apărarea Statutului Procurorilor) and NGOs (Civic 
Radauti Association, Expert Forum and Centrul de Resurse Juridice). 

20   Expert Forum (2025), written contribution, p. 7. 

4 

 
 
 
spoke  out  against  public  pressure  on  judges,  citing  instances  of  political  leaders  making 
disparaging comments about magistrates, notably in the wake of specific rulings21. 

The  Ministry  of  Justice  showed  openness  to  consider  guarantees  to  preserve  the 
independence of the judiciary with regard to the reform of the IT system. The Ministry of 
Justice is working on a centralised system that would host digitalised case files, allowing parties 
and  their  legal  representatives  to  access,  in  a  consolidated  form,  all  documents  of  pending 
cases.  Under  the  proposed  reform,  judicial  databases  would  be  hosted  and  administered 
centrally under the Ministry of Justice22. The SCM23, the European Network of Councils of the 
Judiciary’s  executive  board  and  other  stakeholders24  expressed  concerns  on  the  absence  of 
guarantees  in  this  reform  to  ensure  that  the  Ministry  of  Justice  does  not  have  access  to  the 
centralised system with all documents of the pending cases including those linked to specific 
cases, as well as any data stored on the computer of judges and court staff. Concerns include 
the absence of the possibility to identify if and when any such access  had taken place. The 
Ministry  of  Justice  indicated  its  openness  to  look  into  this  matter  to  ensure  that  the 
independence of the judiciary25 is preserved.  

Quality  

Some  further  progress  was  made  on  the  recommendation  to  ensure  adequate  human 
resources  for  the  justice  system,  including  with  new  recruitments26,  despite  budgetary 
restrictions. As a result of recruitments in 202427, at the beginning of 2025, the occupancy rate 
was of 83% for judges’ positions at the national level (5% more than in the previous year) and 
of 74% for prosecutors’ positions28. However, the SCM considers vacancies in the judiciary a 
“continuous concern”29, as many courts are still understaffed and have a very high workload, 
in particular at second instance and in the prosecutors’ offices30. However, with regard to the 
recruitments made and the increase achieved in the occupancy rate, some further progress was 
made to ensure adequate human resources for the justice system. 

Several initiatives have been taken to facilitate access to legal aid. New rules allow non-
profit legal persons to benefit from legal aid when they defend persons in special situations or 

21   Civil Liberties’ Union for Europe (2025). Romanian Government (2025), written input, p.14. 
22   Another solution has been chosen with regard to prosecution services, where data was also centralised but 
hosted in a separate domain, where the data administrator is an entity in the judicial system. SCM (2025), 
national contribution, p. 24. 

23   SCM(2025). 
24   ENCJ (2025), written input, pp. 4 and 39. The Consultative Council of European Judges also discussed this 
issue at its 25th plenary meeting of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) on 4-6 December 
2024. See also Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (2025) written input, p. 9. 

25   Country visit Romania, Ministry of Justice and SCM website. 
26   The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  Romania  to  “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”. 

27   Competitions  for  admission  to  the  National  Institute  of  the  Magistracy,  July  2024  -  April  2025  and  for 

admission to the magistracy, July 2024 - March 2025. 

28   Country visit Romania, the Government, and website of the SCM. Civil Liberties’ Union for Europe (2025). 
29   Country visit Romania, SCM. 
30   Country visit Romania, magistrates’ associations (Uniunea Nationala a Judecatorilor din Romania (UNJR), 
Asociația Magistraților din România (AMR), Romanian Prosecutors' Association (Asociaţia Procurorilor din 
România) (APR), Association of Judges for the Defense of Human Rights) and HCCJ. Civil Liberties’ Union 
for Europe (2025). Medel (2025), written input, p. 7. European Civic Forum (2025), written input, p. 5. World 
Bank Group (2024) Reflections on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector.  

5 

 
 
 
protect a group or general interest31. Legal aid can also be granted to persons when costs of 
proceedings limit their effective access to justice. Judges are also under the obligation to inform 
the parties about the possibility and conditions for applying for public legal aid. The amount 
of  court  stamp  duties  has  been  reduced  in  some  areas,  in  particular  in  family  litigation. 
According to the Ministry of Justice, almost 30 000 persons benefited from legal aid in 2024, 
and  the  budget  for  2025  slightly  increased.  However,  stakeholders  regret  the  absence  of 
publicly available data on the number of beneficiaries, their profile and the amounts received32.  

Efficiency 

The  length  of  proceedings  increased  compared  to  previous  years.  The  time  needed  to 
resolve civil, commercial, administrative and other cases continued to increase from 160 days 
in 2021, 171 days in 2022 to 228 days in 2023, while the clearance rate of civil, commercial, 
administrative and other cases decreased from 102% in 2021, 96% in 2022 to 87% in 2023. 
The workload of the courts has increased compared to the previous Rule of Law Report, notably 
the number of new and pending cases33. The length of proceedings is seen in some cases as a 
barrier for access to justice, including with regard to requests for access to documents of public 
interest34.  

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  perception  among  experts,  citizens  and  business  executives  is  that  the  level  of 
corruption in the public sector remains high. In the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index by 
Transparency International, Romania scores 46/100 and ranks 24th in the European Union and 
65th globally35. This perception has been relatively stable over the past five years36. The 2025 
Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  75%  of  respondents  consider  corruption 
widespread in their country (EU average 69%) and 60% of respondents feel personally affected 
by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 90% of companies 
consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 72% consider that corruption is 
a problem when doing business (EU average 35%). Furthermore, 51% of respondents find that 
there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from corrupt practices (EU average 
36%), while 34% of companies believe that people and businesses caught for bribing a senior 
official are appropriately punished (EU average 33%)37.  

The implementation of the 2021-2025 Anti-Corruption Strategy (NAS) remains on track 
and a new Strategy is under preparation. This new Strategy will be drafted after the ex-post 
evaluation of the previous strategy, which will be carried out in the first trimester of 2026.  The 
2024  NAS  Monitoring  Report  has  already  been  drafted  in  the  first  trimester  of  2025.  The 
Ministry of Justice is preparing the procurement for an external audit of the NAS, a target under 

31   Law No 268/2024 amending and supplementing Government Emergency Ordinance (GEO) No 80/2013 on 

judicial stamp duties and GEO No 51/2008 on public aid in civil matters. 

32   Country visit Romania, CSOs (Expert Forum, Freedom House, FDSC, Centre for Public Innovation). 
33   2025 EU Justice Scoreboard, Figures 2, 5, 10, and 13. 
34   Centre for Public Innovation (2025). Country visit Romania, CSOs (Expert Forum, Freedom House, FDSC, 

Centre for Public Innovation). 

35   The level of perceived corruption is categorised as follows: low (above 79); relatively low (between 79-60), 

relatively high (between 59-50), high (below 50).  

36   Romania has the same score and rankings as last year. The score in 2019 was 44, so 2 points lower. 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. 
 Data  from  Special  Eurobarometer  561  (2025)  and  Flash  Eurobarometer  557  (2025).  See  also  European 
Semester, Country Report Romania, p. 62. 

37  

6 

 
 
 
Romania’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan. It also started preparing a post-2025 NAS, 
which  will  ensure  that  anti-corruption  measures  are  targeted  towards  high-risk  sectors  and 
adapted  to  the  latest  trends  in  corruption  typologies.  A  new  priority  will  be  to  promote 
education and awareness on corruption-related issues among youth and from an early stage of 
professional development, to foster a culture of integrity and social responsibility. 

