Accession blues: modest successes and major difficulties in Romania

Date05 January 2010
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/13590791011009365
Published date05 January 2010
Pages47-60
AuthorNorel Neagu
Subject MatterAccounting & finance
SECTION I. PRE- AND POST-ACCESSION
FOCUS
Accession blues: modest
successes and major difficulties
in Romania
Norel Neagu
Criminal Law Department, Faculty of Law,
Alexandru Ioan Cuza Police Academy, Bucharest, Romania
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse the legislation and case law relevant to preventing
and combating fraud affecting the European Union (EU)’s financial interests in Romania.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper explores how the legislation is implemented in the
process of Romania’s accession to the EU, how it has been interpreted in case law, the reasons for the
results achieved so far and the link between these specific offences and the general fraud offences
provided for in the Criminal Code and other special laws.
Findings – The analysis examines the deficiencies in the legislation and in practical implementation
thereof, focusing on the penalties and on recovery of funds.
Practical implications – The research highlights the need for practitioners clearly to distinguish
between the common legislation applicable to fraud offences, on the one hand, and offences affecting
the EU’s financial interests, on the other, thus contributing to a fair trial.
Originality/value – The paper identifies the linkages between the common legislation applicable to
fraud offences and offences affecting the EU’s financial interests, which are still blurred even for
Romanian legislators, especially in the field of Community revenue.
Keywords Fraud, EuropeanUnion, Laws and legislation, Romania
Paper type Viewpoint
Introduction and context
Romania has a short tradition of legislation protecting the European Union’s (EU)
financial interest which has been laid alongside, rather than being integrated with,
existing national legislation. The result is both progress and confusion, as this paper
will show.
Legislation was adopted between 2003 and 2007 as a condition for Romania’s
accession to the EU. Under Romanian penal law, offences affecting the Communities’
financial interests are covered by Law No. 78/2000 (Section 4.1, Articles 18(1)-(5))[1]. The
Romanian legislators chose a different division of these crimes than in the PIF
Convention[2]. Thus, the first two forms of committing fraud in relation to expenditure
provided for in the PIF Convention (see notes) are a stand-alone offence in the Romanian
legislation, namely the “illegal obtaining of EU funds” provided for in Article 18(1) of
Law No. 78/2000. The first two forms of committing fraud in relation to income
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-0790.htm
The author would like to thank Simone White and Marco Pecoraro for their helpful comments.
Accession blues
47
Journal of Financial Crime
Vol. 17 No. 1, 2010
pp. 47-60
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1359-0790
DOI 10.1108/13590791011009365

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT