Author
General (scope, time limits)
The timeframe of 30 days provided in Article 52(1) of the Asylum Act shall be suspended during:
- the Dublin procedure for determining the Member State responsible for examining the asylum application;
- the First Country of Asylum procedure;
- the Safe Third Country procedure; or, where appropriate,
- the European safe third country procedure.
- When the reason for suspension no longer exists, the assessment period cannot be less than 20 days.[1]
The 30-day time limit shall be extended successively with further periods of no more than 30 days, and not exceeding 6 months from the lodging of the asylum application in total[2]: if the assessment of the case requires additional documentation, which makes it impossible to carry out the activities necessary to decide on the asylum application or could lead to the non-observance of the guarantees recognised by the law due to causes not imputable to the applicant.
However, if the maximum timeframe of 6 months is exceeded, the applicant should be informed of the delay and shall receive, upon request, information on the reasons of the delay and the time limit for the decision to be taken on their application.[3]
The term of 6 months may be extended successively for new cumulative periods, not exceeding 9 months, when:[4]
- The asylum procedure involves complex elements of fact and/or law;
- A large number of applications for international protection are lodged, making in practice very difficult to assess the claims within 6 months.
Exceptionally, in duly justified cases, a further extension may be applied for a maximum of 3 months.[5]
In practice, in 2022 in the Regional Centres for Procedures and Accommodation for Asylum Seekers at Rădăuţi, Galaţi, Timișoara, Şomcuta Mare (Maramureș) and Giurgiu the 30-day term was respected. In exceptional cases, the 30-day deadline to issue a decision was extended. According to data provided by IGI-DAI, in 2023, the 30-days deadline to process an application and issue the decision was respected. However, in exceptional cases, the term can be extended, thus resulting a 60-days period of time necessary to process the application and issue a decision[6]. This was still the case in 2023 at least in Galaţi.[7] According to IGI-DAI statistics, in 2024 the average duration was between 30 and 60 days (1-2 months) in the regular asylum procedure.[8]
In 2024, CNRR observed regional discrepancies in decisions issued to asylum seekers, likely due to variations in legal interpretation and case-specific factors.[9] In Galați, JRS representatives reported that all asylum seekers undergo two interviews as part of the procedure, usually conducted promptly. However, delays may occur when interpreters for rare languages are unavailable or when asylum seekers leave the CRPCSA Galați before their interview. The interviews are carried out by IGI staff in collaboration with EUAA personnel.[10]
Prioritised examination and fast-track processing
According to the law, priority is given to asylum applications lodged by unaccompanied children.[11] IGI takes all the necessary measures for the appointment of a legal representative, who will assist the unaccompanied asylum-seeking child in all stages of the asylum procedure, as soon as possible.[12] In practice, IGI-DAI instructs the Directorate-General for Social Assistance and Child Protection in writing to appoint a legal representative for the unaccompanied child, who will assist them during the asylum procedure. The notification is sent the next day or in a maximum of 3 days after the application is registered and the unaccompanied child has been accommodated in one of the Regional Centres.
In case of vulnerable asylum seekers who are placed in specially designated closed spaces in the Regional Centres (see Detention of Asylum Seekers), the identity check and the assessment of their applications should be done with priority.[13] There have been no reported cases of this situation in practice. In 2023, according with IGI-DAI, there were situations when the examination of the asylum application and issuing the decision took less than 30 days, in special cases of vulnerable persons, but no further details were provided.[14]
According to CNRR, in 2023 most of the asylum applications from vulnerable persons were assessed with priority by the authorities. However, at the Regional Centre for Procedures and Accommodation for Asylum Seekers Timisoara, there were cases where applications submitted by unaccompanied minors were not assessed with priority.[15]
In 2024, CNRR observed that, across all Regional Centres where it provides legal counselling, priority is given to vulnerable groups such as unaccompanied minors, pregnant women, the elderly, and individuals with severe disabilities— a practice in place since 2022.[16] However, other cases may also be prioritized if deemed well-founded by the determining authority. For instance, during 2024, asylum seekers transferred between camps or those previously held in designated closed spaces were often interviewed immediately after their relocation or accommodation.[17]
Personal interview
According to the law, an interview is conducted in order to assess the elements of an application for international protection.[18] Although the general rule is that an interview should be held in order to correctly assess the asylum claim, there are two situations where the interview is not mandatory:[19]
- When IGI-DAI may take a decision to grant refugee status on the basis of evidence in the file;
- When there are serious doubts about the capacity of the adult asylum seeker.