Authorities  maintain  a  positive  track  record  in  combating  corruption,  including  as 
regards  high-level  corruption  cases.  The  General  Prosecution  Service  continued  to  issue 
many  indictments  in  corruption  cases  and  courts  delivered  many  final  judgments38.  The 
National  Anti-Corruption  Directorate  (DNA),  responsible  for  the  prosecution  of  high-level 
corruption, achieved similar results as last year with 391 convictions and 147 acquittals39. It is 
also addressing its backlog, although the overall workload remains substantial considering the 
number  of  new  complaints40.  Despite  many  vacancies  in  the  prosecution  services,  DNA’s 
occupancy  rate  (above  85%),  has  remained  stable  in  the  past  two  years41.  DNA  received 
equipment  to  facilitate  investigations  and  prosecutions,  such  as  surveillance,  secure 
communication and data analysis tools42. DNA advocates for a legislative change that would 
allow, in duly justified cases, undercover investigations for corruption offences beyond the one 
year maximum currently provided for in the law, as is the case for some other complex offences 
such  as  money  laundering43.  A  law  of  December  2024  strengthened  the  criminalisation  of 
foreign bribery and made DNA exclusively competent for this crime44. During 2024, the EPPO 
investigated 44 corruption cases, which accounts for 5% of the total number of EPPO cases in 
Romania45. Magistrates consider that corruption has become more sophisticated than simple 
bribery as perpetrators engage in more complex forms of abuse of office and misappropriation 
in the interest of people in their network, making it harder to establish criminal liability46.  

Following rulings by the High Court of Cassation and Justice on the statute of limitations, 
courts have closed many corruption cases and annulled convictions.  Despite the overall 
positive track record, several criminal cases are being discontinued as a result of the ruling of 
the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) published on 25 June 2018, which found that the 
interruption  of  the  limitation  period  under  Article  155(1)  of  the  Criminal  Code  was 
unconstitutional,  with  the  legal  void  being  filled  only  with  the  adoption  of  a  Government 
Emergency Ordinance on 30 May 2022. In view of the principle that offences and penalties 

38  During 2024, a total of 1 702 (1 843 in 2023, 1 662 in 2022) cases involving corruption offences were solved, 
of which 209 (259 in 2023, 266 in 2022) indictments and plea agreements were issued, by which 369 (328 in 
2023, 327 in 2022) defendants were sent to trial. There were 164 (159 in 2023, 203 in 2022) final judgments, 
by which 179 (154 in 2023, 184 in 2022) individuals were convicted, see input from Romania for the 2025 
Rule of Law Report, Annex 13, and 2024 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Romania, p. 12. 

39   DNA (2025), written input p. 49; 400 defendants were convicted and 175 acquitted in 2023. 
40   Ibid, p. 48-49. The number of pending cases was 5 443, compared to 6 085 in 2023. DNA considers that the 
reduction of about 10% is a good result, because in 2023 and 2024 they received around 2500 new complaints. 
During 2024, a total of 131 (132 in 2023, 404 in 2022) cases concerning 683 (651 in 2023, 779 in 2022) 
defendants were sent to trial. Of these, 445 (481 in 2023, 565 in 2022) were prosecuted by indictment and 
238 (214 in 2022, 165 in 2021) by plea agreement. The number of files older than 5 years from the date of 
notification has decreased (129 compared to 177 in 2023, 263 in 2022 and 323 in 2021). 

41   Input from Romania to the 2025 Rule of Law report, p. 8, and country visit Romania, DNA. On 31 December 
2024, DNA had 170 occupied positions filled out of the 195 prosecutor positions provided for in the staffing 
scheme.   

42   Country visit Romania, DNA. 
43   DNA (2025), written input, p 51.  
44   Ibid, p 48. 
45   EPPO (2025), Annual Report 2024, p. 51. 
46   Information received from Magistrates’ Associations in the context of the January mission to Bucharest. 

7 

 
 
 
must be defined by law, the Court of Justice of the EU in the Lin case47 interpreted EU law as 
not precluding limitation periods to be expired in cases where procedural acts had intervened 
in the period between 25 June 2018 and 30 May 2022, but considered that the principle of the 
more lenient criminal law (lex mitior) does not allow Romanian courts to call into question the 
interruption of the limitation period by procedural acts which occurred before 25 June 2018. 
However,  in  June  2024,  the  High  Court  of  Cassation  and  Justice  (HCCJ)  held48  that  the 
retroactive  application  of  the  principle  of  lex  mitior  precludes  the  interruption  of  limitation 
periods also by procedural acts which occurred before the finding of invalidity by the CCR in 
its decision published in June 2018. In addition, in its decision 16/2024 of 16 September 2024, 
the HCCJ extended the interpretation of the lex mitior principle, for offences committed before 
30 May 2022, as also preventing the interruption of limitation periods by procedural acts which 
occurred after 30 May 2022. This case law of the HCCJ has since been largely followed by 
Romanian  courts49  extending  the  neutralisation  of  the  interrupting  effect  of  procedural  acts 
beyond  the  2018-2022  period,  thereby  exacerbating  the  systemic  risk  that  a  considerable 
number of criminal cases escape criminal penalty. The combined effects of this case-law make 
it difficult to achieve a final decision in many cases of corruption occurring before 30 May 
202250 and may raise certain questions under EU law. During 2024, the courts discontinued 
criminal proceedings against 307 defendants on the grounds that the statute of limitations had 
expired (compared to 364 in 2023). By comparison, before the adoption of the HCCJ decisions, 
in  2022,  the  discontinuation  of  criminal  proceedings  in  such  cases  occurred  for  129 
defendants51. In April 2025, the HCCJ sought further clarification on the requirements of EU 
law through a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union52.  

There  has  been  some  further  progress  on  the  recommendation  on  the  system  for 
investigating and prosecuting criminal offences in the judiciary53. Since the new system 
for investigating and prosecuting corruption offences in the judiciary was established in March 
2022,  designated  prosecutors  have  managed  to  reduce  the  significant  backlog54.  Six 
indictments were issued in 2024, although some note that this remains low55. The occupancy 
rate has stabilised since the last Rule of Law Report was published56, but part of the Superior 
Council of Magistracy (SCM) and magistrates’ organisations consider that resources and the 
level  of  specialisation  of  prosecutors  are  insufficient  to  address  corruption  cases  within  the 
judiciary efficiently57. The Prosecutor General of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the HCCJ 
made use of his prerogative58 to appoint designated prosecutors ex officio and put forward four 

47   Judgment of the CJEU, case C-107/23, Lin. 
48   Decision 37/2024 of 17 June 2024. 
49   Country visit Romania, Magistrates’ associations. 
50   DNA (2025), written input, p. 50. Country visit Romania, Magistrates’ associations.  
51   DNA (2025), written input, p. 51 
52  Case C-280/25, Lin II, pending.  
53   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p. 2. In the 2024 Rule of Law Report, the Commission recommended to 
Romania  to:  ‘take  measures,  in  particular  at  an  operational  level,  to  ensure  efficient  investigation  and 
prosecution of criminal offences in the judiciary, including as regards corruption offences, taking into account 
European standards’. 

54   Office of the Prosecutor General (2025), written input, Annex 3. On 1 January 2024, there were 3309 cases 
open and on 23 December 2024, the total number of cases pending was reduced to 2431. The number of cases 
at “central” level has grown from 674 to 827, but this is also due to the large number of new complaints (391).  

55   Country visit Romania, Associations of Magistrates’ and Expert Forum (CSO). 
56   There are still four prosecutors appointed out of the 14 posts available at “central” level (there were eight at 
the end of 2022) and 37 out of 45 prosecutors appointed at the local prosecution offices (34 in 2023 and 42 
at the end of 2022). Country visit Romania, Ministry of Justice, PG and SCM. 

57   Country visit Romania, SCM. The VP/prosecutorial part of the SCM submitted that the structure does not 
work for these reasons contradicted by the judicial part. Also country visit Romania, Magistrates associations.  

