Being a defendant in Romania: practical rights guide

1. Why the moment you become a “defendant” matters

Romanian criminal procedure uses a few technical labels for the person under investigation:

“suspect” – there are reasonable indications that you may have committed a criminal offence, but the criminal action has not yet been formally brought against you (Articles 77–78 of the Code of Criminal Procedure – CPP).
“defendant” (inculpat) – the prosecution has formally brought the criminal action against you; in other words, the State is no longer just “checking a suspicion”, it is saying: “we accuse you of committing offence X, in legal classification Y”.

From this moment:

you can be targeted by preventive measures (judicial control, house arrest, pre-trial detention);
you have a full set of procedural rights listed in Article 83 CPP (right to silence, right to a lawyer, right to evidence in defence, right to access the file, and more);
your statements, silence and procedural choices will be analysed by prosecutors and judges when they assess both guilt and sentence.

In other words, the transition from “suspect” to “defendant” is not just a change of label – it is the moment when the criminal justice system fully turns towards you and you need to start using your rights proactively, not just “going along” with the investigation.

2. The legal framework: Romanian law, Constitution, ECHR and EU law

2.1. Code of Criminal Procedure

The main rules on the status and rights of the defendant are in the Romanian Code of Criminal Procedure, adopted by Law no. 135/2010. The official consolidated version can be consulted on the Ministry of Justice’s Portal Legislativ:

👉 Law no. 135/2010 – Code of Criminal Procedure (legislatie.just.ro)

Key provisions for defendants:

Article 10 CPP – the right to defence, which must be ensured at every stage;
Articles 77–78 CPP – suspect and Article 82 CPP – defendant (when the criminal action is brought against a person);
Article 83 CPP – rights of the defendant (a detailed list of rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to a lawyer);
Article 108 CPP – the obligation to inform you of your rights and of the legal classification of the charge.

2.2. Romanian Constitution

Two constitutional guarantees are particularly important for defendants:

Article 23 – individual freedom and personal safety, which protects you against arbitrary arrest and detention;
Article 24 – the right to defence, which requires authorities to give you the time and facilities necessary to prepare and exercise your defence.

The official text is available on the website of the Constitutional Court:

👉 Constitution of Romania – CCR

2.3. Article 6 ECHR – the right to a fair trial

At European level, defendants are protected by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees:

the right to a fair and public hearing,
the presumption of innocence,
the right to legal assistance,
the right to examine witnesses and to present evidence.

The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) – accessible via the HUDOC database – has been crucial for shaping Romanian criminal procedure (for example on access to a lawyer and on the admissibility of statements given without a lawyer).

👉 HUDOC – European Court of Human Rights database

2.4. EU directives on suspects’ and defendants’ rights

Romania, as an EU Member State, must comply with several directives which set minimum standards for suspects and defendants across the EU:

Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer and the right to communicate upon deprivation of liberty;
Directive (EU) 2016/343 on the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at trial;
Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings;
Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings.

A 2021 national report on Romania (CROSS-JUSTICE project) confirms that Articles 78 and 83 CPP were interpreted as the main transposition tools for these directives in Romanian law.

3. What “defendant” really means in practice

3.1. How you become a defendant

You formally become a defendant when the prosecutor issues an ordinance to bring the criminal action against you (ordonanță de punere în mișcare a acțiunii penale).

From that point:

you are named in the file as “inculpat”,
the accusation is no longer abstract – it is tied to you personally,
procedural measures (e.g. seizure, preventive measures) can be taken directly against you as a defendant.

Article 108 CPP then requires that you be informed, in a language you understand, of:

the status in which you are heard (defendant),
the act for which you are accused,
the legal classification (article/paragraph/letter from the Criminal Code),
your rights and obligations.

3.2. Why the suspect/defendant distinction matters

Many people think “I’m already in trouble anyway, so it doesn’t matter if they call me suspect or defendant”. Legally and strategically, it matters a lot:

as a suspect, the investigation is still open-ended and often focuses on collecting information and clarifying what happened;
as a defendant, the authorities have crossed the line into formal accusation, which means:
- you are one step closer to trial and possible conviction;
- your answers (or silence) will be assessed in a much more adversarial context;
- the full catalogue of defendant’s rights under Article 83 CPP becomes central for your defence strategy.

4. The main rights of the defendant – one by one

Article 83 CPP sets out a detailed list of rights. Below are the most important ones, translated into practical language and connected to international standards.

