Politicians from Romania, forced to declare their meetings. Lawyer: “if the visit is declared, the suspicion that it would be something illegitimate”

Parliamentarians, like decision-makers in central and local administration, will be required to declare meetings with representatives of various private interests. Criminal Law Professor Sergiu Bogdan explains what this means for corruption in Romania in the context of the Fanel Bogos case.

Fănel Bogos used a liberal leader to reach Bolojan. PHOTO: Personal archive

In the European Parliament, meetings between MEPs and representatives of private interests are recorded in a public register.

This will also happen in Romania, after a few days ago, the Parliament adopted a draft law that establishes the Single Register of Transparency of Interests (RUTI) – a digital platform through which members of the Parliament will be obliged to declare meetings with third parties interested in influencing legislative initiatives under debate.

AUR and SOS appealed to the CCR, but the appeal was rejected.

The discussion is very current in the context of the case of businessman Fănel Bogos, detained by DNA Iasi prosecutors after allegedly intervening with various people in order to have the sanctions ordered by DSVSA Vaslui lifted following the appearance of an outbreak of salmonellosis at one of his chicken farms. The businessman also reached the Prime Minister of Romania, Ilie Bolojan.

What effect does this law have with regard to the corruption of politicians in Romania and where is the line drawn between the criminal zone and the legitimate interest when a politician meets a businessman or a lobbyist, lawyer Sergiu Bogdan, professor of Criminal Law at the Babeș-Bolyai University, explained to “Adevărul”.

The government has a Transparency Register. What does this mean?

Such a Single Register of Transparency of Interests (RUTI) has been in place across government since 2022 and was developed as a requirement of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan. RUTI is an online platform administered and managed by the General Secretariat of the Government.

In this platform, the decision-makers register the meetings between them and the specialized groups that show, on their own initiative, their interest in a certain field that falls under the regulatory competence of the central and/or local public administration in order to promote a public policy initiative, and the meetings are displayed publicly.

The objective of RUTI is to ensure transparency regarding the meetings between decision-makers and different civil society actors interested in persuading the former to take a public policy initiative or modify an existing public policy.

The specialized groups in civil society covered by RUTI are representatives of: company with legal personality, association, foundation, federation, religious/cult organization or associated with a cult, trade union organization, employers' organization, chamber of commerce, associative structure of local public administration, other types of legally constituted organizations, authorized natural person, sole proprietorship, family enterprise, individual practice, associate practice, professional society, with or without legal personality or any official or informal group/network that has an interest in a certain field that falls under the regulatory competence of a public institution, in order to promote a public policy initiative.

They can register, voluntarily, by accessing the registration form and assuming compliance with the RUTI Code of Conduct. The information about the specialized group already registered in the RUTI platform will be updated by the RUTI Technical Secretariat (ST RUTI) at the request of the representative of the specialized group, whenever changes occur and it deems necessary.

The decision-makers are represented by: Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Head of the Prime Minister's Chancellery, Secretary General of the Government, minister, state adviser, secretary of state, assimilated to these categories of public functions, dignitary leader of other central and local public administration authorities, it is shown on the Government's website, where you can see the meetings between the decision-makers and the interested groups.

Will we have less corruption? “If it is not registered, there will be suspicions”

A similar system will be implemented in parliament. The Constitutional Court decided, on Wednesday, with unanimity of votes, that the objection of unconstitutionality formulated by the deputies belonging to the parliamentary groups of AUR and SOS Romania.

The discussion is very current in the context of the case of businessman Fănel Bogos, detained by DNA Iasi prosecutors after allegedly intervening with various people in order to have the sanctions ordered by DSVSA Vaslui lifted following the appearance of an outbreak of salmonellosis at one of his chicken farms. This file brings into discussion the limits in which the meeting between a businessman and a politician is circumscribed in the criminal area or related to a legitimate interest.

Prime Minister Bolojan told, on Thursday evening, on Digi24, the details of the meeting from the Government, with the PNL leader Vaslui, Mihai Barbu, and the businessman Fanel Bogos, showing that during the meeting, which lasted for about a quarter of an hour, the businessman presented him with the problems he has from the state authorities, and he had “a slight shock”, because he also presented aspects that are not strictly from the political area, given that he had initially been informed that at the meeting will exclusively discuss political issues.