58   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania. 

8 

 
 
 
candidates, from which the SCM only accepted one59. Though the system still has to show its 
ability  to  deal  efficiently  with  corruption  cases  within  the judiciary,  overall,  there  has  been 
some further progress  on efficient  investigation  and prosecution of criminal  offences in  the 
judiciary.  

The updating of the legislative framework on integrity is still in discussion, and a draft 
law addressing revolving doors is being elaborated and submitted to consultations. The 
Ministry of Justice considered that the amendments to the existing integrity laws suggested by 
the National Integrity Agency (ANI)60 would expand the latter’s mandate and would not respect 
the State’s institutional architecture. However, it agreed with ANI to establish a joint working 
group to coordinate the legislative revision process61. In parallel, Parliament adopted a law in 
March 2025 that regulates conflicts of interest and includes rules on gifts. Following OECD 
recommendations62,  a  subcommittee  was  set  up  in  March  2025  to  develop  a  legislative 
approach on pre- and post-employment prohibitions, as well as a monitoring and sanctioning 
system63. Rules on revolving doors are currently reflected in different laws and remain limited 
in scope64. 

ANI  maintains  its  results  in  managing  conflicts  of  interest  and  asset  declarations, 
including with the support of technological tools. Low salaries in ANI, compared to similar 
functions  in  public  administration,  remain  an  obstacle  to  attract  and  keep  competent  staff. 
Several employees left ANI in 202465. Given ANI’s increasing workload, this situation could 
seriously impact its ability to deliver66. ANI also lacks the legal basis to request and receive 
information from the Financial Intelligence Unit67. The Constitutional Court held on 29 May 
202568  that  the  rules  requiring  that  officials  declare  their  spouses’  and  children’s  assets  are 
unconstitutional  on  grounds  that  such  declaration  of  assets,  being  a  declaration  under  oath, 
entails the criminal liability of the declarant and can only be made in one’s own name.  The 
Court also confirmed that it would be a disproportionate interference with the right to privacy 
to require all declarations to be published online and that it is sufficient that declarations be 

59   Country visit Romania, PG and SCM (2025), written input, who submit that such appointments should only 
happen in the exceptional circumstance where not enough prosecutors submit their candidacy and that in each 
case  they  have  to  assess  that  the  candidate  has  irreproachable  moral  conduct  and  sufficient  professional 
experience. 

60   Milestone no. 431 of Romania’s RRP states: ‘Consolidated laws on integrity shall enter into force. The update 
of the integrity legislation shall be realised 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.’ Milestone no. 431 will be 
assessed under the 6th payment request, expected in 2025. 

61   Country visit Romania, Ministry of Justice and ANI (2025), written input. After the completion of the draft 
by the Ministry of Justice and ANI, the draft will be sent to the advisory institutions, submitted for approval 
to the Government, and subsequently submitted for adoption to the Parliament. 

62   OECD (2025), Strengthening the framework on pre- and post-public employment in Romania. 
63   Country visit Romania, Ministry of Justice. The committee was set up by Decision of the Prime Minister no. 

87 of 3 March 2025. 

64   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania. In November 2024, a code of ethics on post-employment restrictions for 

presidential advisers has been approved. 

65   External Audit of the Management of National Integrity Agency for 2023 (2024), Factual Findings Report, 
p. 36 and ANI (2025), written input. In March 2025, ANI operated with 102 out of the 160 foreseen staff, 
mostly  missing  integrity  inspectors.  The  government  would  increase  the  salaries  after  the  presidential 
elections in 2024 which were however postponed to May 2025. 

66   ANI (2025), written input, p. 32. 
67   Country visit Romania, ANI. 
68   Constitutional Court, Decision No 297 of 29 May 2025. 
9 

 
 
 
submitted to ANI69, whereas for elected or politically appointed officials, a review by the public 
is justified. ANI and stakeholders expressed concern that this would weaken transparency and 
accountability70. The Ministry of Justice set up a working group together with ANI in order to 
analyse the Constitutional Court Decision of 29 May 2025. The first meeting took place on 18 
June  2025.  The  v-DAI  platform  became  operational  in  2024  and  it  enables  to  scrutinise 
disclosures and identify those that are more at risk of an integrity incident. More than 1 000 
cases have been identified so far for which over 5 000 asset and interest disclosures need to be 
analysed by ANI71.  

ANI  performs  the  role  of  main  external  whistleblower  channel  and  takes  measures  to 
promote awareness of the whistleblower law. Throughout the reporting period, ANI received 
reports  on  breaches  of  law,  offered  counselling  and  established  relations  with  relevant 
stakeholders. Five integrity inspectors became operational during 2024, of the 15 required by 
law for the Whistleblowing Directorate72. Awareness raising was carried out among the private 
sector to facilitate the application of the whistleblower protection legislation73. In 2024, ANI 
did  not  receive  any  reports  on  corruption.  The  Court  of  Accounts  received  many 
whistleblowing reports and identified two cases of corruption in public procurement, which it 
notified to law enforcement. The Court noted the absence of clear guidance and training on the 
handling  of  violations  of  ethics,  which  reportedly  negatively  impacts  whistleblowers’ 
protection by public bodies and limits the role of the internal ethics counsellor74.  

There has been no progress on the recommendation to introduce rules on lobbying for 
Members  of  Parliament75.  The  law  amending  the  Administrative  Code  sets  out  new 
obligations on lobbying regarding high-level executives, such as the mandatory registration by 
certain public officials of official meetings with third parties at least two days prior to their 
occurrence76. However, this does not apply to members of Parliament and their engagement 
with lobbyists is still not regulated. The same law also lays down specific rules as regards the 
receipt of gifts, their permissible value and assessment, as well as a list of prohibited gifts, as 
therefore there are also still no clear rules on gifts, hospitality, favours and other benefits for 
members of Parliament77. In January 2025, the Minister of Justice asked Parliament to follow 
up  on  the  GRECO’s  recommendations,  including  on  lobbying.  However,  the  Senate’s 

69   Constitutional Court, Decision No 297 of 29 May 2025 press release of 29 May 2025. 
70   ANI,  press  release  of  29  May  2025  “regarding  the  impact  of  the  CCR  decision  regarding  the 
unconstitutionality of some provisions of the ANI Law”; communication of the Association for Cooperation 
and Sustainable Development (ACDD) with 16 CSOs, including the Center for Public Innovation, the Expert 
Forum, Freedom House, ActiveWatch. 

71   ANI  (2025),  written  input,  p.  38-39  and  Annex  11.  Over  2024,  integrity  inspectors  issued  19  integrity 

warnings, amounting to almost EUR 80 million. 

72   Due to general austerity measures, competitions for the remaining 10 posts can currently not be organised. 

Replacements can however be sought for the existing 5 posts, should they become vacant. 

73   Information received from ANI in the context of the country visit to Romania. 
74   Country visit Romania, Court of Accounts.  
75   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p. 2. In the 2024 Rule of Law Report, the Commission concluded that 

Romania made no progress on introducing rules on lobbying for Members of Parliament. 

76   Ministry of Justice (2025), written input. Law 49 of 14 April 2025. The published data must include the names 
or titles of participants, the date and location of the meeting, as well as a description of its purpose. Following 
the  meeting,  within  a  maximum  of  five  working  days,  the  initial  information  must be  supplemented  with 
details  regarding  the  main  topics  discussed  and  the  conclusions  drawn,  where  applicable.  There  is  no 
information available on the implementation of these rules and they do not cover the Prime Minister. Romania 
also  set  up  an  Interministerial  Commission  to  implement,  among  others,  the  OECD  recommendation  to 
improve rules on lobbying of public officials and an initial meeting took place on 6 March 2025. Country 
visit Romania, Ministry of Justice and Decision of the Prime Minister no. 87 of 3 March 2025. 