4.1. The right to remain silent and not to incriminate yourself

You have the right not to give any statement throughout the criminal proceedings. Exercise of this right:

cannot be sanctioned;
cannot be interpreted as an admission of guilt in itself;
is protected by both Romanian law and Article 6 ECHR as part of the presumption of innocence.

Directive (EU) 2016/343 explicitly recognises the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself as core elements of the presumption of innocence.

In practice, it is perfectly legitimate to say:

“I understand the accusation, but at this stage I choose to remain silent and will decide later, together with my lawyer, whether I will make a statement.”

Once you start talking, everything you say may be used as evidence – and it is often very difficult to “walk back” statements given in a moment of pressure.

4.2. The right to be informed about the accusation

You have the right:

to know exactly what you are accused of (facts, approximate date and place, alleged role);
to know the legal classification (e.g. Article 228 Criminal Code – theft, Article 360 – illegal access to a computer system);
to be informed about any change of the legal classification, for example from simple theft to qualified theft.

This right is also guaranteed by Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information in criminal proceedings, which requires a written “letter of rights” for suspects and defendants.

4.3. The right to a lawyer

You have the right:

to choose a lawyer you trust,
or, if you cannot afford one or you are in a situation where defence is mandatory, to be assisted by a court-appointed lawyer (official defence).

Article 10 CPP and Article 83 CPP guarantee the right to defence, while Directive 2013/48/EU sets EU-wide minimum standards on access to a lawyer.

The ECtHR’s Salduz v. Turkey judgment has become a landmark: the Grand Chamber held that, as a rule, suspects must have access to a lawyer from the first interrogation; statements obtained without a lawyer cannot be the sole basis of a conviction.

In practical terms:

you have the right to speak privately with your lawyer;
your conversations with the lawyer are confidential;
renouncing your right to a lawyer must be voluntary and unequivocal.

4.4. The right to access the case file

Subject to certain temporary restrictions at the very beginning of the investigation, you and your lawyer have the right to inspect and obtain copies from the file so that you can:

understand what evidence exists against you;
prepare your defence and decide whether to remain silent or to give a statement;
identify potential irregularities (e.g. search warrants that are too broad, unlawfully obtained evidence).

National and EU-level reports (for example, from the EU Fundamental Rights Agency and the CROSS-JUSTICE project) show that access to the file is one of the most important tools for an effective defence.

4.5. The right to present evidence in your favour

You are not a passive object in the case. As a defendant, you may:

propose witnesses (people who can support your version of events);
present documents, e-mails, invoices, medical records or other material evidence;
request expert opinions (for example in IT, accounting, medicine);
ask for re-examination or completion of an existing expert report.

This right reflects Article 6(3) ECHR – the right to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses under the same conditions as witnesses against you.

4.6. The right to make motions and raise procedural objections

Article 83 CPP also guarantees the right to file motions and raise objections (nulities, inadmissibility, exclusion of evidence, etc.).

Typical examples:

challenging the lawfulness of a house search or a body search;
arguing that a computer search went beyond the scope authorised by the warrant;
invoking violations of the right to a lawyer or of the right to remain silent and requesting the exclusion of statements given in breach of these rights.

In Romanian practice, many of these objections are raised during the pre-trial chamber phase, before the merits of the case are examined.

4.7. The right to an interpreter and translation

If you do not speak or understand Romanian well enough, you have the right to:

free interpretation during questioning and hearings;
translation of key documents (for example, the indictment and the judgment).

This right stems from both the CPP and Directive 2010/64/EU, and its violation can lead to the annulment of procedural acts and exclusion of evidence, as confirmed by FRA and national reports on Romania.

5. Common myths about being a defendant in Romania

Myth 1: “If I stay silent, the judge will think I’m guilty”

Silence is often perceived as “suspicious”, but legally:

the right to remain silent is protected by Article 83 CPP and by Article 6 ECHR;
the EU Presumption of Innocence Directive (2016/343) explicitly protects the right to silence and the privilege against self-incrimination;
courts must not draw automatic conclusions of guilt from your silence, especially when the prosecution has not first produced strong evidence.

In many complex cases, speaking too early – before you actually see the file – does more damage than good.

Myth 2: “A court-appointed lawyer is always useless”

In reality:

court-appointed (ex officio) lawyers are bound by the same ethical and professional duties as privately hired lawyers;
the ECtHR has underlined that the right to a lawyer must be practical and effective, not theoretical or illusory – and this applies equally to ex officio defence.