President Nicușor Dan claimed that the interaction between politicians and businessmen is normal “Interaction between politicians and businessmen is normal. Now, what does interaction mean? What is being discussed there, of course that a principled limit must not be exceeded. And I did not see that Mr. Bolojan had exceeded this principled limit. That's my answer”President Nicusor Dan said on Friday.

Asked what impact the Registry will have on meetings of this kind, in the context where there is almost a custom in Romania according to which when I have a problem I turn to knowledge to solve it and do not go through the legal channels, Bogdan claimed: “Something will change in the sense that you can also defend yourself. If the visit was officially entered in this register, the businessman declared that he was going there, then the suspicion that something illegitimate was going to happen. Now, public opinion may think that there is something illegitimate in this meeting, only because of the way the businessman reached the Romanian prime minister. This register seems to me to be an element that provides a certain transparency and security that the meeting took place within the limits of the law and there is nothing hidden. If things are done “on the gray”, suspicion is created. I don't see anything wrong with this registry.”

We specify that in the government register, on September 23, when Bolojan met with the investigated businessman, no event was entered in the government's agenda.

Was it mandatory to record the meeting? On the website of the government registry, the question is answered as follows: “Is registration required if I request a meeting with a decision maker?”

“RUTI recommends prior registration of specialized groups in case of requesting a meeting with decision-makers from the central and local executive apparatus”– is the answer. The idea of ​​the registry is mainly related to “specialized groups”, that is, entities that have an activity of influencing, lobbying on public policies.

In any case, the omission of entering the meeting in the register is not sanctioned.

On September 24, for example, two events were recorded in the government register: the first meeting of the interministerial working group, established by Joint Order no. 781/1801/1823/1770 October 24, 2025 @ 10:00 – 11:00 UTC+2 and the Black Sea Energy and Security Forum.

When does a meeting between a businessman and a politician become a criminal act?

I asked Bogdan where the line is drawn between a criminal act and a normal meeting between a businessman and a politician: “The problematic element here is the discussion of influencer traffic. Initially there was no crime of influence peddling. It was just bribery. The prosecutors realized that they could not prove the act of corruption, and then they said that it would be easier to catch the one who brokers the meeting between the giver and the one who takes the bribe. The trafficker is an intermediary in this respect.” However, not every type of intermediation is criminalized, but only that in which the intermediary receives a sum of money or other advantages. After the middleman was caught, the prosecutors' task of proving bribery became easier, especially if he was convinced to cooperate.

As regards the meeting between a politician and a businessman, the decision regarding the degree of illegality thereof is related to the fact that the politician, as a result of that meeting, receives something or obtains something for another. “That is, basically, if the problem is solved by receiving a sum of money, a promise or any other benefit. Basically, there is the element of unfairness“, states the teacher.

If the decision-maker solves the problem, without asking for anything, we are not talking about a criminal situation. “Because this is exactly the role of politicians: to solve everyone's problems. It is true that politicians choose to solve only certain problems and then suspicions are created. For the general public, it will look suspicious because they will say: “he solved it, because he has money”. The problem for politicians is that the benefits for them can also be in the political area, i.e. marketing, support and other things that are not always materialized in sums of money”. explained the lawyer.

“The lobby is influence traffic for us”

The fact that it did not go through a normal mechanism, signing up for an audience with the Romanian prime minister and going through a normal bureaucratic process creates, says Bogdan, “the suspicion of an illegitimate element, and this is where the registry I was talking about comes into play. If you signed up there, the presumption is that what is being pursued is a legitimate discussion with the decision-makers.”

The difference between the transparency system present at the European level and the one in Romania is that lobbying is not regulated here. “With us, lobbying is influence peddling. You pay the lobbyist to lobby, right? Then, according to Romanian law, you are committing influence peddling. What happens at the level of European institutions on a daily basis is a crime for us”, explained the teacher.

In this context, says the lawyer, this registry should come together with a lobbying law.

“A lobbying law has been on standby for years, but there is no desire for regulation. Lobbying firms also exist in Romania, they carry out lobbying activities, organize meetings and so on, obviously not for free, but there is no framework, it is a gray area”concluded Sergiu Bogdan.