77   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, pp. 17-18. 

10 

 
 
 
Committee on Legal Affairs, Appointments, Disciplinary Matters, Immunities and Validations 
did not propose to adopt lobbying rules78, and the Chamber of Deputies has not replied. In May 
2025,  Members  of  Parliament  held  preliminary  discussions  on  the  Unified  Register  of 
Transparency of Interests in the Joint Special Committee of the Chamber of Deputies and the 
Senate. However, no concrete legislative steps have been taken to follow up, and therefore, 
there has been no progress yet on introducing lobbying rules for Members of Parliament. 

Legislation  to  improve  the  transparency  of  political  party  financing  is  still  pending  in 
Parliament.  Draft  legislation  from  the  Permanent  Electoral  Authority  to  improve  the 
transparency of political party financing and the enforcement of related rules has been with the 
Chamber of Deputies  since October 2023, with  no foreseen date of adoption.  The Court of 
Accounts submitted that the current  legislation does not  sufficiently  regulate issues such  as 
maximum expenditure limits, salaries, travel expenses or what should happen with the funds 
that are not (fully) used79. Concerns related to transparency of political party financing raised 
in previous Rule of Law Reports remain particularly as regards the lack of thorough auditing, 
investigation  and  enforcement  of  the  rules  and  low  penalties  for  non-compliance80.  The 
Constitutional Court’s decision to annul the first round of Presidential elections of November 
2024 also referred to the financing of the election campaign from undeclared sources, including 
online, in breach of electoral legislation81. 

Corruption  and  fraud  have  been  identified  by  the  national  authorities  as  risks  in  the 
public  procurement  process,  with  some  measures  ongoing  to  address  them.  The  Flash 
Eurobarometer  on  businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  in  the  EU  shows  that  37%  of 
companies  in  Romania  (EU  average  35%)  think  that  corruption  has  prevented  them  from 
winning a public tender or a public procurement contract in practice in the last three years82. 
Procurement remains a sector with a high risk of corruption83. 45% of businesses perceive the 
level  of  independence  of  the  public  procurement  review  body  (The  National  Appeals 
Settlement  Council)  as  very  or  fairly  good84.  The  Single  Market  and  Competitiveness 
Scoreboard on access to public procurement in Romania reports 45% of single bids for 2023 
(EU average 29%). Out of the total investigations into potential cartel agreements initiated by 
the Competition Council in 2024, 75% concern public procurement procedures85. The Court of 
Accounts submits that most corruption cases, alongside bid-rigging and overpricing, seem to 
take place mostly at local level. It pleads in favour of more training on ethics for local officials, 
in particular mayors86. The number of integrity warnings issued by the electronic system to 
prevent  conflicts  of  interests  in  public  procurement  continued  to  be  stable87.  As  part  of  the 
Romanian Recovery and Resilience Plan work is ongoing to digitalise the public procurement 
process.  Electronic  submission  forms  have  been  introduced  and  the  Electronic  Public 

78   Country  visit  Romania,  Ministry  of  Justice;  letters  to  Senate  and  Chamber  of  Deputies  23  January  2025, 
Senate  letter  of  5  March  2025  with  annexed  opinion  of  its  Committee  on  Legal  Affairs,  Appointments, 
Disciplinary Matters, Immunities and Validations of 25 February 2025. 

79   Country visit Romania, Court of accounts. 
80   Ibid and 2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p.18-19. 
81   Decision 32 of 6 December 2024. 
82   Flash Eurobarometer 543 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2024). This is 8 percentage 

points above the EU average.  

83   Court of Accounts (2025), written input p. 45 and country visit Romania, Court of Accounts. 
84   Figure 59, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
85   Input from Romania to the 2025 Rule of Law report. 
86   Country visit Romania, Court of Accounts. 
87   There were 19 integrity warnings in 2024, in comparison to 21 in 2023 and 22 in 2022. Written input from 

Romania for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 41.   

11 

 
 
 
 
Procurement System is now interconnected with other registers88. With the support of the EU’s 
Technical Support Instrument, Romania has identified fraud and corruption risks in all stages 
of the public procurement process89.   

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

The  National  Audiovisual  Council  (CNA)  would  benefit  from  more  human  resources 
and  a  long-awaited  new  IT  system.  The  CNA  carried  out  its  activities  with  an  average 
number of staff of 118, for 153 approved positions90. According to some stakeholders, even 
though the CNA was more reactive in 2024 in its monitoring of audiovisual media content, it 
does not have the resources it needs to fulfil its mission effectively91. Increased tasks included 
implementing the Digital Services Act by monitoring media content on social platforms, based 
on users’ complaints, and issuing removal decisions in case of detected violations92. Some 
stakeholders also argue that the CNA’s practice of applying a single sanction for multiple and 
repeated infringements  by a broadcaster undermines the deterrent  effect  of the sanctions93. 
The long-awaited94 decision by the Government to replace the CNA’s outdated95 IT system is 
expected in 2025. A new draft Audiovisual Law96 is being discussed in the relevant standing 
committees of the Senate. Civil society organisations question the fact that the draft law would 
include  ordinary  users  of  video-sharing  platforms  in  its  scope  and  that  it  would  impose  a 
licensing obligation also for audiovisual media service providers that broadcast exclusively 
via the Internet. On 5 March 2025, the CNA launched a public consultation on extending the 
scope  of  the  Code  governing  audiovisual  content  to  video-sharing  platforms97.  The  2025 
Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) reports a medium-low risk (37%) for the independence and 
effectiveness of the media authorities98, up from low level (32%) in 2024.  

Media actors have yet to agree on self-regulation. The current Audiovisual Law encourages 
self  and  co-regulation.  However,  currently,  there  are  no  representative  media  councils  or 
ethics  codes  in  the  Romanian  media  environment99  and  various  initiatives  failed  to  gather 
enough support among journalists. Despite some talks between journalists and media players, 
journalists’ representatives are pessimistic about the chances of agreeing on self -regulation, 
arguing that the main media holdings are not willing to engage100.  

88   Court of Accounts (2025), written input, p. 45-47. 
89   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Romania. This risk 
mapping  tool  systematically  identifies  fraud  and  corruption  risks  within  Romania’s  public  procurement 
processes. It includes both general risks applicable to all stages of the procurement process and specific risks 
identified based on contract typologies or the actors involved. 

90   CNA (2023) annual report, p. 129. 
91   Country visit Romania, civil society organisations; Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania 

(2025), written input, p. 11 

92   Country visit Romania, CNA and journalists’ associations. One such Decision was issued on 5 March 2025. 
93   Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania (2025), written input, p. 11. 
94   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania p.20. 
95   Country visit Romania, CNA.  
96   Draft audiovisual law L292/2024. 
97   Country visit Romania, CNA. 
98   2025 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 11. 
99   Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania (2025), written input, p. 12; Center for Independent 

Journalism: The state of Romanian media in the 2024 super-electoral year, April 2024, page 29. 

100   Country visit Romania, journalists’ associations. 

12 

 
 
 
 
There  has  been  no  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  enhance  the  independent 
governance and editorial independence of public service media101. There have not been 
any concrete developments so far to improve the framework for the effective governance and 
editorial independence of public service media102. The bill of June 2021 to reform the law on 
public  broadcasting  and  radio  companies  remains  without  progress  in  the  Senate103.  The 
Government however intends to set up an interministerial group to identify the legislation that 
needs  to  be  amended  to  implement  the  European  Media  Freedom  Act  (EMFA)  [TBU]104. 
While  TV  continues  being  the  main  source  of  information  for  the  Romanian  public105, 
audience rates of the public national TV remain insignificant (1.4%)106. This contrasts with 
the situation of the public radio service SRR, which keeps its top position in audience rates at 
national level, including on news content and information on political affairs107. Overall, no 
progress has been made to enhance the independent governance and editorial independence 
of public service media.  