All personal interviews, assessments of the reasons invoked by the asylum seeker and decisions are conducted by a designated case officer of IGI-DAI.[20]
In 2022, 3,696 interviews were conducted, of which 329 were through videoconference. IGI-DAI reported that they had no statistics on the number of asylum applications assessed without an interview.[21]
For the year 2023, the situation is as follows according to the data provided by IGI-DAI: all interviews were conducted individually. In the case of children, the parent or legal representative was present at the interview. IGI-DAI uses indicators and guidelines that facilitate the identification of vulnerable persons among asylum seekers, but no details on these indicators and guidelines were provided. In 2023, a total of 260 interviews were conducted via videoconference. In 2024, 185 interviews were conducted through videoconference. IGI-DAI reported that they had no statistics on the total number of interviews conducted and on asylum applications assessed without an interview in 2024.[22]
In 2024, the EUAA continued to support the Romanian asylum system by deploying caseworkers and interpreters in several Regional Centres, including Bucharest, Timișoara, Șomcuta Mare and Galați. EUAA experts were involved in conducting personal interviews and drafting first-instance assessments, complementing the work of IGI-DAI officials. Additionally, the Agency facilitated the development of national standard operating procedures and templates for interviews and decisions, contributing to greater consistency and procedural alignment. A quality feedback exercise led by the EUAA’s Quality Procedures and Tools Sector was also carried out, culminating in a workshop and the production of a podcast summarising key findings for use by national caseworkers. These actions, coupled with training and capacity-building measures, aimed to enhance the quality and efficiency of the regular procedure.[23]
According to the EUAA, despite a marked decrease in the number of applications in 2024, a dedicated needs assessment confirmed the necessity to maintain support, particularly in the areas focusing on effective implementation of temporary protection, enhanced capacity for the processing of asylum applications and enhanced capacity to provide reception conditions in line with the CEAS.[24]
In 2024, EUAA caseworkers carried out interviews concerning 479 applicants, of which 78% related to the top 10 citizenships of applicants interviewed by EUAA, mainly concerning nationals from Syria (136), Nepal (62), Iraq (42) and Sudan (31).[25]
The EUAA drafted 1,091 concluding remarks, of which 83% related to the top 10 citizenships of applicants in concluding remarks drafted by the EUAA, mainly concerning applicants from Syria (311), Bangladesh (138), Nepal (119), Pakistan (75) and Iraq (72).[26]
Interviews are conducted individually, with members of the same family being interviewed separately. When there are underage children in a family, they are interviewed in the presence of a parent. For children under 12 or even 14 years old (or when the child’s age, maturity, and understanding do not permit), the presence of the child is not mandatory, and the IGI officer may decide to interview only one of the parents. Interviews are tailored to the child’s age, level of education, and understanding. The staff is trained in all legal instruments related to interviewing and assisting children. [27]
In its Concluding Observations adopted in May 2025, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child welcomed the legislative amendments that explicitly include asylum-seeking children and children under international protection among the beneficiaries of Law No. 272/2004 on child rights. The Committee recommended effective implementation of the law and urged Romania to ensure the participation of children in decisions affecting them, including in asylum procedures.[28]
According to CNRR, in 2024 all asylum seekers were interviewed, and no cases were recorded in which refugee status was granted only based on documents present in the personal file. During the same year, both officers designated under Article 48, para. (2) of the Asylum Act and EUAA experts (para. (4) of the same article) conducted interviews with asylum seekers, with most decisions being made solely by case officers at the Regional Centre. Asylum legislation does not require the applicant’s consent for the video conference system but does require consent for conducting the interview with a trusted interpreter for translation and/or interpretation. The video conference system was used for applicants speaking rare languages (e.g., Lingala) when interpretation services were not available from the EUAA or in exceptional cases when the interpreters were on vacation.[29]
Courts also use the video conference system, particularly for rare languages. Some asylum seekers have reported that the quality of interpretation via videoconference was poor, making it difficult to understand, and the process felt impersonal. [30] Whenever possible, if requested by the applicant, both the officer and the interpreter will be of the same gender as the person being interviewed. This is generally implemented in practice, though it depends on the availability of interviewers and interpreters. [31]
According to CNRR, JRS, and UNHCR, the reports containing the analysis and recommendations of EUAA officers are not communicated to applicants together with the rejection decision issued by IGI.
