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

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}
Offentligt
KOM (2025) 0900 - SWD-dokument
Europaudvalget 2025
1
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.
2
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.
3
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).
4
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.
5
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.
6
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.
37
Data from Special Eurobarometer 561 (2025) and Flash Eurobarometer 557 (2025). See also European
Semester, Country Report Romania, p. 62.
7
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.
8
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.
9
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.
10
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.
11
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.
12
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.
13
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.
14
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.
15
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.
16
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
17
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.
18
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).
19
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.
20
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 be found at https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en.
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 the European Union, judgment of 24 July 2023, Lin, C-107/23,
ECLI:EU:C:2023:606.
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.
21
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.
22
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.
23
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.
24
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)
• IRDO (Romanian Institute for Human Rights)
• 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)
* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:
• Amnesty International
• Araminta
25
• Civil Liberties Union for Europe
• Civil Society Europe
• European Civic Forum
• European Partnership for Democracy
• European Youth Forum,
• International Commission of Jurists
• International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
• JEF Europe
• Philea – Philanthropy Europe Association.
• Transparency International