Information  on  media  ownership  beyond  the  audiovisual  sector  is  still  insufficient108. 
Information  on  media  companies’  ownership  can  be  found  in  the  National  Commercial 
Registry database against payment. Stakeholders report however some difficulties in searching 
information  in  the  Registry109,  pointing  that  the  information  contained  in  this  Registry  is 
limited  since  it  does  not  include  some  online  news  sites,  often  funded  through  opaque 
sources110.  The  government  points  to  the  possibility  to  obtain  additional  information  from 
inquiring the Real Beneficial Register. An interinstitutional group, of which the CNA will be a 
member,  will  be  set  up  to  identify  the  legislation  that  needs  to  be  amended  and  adopted  to 
implement the EMFA, including on transparency of media ownership. According to the Media 
Pluralism Monitor, transparency of media ownership remains at high risk (72%)111. 

The financing of private media  by political parties and state authorities has led to an 
increase of untransparent political advertising. Except for a few new independent outlets, 
national and local media heavily depend on state advertising and direct financial support from 
political parties. State advertising is often allocated in a non-transparent manner, without clear 

101   The 2024 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. 

102   2025 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Romania, p. 7. 
103   Legislative proposal to amend Law no. 41/1994 of 17 June 1994, on the organisation and functioning of the 

Romanian Broadcasting Company and the Romanian Television Company, Pl-x. nr. 262/2021. 

104   Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a 
common framework for media services in the internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU (European 
Media Freedom Act) 

105   Center  for  Independent  Journalism:  The  state  of  Romanian  media  in  the  2024  super-electoral  year,  April 

2024, page 4. 

106   Paginademedia.ro, AUDIENŢE, 23 January 2025. 
107   Country visit Romania, SRR. 
108   2025 Media Pluralism Monitor, Romania, p. 35. 
109   International Press Institute and Media and Journalism Research Centre: Media capture monitoring report: 

Romania, October 2024, page 24. 

110   Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania (2025), written input, p. 14 
111   2025 Media Pluralism Monitor, Romania, p. 18.  

13 

 
 
 
 
criteria112.  This  affects  the  quality  and  independence  of  their  news  content113,  as  well  as 
Romanian society’s trust in the press114. Following an increasing trend since 2015115, political 
parties spent around EUR 24.5 million in 2023 on media116, double the budget spent in 2021. 
A substantial part of these amounts was paid through advertising agencies to TV and online 
news websites, which repeatedly presented statements by politicians as journalistic content 
and not as paid-for advertisement117. This occurred also during the campaign for the elections 
to  the  European  Parliament,  with  major  political  parties  in  Romania  financing  political 
advertising such as paid-for interviews and debates conducted by journalists in programmes 
with an editorial appearance118. The ‘electoral promotion’ tag was displayed only in a limited 
number  of  cases  and  was  not  always  done  in  a  clear  manner.  An  important  element 
surrounding  the  Presidential  election  was  the  use  of  the  information  space  for  political 
campaigning which escaped the scrutiny to which political advertising is normally subject. 
On 25 February 2025, following the cancellation of the first round of the Presidential election 
of November 2024, the CNA adopted a decision detailing the types of programmes in which 
candidates can present their political programmes, opinions and messages in the context of a 
Presidential election119. The CNA decision also prohibits the sponsoring of news and political 
news  programmes  and  sets  obligations  for  broadcasters,  political  parties  and  candidates  to 
prevent misconduct during the election campaign. 

Issues on transparency and access to information remain, pending discussions on a new 
Code of Administrative Procedures. The legal framework on access to documents has not 
been  changed  yet.  The  Government  is  working  on  a  Code  of  Administrative  Procedures 
consolidating norms that regulate public institutions’ activities, including a law on access to 
public information and a transparency law. The Code will also replace the draft bill120 intended 
to update the freedom of information act. The Code aims to facilitate access to information 
instead of access to documents, which is the main justification used by public bodies. While 
journalists  welcome  this  new  approach,  they  and  civil  society  organisations  (CSOs)  are 
concerned about plans to include the latter in the Code’s scope, subjecting them to the same 
obligations as public authorities in terms of access to information121. This is likely to give rise 

112   International  Press  Institute  IPI  and  the  Media  and  Journalism  Research  Centre,  2023,  Media  Capture 

Monitoring Report: Romania, page 5. 

113   Center  for  Independent  Journalism:  The  state  of  Romanian  media  in  the  2024  super-electoral  year,  April 

2024, pages 17 to 21. 

114   Ibidem, page 19. Public trust in the press has plummeted from 80% in the 1990s to 32% in 2023. 
115   Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania (2025), written input, p. 13 
116   Center  for  Independent  Journalism:  The  state  of  Romanian  media  in  the  2024  super-electoral  year,  April 

2024, page 4. 

117   Ibidem. 
118   Active Watch (2024), ‘Time is money’, page 1; Liberties (2025) Rule of Law Report, page 68. Amounts spent 

reach EUR 9 million. 

119   Decision no. 86 of 25 February 2025, on the rules for conducting the electoral campaign for the  election of 
the President of Romania in 2025. This follows the emergency ordinance adopted by the government on 16 
January 2025 aiming to ensure the objectivity, transparency, fairness and integrity of the electoral process. 
On the same day the Government also adopted an emergency ordinance which provides sanctions, including 
a turnover tax of up to 5%, for social media companies that fail to mark campaign advertisements. 

120   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,  PL-x 
529/2020. 

121   The Government rejected the CSOs proposals to avoid assimilating them to public authorities when it comes 

to access to information.  

14 

 
 
 
to a high administrative burden that would hamper the work of investigative journalists and 
small media outlets, which are very often set up as CSOs in Romania122.   

Threats and instances of harassment of journalists remain an issue and political pressure 
on editorial independence affects journalists’ work. Since the publication of the 2024 Rule 
of  Law  Report,  three  new  alerts  have  been  recorded  for  Romania  in  the  Council  of  Europe’s 
Platform  to  Promote  the  Protection  of  Journalism  and  Safety  of  Journalists123,  relating  to 
harassment and intimidation, attacks on physical safety and integrity of journalists, and other acts 
having chilling effects on media freedom124. That  platform  registers fourteen active alerts in 
total125, and the Media Freedom Rapid Response platform has recorded 28 incidents126 since 1 
June  2024.  Strategic  lawsuits  against  public  participation  (SLAPPs)  remain  an  issue127. 
Stakeholders  estimate  that  over  90%  of  SLAPPs  do  not  have  a  cross-border  element  and 
therefore the protections under the anti-SLAPP directive would need to be extended also to 
domestic  cases  and  criminal  proceedings,  in  light  of  the  EU  Recommendation  on  anti-
SLAPPs128.  The  draft  Law  transposing  the  anti-SLAPP  Directive  has  undergone  the 
transparency checks and public consultations have been organised. It extends the protection 
and the procedural guarantees contained in the Directive to domestic cases. In 2024, following 
protests from media and human rights organisations, the General Prosecutor’s office cancelled 
a  request  by  prosecutors  from  DIICOT  asking  investigative  journalists  to  hand  over 
information  gathered  for  a  series  of  articles129.  In  March  2025,  several  media  freedom 
organisations  raised  concerns  about  the  physical  surveillance  and  wiretapping  of  an 
investigative journalist by a local branch of the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA)130, 
which confirmed however that the surveillance measures were approved by a court131. 

IV. 

OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Some  progress  has  been  made  to  implement  the  recommendation  on  effective  public 
consultations,  while  a  number  of  shortcomings  remain  in  practice132.  The  Secretariat-
General of the Government organised training sessions on best practices for transparency and 
consultation  in  law  making  for  public  officials  from  central  and  local  authorities133.  It  also 
organised  a  meeting  with  stakeholders,  including  NGOs,  to  improve  knowledge  about  e-
consultare,  a  platform  centralising  all  public  consultations  on  draft  legislation.  The 
functionality of the portal is to be expanded in 2025134 through a project funded by the EU 

122   Country visit Romania, journalists and civil society organizations. Romania has not signed the Council of 

Europe Convention on access to official documents, Tromsø, 18.VI.2009. 

123   Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, Romania. 
124   Romania has replied to all three alerts. 
125   Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists, Romania. 
126   https://www.mfrr.eu/monitor/ 
127   Member States are required to transpose the Directive into their national law by May 2026. 
128   Liberties  Rule  of  Law  Report  2025,  page  840  and  petition  signed  by  30  NGOs  on  30.11.2024 
https://apador.org/scrisoare-deschisa-impotriva-actiunilor-deintimidare-privind-libertatea-de-exprimare/). 
129   Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania, Fundatia pentru Dezvoltarea Societatii Civile (2025), 

written inputs, p. 16 and 13 respectively. 

130   Romania: Answers needed over surveillance of investigative journalist. Signed by International Press Institute 
(IPI), Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Free Press Unlimited 
(FPU), Osservatorio Balcani Caucaso Transeuropa (OBCT) and Reporters Without Borders (RSF). 

131   DNA (2025), Press release following information circulated in the media, according to which an investigative 

journalist was wiretapped and intercepted by the DNA.  

132   The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Romania  to  “step  up  efforts  to  ensure  effective  public 

consultations before the adoption of legislation”. 
133   Romanian Government (2025), written input, p. 55. 
134   Romanian Government (2025), written input, p. 56. 

15 

 
 
 
under Romania’s Recovery and Resilience Plan. CSOs and businesses however consider that 
public consultation often remains a ‘box-ticking’ exercise, with very tight deadlines, despite 
legal  requirements135.  CSOs  also  report  that  legislation  impacting  fundamental  rights  rarely 
undergoes the specific consultation required by law136. Furthermore, CSOs137 are increasingly 
worried about the wide application of an exception to the general transparency obligations in 
case of “emergency situations”, provided for in the Government Decision on procedures for 
policy  and  law  making138.  At  CSO’s  request,  the  Ombudsman139  challenged  this  provision 
before  the  Constitutional  Court140.  Overall,  however,  some  progress  was  made  to  ensure 
effective public consultations before the adoption of legislation. 

Legislative  unpredictability,  the  frequent  use  of  Government  Emergency  Ordinances, 
problems with the quality of legislation and regulatory burden remain primary concerns 
for businesses and CSOs. According to the Romanian Foreign Investment Council Business 
Sentiment Index (BSI) of September 2024141, and to the Romanian Employers’ Organisation 
Concordia142,  legislative  unpredictability  remains  an  important  concern  for  investors  and 
businesses.  Stakeholders  also  report  that  legislation  is  not  always  sufficiently  substantiated, 
and that impact assessments are often missing or inadequate143. The frequent use of GEOs, in 
particular in the fiscal area, is seen as adding to the unpredictability of legislation144. In 2024, 
the Government adopted 199 ordinances (out of which 156 GEOs), an increase compared to 
2023  (131  GEOs)145.  These  GEOs  covered  various  topics,  including  changes  to  electoral 
legislation or to the fiscal code, and accounted for a large part of new legislation146. GEOs can 
be challenged before the Constitutional Court but according to stakeholders this rarely happens 
despite requests from CSOs147.  

Over half of the companies surveyed in Romania express confidence in the effectiveness 
of investment protection. 58% of companies are very or fairly confident that investments are 
protected by law and courts148. As regards authorities relevant for economic operators, 49% 

135   Resource Center for Public Participation & Coalition NGOs for Citizens (2025), written input, p. 14. Country 
visit  Romania,  Concordia  and  Foreign  Investment  Council.  See  also  European  Semester,  Country  Report 
Romania, p. 46. 

136   Country visit Romania, CSOs (Expert Forum, Freedom House, FDSC, Centre for Public Innovation). 
    FDSC (2025) written input, p. 16. 
137   Coalition NGOs for Citizen (2022), FRA (2025). Country visit Romania, CSOs (Expert Forum, Freedom 

House, FDSC, Centre for Public Innovation). 

138   Government Decision 1173/2022 of 21 September 2022, Chapter 1.2. 
139   Supported by NGOs through an amicus curiae, see 2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, pp. 25-26. 
140   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p. 26. Centre for Public Innovation (2025), written input, p.17ff. 
141   Romanian Foreign Investment Council (2025), written input. 67% of the respondents to the BSI believe the 
legislative environment has worsened, with 80% facing challenges related to legislative uncertainties. 64% 
consider  the  regulatory  burden  as  a  major  competitive  drawback.  See  also  European  Semester,  Country 
Report Romania, pp. 46-47 and p. 60. 

142   Concordia (2025), written input. 
143   Resource Center for Public Participation & Coalition NGOs for Citizens (2025), written input, p. 14. 
144   See  e.g.  GEO  156  of  30.12.2024  on  some  fiscal-budgetary  measures  in  the  field  of  public  expenditure, 
severely criticised by businesses, notably for decreasing the revenue threshold for classification as a micro-
enterprise  from  EUR  500  000  to  EUR  250  000  in  2025,  and  further  to  EUR  100  000  in  2026.  See  also 
European Semester, Country Report Romania, p. 60. 

145  The Government considers that this increase could also be justified by the fact that the Parliament was less 

active due to the parliamentary elections of December 2024. 

146   Centre for Public Innovation (2025), written input. 
147   Country visit Romania, CSOs (Expert Forum, Freedom House, FDSC, Centre for Public Innovation). 
148   Figure  54,  2025  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  As  main  reasons  for  lack  of  confidence,  businesses  mention 
unpredictable, non-transparent administrative conduct, and difficulty to challenge administrative decisions in 

16 

 
 
 
 
perceive  the  level  of  independence  of  the  national  competition  authority  (the  Competition 
Council) as very or fairly good149. A number of judicial mechanisms are in place at the level 
of the High Court of Cassation and Justice to ensure the implementation of administrative court 
judgments, which include disciplinary actions against the responsible officials. However, these 
mechanisms do not include the possibility to quash administrative decisions for continued non-
compliance with court’s instructions, to issue binding orders to the administration to perform 
or  refrain  from  administrative  acts,  or  to  award  direct  or  consequential  damages  or 
compensation150. 

On  1  January  2025,  Romania  had  111  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, a decrease of 4 compared to the previous year151. 
At  that  time,  Romania’s  rate  of  leading  judgments  from  the  past  10  years  that  had  been 
implemented was at 40% (compared to 41% in 2024; 60% remained pending), and the average 
time that the judgments had been pending implementation was 6 years and 3 months (compared 
to 5 years and 5 months in 2024)152. The oldest leading judgment, pending implementation for 
close to 20 years, concerns structural deficiencies in the mechanisms set up to afford restitution 
of or compensation for properties nationalised during the communist period153. As regards the 
respect  of  payment  deadlines,  on  31  December  2024  there  were  99  cases  in  total  awaiting 
confirmation  of  payments  (compared  to  176  in  2023)154.  On  16  June  2025,  the  number  of 
leading judgments pending implementation had decreased to 101155.  

In December 2024, the Constitutional Court cancelled the first round of the Presidential 
election. In its decision of 6 December156, the Romanian Constitutional Court concluded that 
the electoral process had been tampered with, due to multiple irregularities and violations of 
the electoral law, which distorted equal opportunities and the freedom to vote and affected the 
transparency of the campaign process. On this basis, Presidential elections were repeated in 
May 2025. The Venice Commission published a report on the conditions and legal standards 
whereby a Constitutional Court could invalidate an election ex officio157.  