The Committee further encouraged the State to establish procedures ensuring that asylum-seeking, refugee, unaccompanied and separated children are systematically consulted in decisions that affect them. It also underlined the need for detailed procedural safeguards, clear mandates for representatives assisting unaccompanied children, and child-friendly complaint mechanisms.[32]
Interpretation
Article 45(2) of the Asylum Act sets out the rules regarding the right to have an interpreter during the personal interview. At the request of the applicant and when deemed necessary for presenting all the reasons for the asylum application, the interview shall be carried out by the case officer, with the support of an interpreter, in the language indicated by the applicant or in a language they understand and can communicate clearly. As far as possible, if the applicant requests it, both the case officer and the interpreter will be of the same gender as the interviewee.[33]
Availability of interpreters and double interpretation
In 2024, translators receive RON 30.91 / hour (approx. EUR 8.14) for interpreting services foreign languages – Romanian and RON 44.82 / page (approx. EUR 9.14) for translation of documents, according to the legal provisions stipulated in Order no.2907/C/2340/2020.[34] These rates do not include VAT.[35] These amounts can be increased according to art. 7 of the Law no. 178/1997 for the authorisation and payment of interpreters and translators,[36] as follows:
- by 50% for translations from or into an oriental language (Japanese, Chinese, etc.) or rarely used language;
- by 50% for translations carried out on an urgent basis (24-48 hours);
- by 100% for simultaneous translations performed at the hearing, in courts, criminal investigation bodies and prosecutors’ offices;
- by 100% when interpreters and translators are required on the weekend, public holidays or between 10 PM and 6 AM.
Quality and conduct
Several problems regarding the quality of the interpretation and conduct of interpreters have been reported. Interpreters are not sufficiently trained and, therefore, they are not impartial.
Related problems were also pointed out:
- Some interpreters still have private conversations with the asylum seeker and do not translate the conversation, or they express emotions, however not at the same scale as in previous years;
- Asylum seekers complained that an interpreter selected the documents that the asylum seeker should present at IGI-DAI, and translated only a summary of what is written on the page and not the whole interview (question and answer).
- Asylum seekers complained that the transcript was not read at the end of the interview in most of the centres.
In 2023, there was also an issue related to the role of interpreters in the interview at Galaţi, which affected how interpretation was done and had a clear impact on the quality of the asylum process.
According to CNRR,[37] in 2023 as in previous years, there were cases in which asylum seekers expressed concern regarding interpretation during their interview to determine a form of protection. In 2024, CNRR observed some discrepancies from one region to another regarding the decisions issued to the asylum seekers. The reasons could be differences in the interpretation of the law, as well as the individual elements of each case. During CNRR legal counselling sessions with applicants, some of them claimed that the interpreters did not exactly translate their answers, gave another meaning to statements in the interview, or had a biased attitude towards them. According to the procedure, the interview note must be read at the end, however applicants often declare that this step didn’t happen, nor were they given the opportunity to express their will for this to occur. Moreover, there are cases where asylum seekers’ interview (in the administrative phase) or hearing (in the judicial phase) are postponed due to the lack of interpreters, mostly in cases of very rare languages or dialects. Besides that, there are also financial reasons for the lack of interpreters. Some of the interpreters complained about low fees, payment delays, or lack of payment for their services.
In 2023, CNRR[38] made specific efforts to ensure that interpreters received training. In February 2023, CNRR organised a specific training session for the interpreters with which it collaborates in order to respond to the imperative needs of improving language assistance in the asylum procedure. In 2024, as a consequence of a gap in the provision of AMIF funds at the national level, no trainings for interpreters were organised. Information materials were also made available on the methods and techniques for interviewing persons undergoing the asylum procedure, the glossary of terminology related to the field and the UNHCR recommendations on communication and interpretation techniques in cases of vulnerable persons, with particular reference to unaccompanied minors.
According to CNRR, while interpreters were available in 2024, some Regional Centres lack coverage for key languages such as Amharic, Somali, or Kurdish Sorani, which has caused delays in the asylum process and in the examination of several cases.[39] The unavailability of interpreters can lead to delays in the process. The problem is more pronounced at the second instance level, where interpreters must be certified – although, in practice, trusted individuals are sometimes used instead.[40] Although there was a decrease in the number of reported issues with interpretation quality in 2024, some asylum seekers still raised concerns. Interpreters are trained and required to adhere to a code of conduct.[41] CNRR has observed that applicants may request interpreters of a specific gender. Interpreters collaborate with them, and authorities rely on NGOs to provide interpretation services. Additionally, child protection authorities lack their own interpreters and must also depend on NGOs for language support.[42]
Representatives of JRS in Galati have noted that EUAA interpreters are used in interviews during the asylum process. They have hired interpreters for languages such as English, French, Arabic, Kurdish, Somali, Russian, and Ukrainian. However, challenges arise with asylum seekers from Afghanistan, as CRPCSA Galati does not have interpreters on staff for this language. It takes longer to find an interpreter, which complicates the asylum process and leads to delays in decision-making.[43]
Recording and report
The law does not prescribe audio/video recording of the personal interview. Personal interviews and preliminary interviews are not audio/video recorded.
Court sessions are recorded according to the Civil Procedure Code.[44] The rules concerning the recording of court hearings are set out in Article 13 of Act 304/2004 on Judicial Organisation, which provides that:
- The court hearings are recorded by video or audio technical means or recorded by stenography. Recordings are immediately transcribed;
- The clerk or the stenographer shall record all the affirmations, questions and submissions of those present, including the president of the court panel;
- Upon request, the parties may receive a copy of the transcript of the Registrars, minutes or notes of the Registrar.
In 2023, 260 interviews were conducted through videoconferencing in total in all the regional centres.[45]
In 2024 according to CNRR the videoconference system is also used by the courts, mainly in the case of rare languages. There were cases when some asylum seekers stated that the quality of the interpretation through video conferencing was not that good, they had troubles understanding and the process was quite impersonal.[46]
Transcript
The case officer conducting the interview transcribes the questions and the answers/statements verbatim. The transcript includes at least the following data: identification data of the applicant, the name of the case officer who performs the interview, the name of the interpreter and, as the case may be, of the legal representative, the counsellor and/or the lawyer assisting the applicant, the language of the interview, the reasons for the request for international protection, as well as the applicant’s statement that all the data and information presented at the interview are correct. Where appropriate, the interview note shall also include the applicant’s explanations of the failure to present elements to be considered when examining the asylum application and/or clarification of inconsistencies or contradictions in their statements.[47]
At the end of the interview, the transcript of the interview is orally translated by the interpreter to the applicant.[48] The applicant has the possibility to formulate observations and/or to offer clarifications relating to any errors of translation or misunderstanding, which will be recorded in the interview transcript.[49] After this, the transcript is signed on every page by all the persons present at the interview.[50] A copy of the transcript is given to the asylum seeker or legal representative, their lawyer or counsellor, as the case may be, which assisted them at the interview, after the document was signed.[51] If the applicant refuses to sign the transcript, the reasons for their refusal will be mentioned on the transcript. The applicant’s refusal to sign the transcript does not prevent IGI-DAI from taking a decision on the asylum application.[52]
Appeal
The decision taken (admission or rejection) by IGI-DAI is communicated, immediately, to the asylum seeker in writing, through direct communication by the representatives of the IGI-DAI if the asylum seeker lives in the Centre, or by post at the last declared residence of the applicant.[53] The decision may be communicated to the lawyer or NGO representative representing the asylum seeker, upon request from the asylum seeker.[54]
The decision is accompanied by written information, in Romanian and in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand, related to the admission or rejection of the asylum application and the conditions under which the decision may be appealed, as the case may be.[55] In practice, the justification of the decision is written in Romanian and is translated by NGO representatives.