If you feel that your ex officio lawyer is not defending you properly, you can:

request a different ex officio lawyer if there are serious reasons (conflict of interest, lack of communication);
choose a lawyer of your own at any time.

Myth 3: “If I sign the statement, it means I admit everything”

Signing a statement usually means:

you confirm that the text reflects what was read out to you;
you acknowledge that you were informed of your rights and that this is what you said.

You can – and should – ask for your objections to be recorded in the statement or in a separate note (for example: “I was not given time to consult my lawyer”, “the interpreter was not independent”).

Refusing to sign does not automatically invalidate the document, but a clear written objection may later help your lawyer to challenge its reliability.

6. ECHR case-law and EU directives as tools in your defence

6.1. Salduz and the right to a lawyer from the first interrogation

In Salduz v. Turkey (Grand Chamber, 2008), the ECtHR held that, as a general rule, suspects and defendants must have access to a lawyer from the first questioning by the police, and that the absence of a lawyer can irretrievably prejudice the fairness of the trial.

This case has influenced:

amendments to national laws (including Romanian CPP);
the adoption of Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer;
ECtHR judgments against several states, including Romania, where defendants were questioned or convicted without effective legal assistance.

6.2. The Presumption of Innocence Directive (2016/343)

Directive (EU) 2016/343, applicable to Romania, clarifies that Member States must ensure that:

suspects and defendants are not publicly presented as guilty before conviction;
public authorities (including prosecutors and police) use careful language in press releases;
the burden of proof remains with the prosecution;
defendants have the right to be present at their trial and to obtain a new trial if they were judged in absentia without sufficient guarantees.

Academic analysis has shown that this directive pushes national courts – including the Court of Justice of the EU – to bring their case-law closer to ECHR standards and to avoid divergences in the protection level of defendants’ rights.

6.3. Using European standards before Romanian courts

In practice, defence lawyers often rely on:

specific ECtHR judgments to argue for the exclusion of evidence or for a more lenient sentence;
the EU directives on access to a lawyer, presumption of innocence, and interpretation/translation when arguing violations of rights during police custody or interrogation.

Romanian courts are increasingly used to such arguments, especially in serious cases (corruption, organised crime, cybercrime).

7. The first 24–48 hours as a defendant: a practical checklist

Once you find out that you are a defendant:

Ask clearly: “What exactly am I accused of? Which article of the Criminal Code?”
Ask to speak to a lawyer before any detailed questioning.
Do not rush into giving a full statement before you and your lawyer have seen at least the core evidence.
Gather documents and information that support your version (contracts, e-mails, GPS data, CCTV, medical records).
Write down a timeline of events – dates, times, places, potential witnesses; memory fades quickly.
Avoid talking in detail about the case on the phone or social media; such conversations may be intercepted or used against you.

Discuss with your lawyer:

realistic sentencing ranges and whether alternative solutions (mediation, plea agreements, deferred prosecution) are possible;
the risk of preventive measures (especially pre-trial detention) and how to reduce it with documents and guarantees;
what evidence you should request to be gathered as soon as possible (for example, CCTV footage that is overwritten after 30 days).

8. How the status of defendant connects to other procedural measures

Being a defendant often goes hand-in-hand with intrusive measures such as:

house searches – which require a judicial warrant and are regulated by Articles 158–165 CPP;
body searches – governed by Articles 165–166 CPP;
computer searches – under Article 168 CPP, covering phones, laptops, cloud accounts and other data carriers;
preventive measures – from judicial control to pre-trial detention.

To understand the full picture, it often helps to read specialised guides on each measure, for example:

A coherent defence strategy treats your status as defendant and these measures as parts of the same film, not separate episodes.

9. Final warning and practical takeaway

Being recorded as a defendant in a criminal file is a turning point:

it does not mean you are guilty;
it does mean that the State has taken a formal accusatory stance against you;
from that moment, how you use your rights – or fail to use them – can change the outcome of the case.

Key ideas to keep in mind:

do not treat Article 83 CPP as a decorative list – treat it as a toolkit;
insist on your right to a lawyer from the very first interrogation;
do not underestimate the power of silence when you and your lawyer still lack access to key evidence;
document every irregularity and discuss with your lawyer how to turn it into a procedural argument (nullity, exclusion of evidence, ECtHR-based complaint).

No general article can replace a tailored, confidential discussion with a lawyer who has your file in front of him. But understanding the basic architecture of your rights as a defendant in Romania is the first step from fear and confusion towards informed control over your defence.