A  final  decision  is  still  pending  regardingthe  accreditation  of  National  Human  Rights 
Institutions158. In June 2024, the Government issued a proposal to support the accreditation 
by GANHRI159 of two national institutions: the Romanian Institute for Human Rights (RIHR) 
and  the  People’s  Advocate160.  The  accreditation  process  was  however  paused  following 

court  (32%);  frequent  changes  in  legislation  or  concerns  about  quality  of  the  law-making  process  (38%); 
difficulty to obtain a fair compensation/ to protect property when something goes wrong (32%). 

149   The  Competition  Council  is  an  autonomous  administrative  body  aimed  at  protecting  and  stimulating 
competition in order to ensure a normal competitive environment.  Figure 60, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
150   Figure 49, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. The data presented reflects exclusively the mechanisms in place at 
the level of the highest administrative jurisdictions; the same or other mechanisms may be in place at lower 
instance administrative courts. 

151   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe. On 12 June 2025, 

Romania had closed 240 cases out of 341 leading cases (70%). 

152   All figures calculated by the European Implementation Network (EIN) and based on the number of cases that 
are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2025. EIN (2025), written input, p. 7-8. 
153   Judgment of the ECtHR, 557001/00, Strain and Others v. Romania, pending implementation since 2005.  
154   Council of Europe (2025), p. 157.   
155   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
156   Decision 32 of 6 December 2024. 
157   The report followed a request from the President of the parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.  
158   The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Romania  to  “take  forward  the  process  for  obtaining 
accreditation for two National Human Rights Institutions, taking into account the UN Paris Principles”. 

159   Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. 
160   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p. 28. 

17 

 
 
 
questions  from  GANHRI’s  Sub-committee  on  Accreditation  (SCA)  pertaining  to  the 
accreditation of more than one NHRI from one United Nations member state, with the same 
geographical  scope161.  In  addition,  the  SCA  identified  non-compliance  issues  for  both 
institutions, particularly regarding the involvement of state authorities162. ENNHRI163 and UN 
bodies164 have recommended changes to the statute of the RIHR165 for it to comply with the 
Paris Principles166, as well as more resources167. The vacancy rate for expert staff is at 70%, 
and the budget was cut by 50% for 2025, despite the RIRH’s new responsibility as Romania’s 
Anti-SLAPP  Focal  Point168.  The  RIHR  also  lacks  the  resources  to  move  to  new  premises, 
which is necessary for security reasons169. Under these conditions, there is a real risk that the 
RIRH ceases its functioning in the coming months. Conversely, successive amendments to the 
legislation on the organisation and operation of the People’s Advocate led to the consolidation 
and development of its mandate170. The People’s Advocate mandate ended in June 2024, but 
the Parliament has not yet selected a new one and no procedure in this respect was launched. 
The CSOs have called for a fair and transparent process171. Therefore, there has been no further 
progress on the accreditation of NHRIs. 

A Strategy for Open Government was adopted to address the increasing challenges for 
civil  society  organisations.  Civil  society  space  continues  to  be  considered  narrowed172.  In 
April  2025,  a  Strategy  for  Open  Government  in  Romania  2025-2030  was  adopted  by  the 
government173, in line with its obligations as OECD accession candidate174, the OECD Civic 
Space Review of Romania175 and a preparatory document adopted by the Secretariat General 
of the Government176. The latter took stock of the increasing challenges for CSOs, describing 
the sector as precarious and struggling to access funds and premises, with higher administrative 
barriers than in other EU countries177. Despite progress in the sector’s development overall, 

161  The  GANHRI,  at  its  meeting  on  26-28  November  2024,  requested  the  SCA,  in  consultation  with  SCA 
members and observers, to provide a background note on the issue of the co-existence of multiple NHRIs/ 
NHRIs from the same UN Member State. 

162   RIHR (2025), written contribution, included in the national contribution, p. 63. 
163   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p. 29 and ENNHRI (2024), Rule of Law Report, p. 425. 
164   Notably the UN Committees on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, on the Elimination of All Forms of 

Discrimination against Women, on Human Rights. 

165   Law no. 9/1991. 
166   The Paris Principles set out the main criteria that NHRIs are required to meet: establishment under primary 
law  or  the  Constitution,  a  broad  mandate  to  promote  and  protect  human  rights,  formal  and  functional 
independence,  pluralism,  representing  all  aspects  of  society,  adequate  resources  and  financial  autonomy, 
freedom to address any human rights issue arising, annual reporting on the national human rights situation, 
cooperation with national and international actors, including civil society. 

167   ENNHRI (2025), written contribution, p. 3 and 5-6. Country visit, Romania, RIHR. 
168   “Anti-SLAPP” Recommendation (EU) 2022/758. 
169  Country visit Romania, RIHR. 
170   People’s Advocate (2025), written contribution, p. 62 of the national contribution. 
171   https://www.stareademocratiei.ro/2024/12/11/viitorul-avocat-al-poporului-trebuie-sa-fie-un-garant-real-al-

protejariidrepturilor-fundamentale.  Centre  of  Public  Innovation  (2025),  written  contribution,  p. 19.  FDSC 
(2025) written input, p. 15. 

172   Rating by CIVICUS; ratings are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed 

and closed. 

173   by Government Decision 358/ April 9, 2025. 
174   OECD, Romania. 
175   OECD; Civic Space Review of Romania, July 2023. 
176   Public consultation by the General Secretariat of the Government (2024), Empowering citizens, strengthening 

democracy: insights on open government and civic space in Romania. 

177   Referring to World Bank (2020): Individual and company donations are the main funding sources for CSOs, 
followed by EU and international foundations, whereas public funding plays a minor role. ENNHRI (2025), 
written contribution, p. 7. Civil Liberties’ Union for Europe (2025). 

18 

 
 
 
many organisations struggle to make their voices heard in public debates and decision-making 
processes178.  The  Strategy  makes  a  number  of  recommendations  to  address  these  different 
issues, including through legislation. Meanwhile, CSOs continue to report attacks, also from 
the government179. Environmental CSOs feel particularly targeted by SLAPP cases180 and 75 
of them signed an open letter to the Prime Minister, detailing what they perceive as systematic 
challenges to their advocacy work. CSOs criticise the fact that draft legislation, which would 
simplify certain procedures for them181, has not been debated in Parliament182. Despite broad 
consensus, a draft law to amend the law governing the right to peaceful assembly is stalled in 
the Parliament since 2021183. 

178   Referring to OECD (2022). The European Coordination for Civil Society Organisations (2025), Joint Civil 

Society Contribution on Civic Space to the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

179   Civil Liberties’ Union for Europe (2025). The European Coordination for Civil Society Organisations (2025), 

Joint Civil Society Contribution on Civic Space to the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

180   Resource Center for Public Participation & Coalition NGOs for Citizens (2025), written input, p. 17. 
181   2024 Rule of Law Report, Romania, p.29. 
182   FDSC(2025) and Centre for Public Innovation (2025) written contributions, resp. p. 17 and p. 20. 
183   Law 60/1991. Resource Center for Public Participation & Coalition NGOs for Citizens (2025), written input, 

p. 17. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2024 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en. 

found 

be 

at 

Active Watch (2024), Time is money. 

APADOR-CH (2025), Contribution from APADOR-CH for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Center for Independent Journalism (2024), The state of Romanian media in the 2024 super-electoral 
year. 

Centre for Public Innovation (2025), Contribution from the Centre for Public Innovation for the 2025 
Rule of Law Report. 