The decision taken by IGI-DAI may be challenged in a two-instance judicial review procedure.
According to CNRR,[56] asylum seekers face many challenges in the appeal process: bureaucracy, short deadlines, inaccessible information. This makes them heavily reliant on the guidance provided by NGOs in this phase. There are many situations where asylum seekers do not receive the court’s notification (due to their own fault or not) and they miss the hearing. An asylum seeker’s absence from the hearing is most of the time interpreted by the court as a lack of responsibility, and it may influence the decision to some extent. Accessing the file in court is also very difficult for asylum seekers due to the language barrier. Moreover, they do not benefit from legal representation in court, due to the lack of financial means to hire a lawyer or because they are not aware of their right to ask for a legal aid lawyer or the court rejects their legal aid request.
These problems persist in 2024 as well. When asylum seekers contacted CNRR after receiving a negative decision on their application, the reasons for the denial were explained and translated for them by staff of the organisation, along with the mandatory deadline for filing a complaint. Based on CNRR’s experience in 2024, the asylum seekers they assisted did not face obstacles when appealing a decision. The communication received by applicants includes details about the decision, the deadline for filing a complaint, and the competent court, all translated into a language the applicant is presumed to understand. In 2024, the average processing time for the reviewing body to make a decision was between one and three months, although some cases took up to four months (for both instances).[57]
Asylum seekers who receive a rejection during the first instance stage have the opportunity to file a complaint and have their case moved to the judicial phase. They are informed about this option, given sufficient time, and receive support in submitting their complaint. If necessary, they are assisted by a CNRR legal advisor or a lawyer. However, many asylum seekers do not reach this stage of the process either because they receive a favourable decision or because they leave the CRPCSA before a decision is made.[58]
Appeal before the Regional Court
The Regional Court (Judecătoria Secţia Civilă) has jurisdiction in asylum cases, as the first-instance judicial review. The Regional Court rules in a single judge composition. The judges are not specialised in asylum law. UNHCR and CNRR organized seminars for judges in 2024.[59] Although the initiative was met with interest, there remains a strong need for specialized judges. Training for lawyers is planned for 2025, as legal counsellors cannot formally represent asylum seekers and this role may be fulfilled by ex officio bar lawyers who often lack specialization.[60] According to CNRR, judges are not open to attend the training sessions, one of the reasons being the presence of IGI personnel at the sessions.[61]
The appeals, as well as the other procedural acts regarding the resolution of the appeal, are exempt from legal taxes and legal expenses cannot be demanded.[62]
In 2022, a total of 678 appeals against IGI-DAI decisions were filed before the Regional Courts.[63] According to the information provided by the Regional Courts the number of appeals in 2022 was 544. This was a significant decrease in comparison with last year, when a total of 1,489 appeals were made.
