The judge’s gavel of the Constitutional Court of Romania (CCR) lies on the stand prior a session at the CCR headquarters in Bucharest, Romania, 24 September 2025. Photo: EPA/ROBERT GHEMENT
The Judicial Inspectorate, the body responsible for overseeing the professional conduct of judges and prosecutors in Romania, announced on Friday that it has opened preliminary checks into accusations made by several magistrates in a recent media investigation alleging corruption, undue influence and other deeply troubling practices within Romania’s judiciary.
The media report, released on Tuesday by the investigative outlet Recorder, includes on-camera testimonies – some given anonymously – from judges and prosecutors who describe what they call entrenched informal networks operating within the system. According to their accounts, these networks influence how cases are assigned, pressure magistrates to deliver favourable rulings in sensitive files, and sidelines those who refuse to comply.
The documentary claims that judges who decline to follow “recommendations” from senior judicial figures are quietly removed from cases involving high-profile defendants, particularly politicians or powerful businesspeople. Several magistrates also recount how disciplinary procedures have allegedly been weaponised to intimidate or discredit colleagues who resist such pressures, creating what some describe as a climate of fear and self-censorship.
The allegations have sparked significant public and institutional reactions. Both President Nicușor Dan and Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan have acknowledged the seriousness of the claims and called for further steps to clarify the situation. President Dan stressed that “the solution to the problems raised [in the documentary] is still within the justice system”, inviting magistrates to a meeting on December 22 to discuss the challenges and possible remedies.
Meanwhile, nearly 200 judges and prosecutors issued a joint statement on Thursday asserting that Romania’s justice system has been effectively “captured” by the highest levels of judicial authority and has, in their view, been distorted to serve the interests of influential political and economic actors. They argue that the revelations presented by Recorder represent only “the tip of the iceberg” and warn that the credibility of the entire judicial system is now at risk.
However, Lia Savonea, president of the High Court of Cassation and Justice – who features prominently in the documentary and is accused by some magistrates of contributing to the alleged “capture” of the system – rejected the accusations. In a televised statement, she argued that the testimonies in the documentary are not backed by verifiable facts and include claims that do not reflect reality.
Legal experts say the breadth of the reaction within the judiciary is unprecedented and signals mounting frustration. “The documentary brought to the public, in accessible language, things that were more or less known – cases where major corruption files were closed due to excessively favourable interpretations of the law,” said Raluca Pruna, a former justice minister.
She warned that if the issues raised are left unaddressed, public trust in the judiciary, already weakened by years of political conflict over anti-corruption reforms and judicial independence, could deteriorate even further.