Centre  for  Media  Pluralism  and  Media  Freedom  (2025),  Media  pluralism  monitor  2025, 
https://cmpf.eui.eu/media-pluralism-monitor/mpm-2025. 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Romania,  https://monitor.civicus.org/country/romania/. 

Concordia (2025), Contribution from Concordia for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Consiliul Național al Audiovizualului (2023), Annual Report. 

Council Implementing Decision on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan 
for Romania. 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2025), Supervision  of  the  execution  of  judgments  and 
decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, 18th Annual Report of the Committee of Ministers, 
https://rm.coe.int/gbr-2001-18e-rapport-annuel-2024/1680b4d77d.  

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2024), Annual Report on the Supervision of the execution 
of judgments and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. 

Council of Europe (2025), Contribution from the Council of Europe for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Council  of  Europe,  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists  – 
Romania, https://www.coe.int/en/web/media-freedom/romania. 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2022), Romania - Urgent Opinion of the Venice Commission 
on  three  laws  concerning  the  justice  system  (CDL-AD(2022)045).Court  of  Accounts  (2025), 
Contribution from the Court of Accounts for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Council of European Bars (CCBE) (2025), Contribution from the Council of European Bars  for the 
2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Court  of  Justice  of 
ECLI:EU:C:2023:606. 

the  European  Union, 

judgment  of  24  July  2023,  Lin,  C-107/23, 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2025),  Flash  Eurobarometer  557  on  Businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2025),  Special  Eurobarometer  561  on  Citizens’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU. 

20 

 
 
ENNHRI (2025), State of the Rule of Law in Europe. 

European Civic Forum (2024), Civic Space Report 

European Commission (2025), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2023), 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Romania. 

European Commission (2024), 2024 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Romania. 

European Commission (2025), Country report Romania, SWD(2025) 223 final. 

European  Coordination  for  Civil  Society  Organisations  (2025),  Joint  Civil  Society  Contribution  on 
Civic Space to the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

European  Court  of  Human  Rights,  Judgment  of  30  November  2005,  Strain  and  Others  v. 
Romania, 57001/00. 

European Implementation Network (EIN) (2025), written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

European  Network  of  Councils  of  the  Judiciary  (2025),  Contribution  from  the  ENCJ  for  the  2025 
European Commission Rule of Law Report. 

European Public Prosecutor’s Office (2025), 2024 Annual Report. 

Expert Forum (2025), Contribution from the Expert Forum for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

External Audit of the Management of National Integrity Agency for 2023 (2024),  Factual Findings 
Report. 

Foreign Investors Council (2025), Contribution of the Foreign Investors Council for the 2025 Rule of 
Law Report. 

Fundamental Rights Agency (2025), Report on the Civic Space 2024. 

Fundatia pentru Dezvoltarea Societatii Civile (Foundation for the Development of civil society) (2025), 
Contribution from Fundatia pentru Dezvoltarea Societatii Civile for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Fundatia pentru Dezvoltarea Societatii Civile (Foundation for the Development of civil society) (2024), 
Romania: The non-governmental sector - profiles, trends, challenges. 

Fundatia pentru Dezvoltarea Societatii Civile (Foundation for the Development of civil society) (2025), 
Point of view on the draft Code of Administrative Procedure. 

High Court of Cassation and Justice, Decision 37/2024 of 17 June 2024. 

International  Press  Institute  and  Media  and  Journalism  Research  Centre  (2024),  Media  capture 
monitoring report: Romania. 

Judicial Inspection (2025), Contribution from the Judicial Inspection to the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (2025), Contribution from the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung for the 2025 Rule 
of Law Report. 

21 

 
 
Liberties (2025), Rule of Law Report. 

Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés – MEDEL (2025), Contribution from MEDEL 
to the 2025 Rule of Law Report (Romania). 

National Audiovisual Council (2025), Contribution from the National Audiovisual Council for the 2025 
Rule of Law Report. 

National  Anti-Corruption  Directorate  (2025),  Contribution  from  the  National  Anti-Corruption 
Directorate for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

National Integrity Agency (2025), Contribution from the National Integrity Agency for the 2025 Rule 
of Law Report. 

Network of the Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union (2025), Contribution 
of the Network of the Presidents of the Supreme Judicial Courts of the European Union to the 2025 
Rule of Law Report. 

OECD  (2025),  Strengthening  the  framework  on  pre-  and  post-public  employment  in  Romania, 
https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/strengthening-the-framework-on-pre-and-post-public-
employment-in-romania_24381cc1-en.html.  

OECD (2023), Civic Space Review of Romania. 

Office of the Prosecutor General (2025), Contribution from the Office of the Prosecutor General for the 
2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Paginademedia.ro, Audienţe, 23 January 2025. 

Panel of the high-level experts (2024), Report. 

Parliament, letters to Senate and Chamber of Deputies 23 January 2025, Senate letter of 5 March 2025 
with  annexed  opinion  of  its  Committee  on  Legal  Affairs,  Appointments,  Disciplinary  Matters, 
Immunities and Validations of 25 February 2025]  

Reporters Without Borders and Active Watch Romania (2025), Contribution from Reporters Without 
Borders and Active Watch Romania for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Resource Centre for Public Participation and Coalition (2025), Contribution from Resource Centre for 
Public Participation and Coalition for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Romanian Government (2025), Input from Romania for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Romania’s Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

Strategy for an open government in Romania, 2025-2030. 

Superior Council of Magistracy (2025), Contribution from the Superior Council of Magistracy for the 
2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Transparency International (2025), Corruption Perceptions Index 2024. 

UNBR (Romanian Bar Association), Independence of the legal profession in Romania: Analysis for the 
period 21 December 2023 – 21 December 2024. 

22 

 
 
United  Nations  Human  Rights,  Regional  Office  Europe  (2025),  Contribution  from  United  Nations 
Human Rights, Regional Office Europe for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

World Bank Group (2024), Romania: Reflections on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice 
Sector.  

23 

 
 
 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Romania 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March 2025 with: 

•  Active Watch 
•  Agentia Nationala pentru Achizitii Publice (ANAP) 
•  ANABI 
•  Asociația Forumului Judecătorilor din România 
•  Asociația „Inițiativa pentru justiție” 
•  Asociația Judecătorilor pentru Apărarea Drepturilor Omului 
•  Asociația Magistraților din România  
•  Asociatia Mișcarea pentru apărarea statutului procurorilor 
•  Asociaţia Procurorilor din România 
•  Centrul de Resurse Juridice 
•  Center for Public Innovation 
•  Civic Radauti Association 
•  Consiliul National al Audiovizualului 
•  Court of Accounts 
•  Expert Forum  
•  Freedom House 
•  Fundația pentru Dezvoltarea Societății Civile 
•  Funky Citizens 
•  G4Media 
•  High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ) 
• 
•  Judicial Inspection 
•  Legislative Council 
•  Ministry of Justice  
•  National Bar Association (UNBR) 
•  National Directorate against Corruption (DNA) 
•  National Institute of the Magistracy 
•  National Integrity Agency 
•  National Radio (RRA) 
•  National TV (TVR) 
•  Ombudsperson 
•  Prosecutor General attached to the HCCJ 
•  Romanian Business Leaders 
•  Secretariat General of the Government 
•  Superior Council of the Magistracy  
•  Uniunea Nationala a Judecatorilor din Romania (UNJR) 

IRDO (Romanian Institute for Human Rights) 

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

•  Amnesty International  
•  Araminta  

24 

 
 
 
•  Civil Liberties Union for Europe   
•  Civil Society Europe   
•  European Civic Forum   
•  European Partnership for Democracy  
•  European Youth Forum,  
• 
• 
•  JEF Europe  
•  Philea – Philanthropy Europe Association.  
•  Transparency International   

International Commission of Jurists   
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)  

25