In 2023, a total of 674 appeals against IGI-DAI decisions were filed before the Regional Courts. In 2024, a total of 616 appeals against IGI-DAI decisions were filed before the Regional Courts.[64]
Time limits
The deadline for lodging an appeal is 10 days from the day the decision was communicated.[65] The appeal has automatic suspensive effect, if it was lodged within the term prescribed by law.[66] Since May 2023, a return decision is issued together with the negative administrative decision in the asylum procedure. If the person wants to file a complaint against the rejection decision, they must also request the suspension of the return decision (see above, Appeal).
The law contains a procedural safeguard in case of appeals lodged after the time limit set out in the law.[67] Therefore, in case of filing the appeal or onward appeal after the deadline, the applicant may request the suspension of the execution of the return decision. The request for suspension shall be settled within 7 days from its registration, by the competent court, which shall pronounce the decision in the council chamber, without the parties being summoned, by an irrevocable decision.[68] While the review is pending, the applicant cannot be removed from the country.[69]
If the court admits the request to suspend the execution of the removal decision, the foreigner has the right to remain in the country pending the outcome of the request for reinstatement of the legal term to appeal.[70] The foreigner will benefit from all the rights provided by Articles 17 and 18 of the Asylum Act from the moment the court admits the request for reinstatement of the legal term to appeal.[71]
The appeal has to be motivated in fact and in law.[72] It may be lodged at IGI-DAI, which has issued the decision or directly to the competent court.[73] The appeal has to be accompanied by a copy of the IGI-DAI decision and other documents or elements on which the appeal is based.[74] The court carries out an assessment of both points of facts and law. The decision of the first instance court incorporates the reasons in fact and law on which it is based.[75]
In general, there are no problems in appealing a decision, if asylum seekers consult the legal counsellor of an NGO.[76] In Bucharest, when communicating the decision, IGI-DAI also provides the asylum seeker with the postal address of the Romanian National Council for Refugees (CNRR) in English. Asylum seekers are told by the representative of IGI-DAI who communicates the decision, that they have to go to CNRR for legal counselling and assistance for lodging an appeal. This practice has been in place since 2017.
Article 62 of the Asylum Act provides that asylum cases should be dealt with priority before other civil matters.[77] The court should take a decision on the appeal within 30 days.[78] The court has to motivate its decision within 5 days of it being pronounced.[79]
In 2020, IGI-DAI statistics refer to 1 to 2 months average duration of the appeal procedure.[80] For 2021, IGI-DAI reported that there are no statistics on the duration of the procedure.[81] The same was stated for 2022.[82] In 2023, IGI-DAI statistics indicate that on average, appeal procedures lasted 60 days. In 2024, IGI-DAI statistics indicate that on average, appeal procedures lasted 60 days.[83]
Hearing
The law establishes that the court may order the hearing of the asylum seeker when it considers that it is useful to settle the case.[84]
There is no updated information available for 2024 regarding the number or scheduling of hearings in appeal procedures; the courts did not provide any further data following the 2023 reporting period. The only information provided for 2024 was from the Bucharest Bar, where they had 151 requests for legal assistance.[85]
At the national level, there is a court portal available online,[86] and since 2022 asylum cases registered at the Regional Courts (Giurgiu, Rădăuţi, Giurgiu, Timișoara, Baia Mare, Galaţi, and Bucharest) are no longer published on it.
According to Law No. 122/2006, and in line with the confidentiality of asylum procedures, case files uploaded to the national electronic system are not public. In practice, neither the General Inspectorate for Immigration nor the applicants themselves have direct access to these files without prior approval.
The practice shows that with no support from NGOs or attorneys, it is impossible for asylum seekers to find out the decision of the appeal courts. In certain instances, even for the NGO representatives and attorneys it is a hurdle. This has a direct effect on their access to onward appeal. Thus, in order to learn the decision of the court, the legal counsellor has to go or call the Court’s Registry.
Onward appeal
IGI-DAI reported that, in 2022, there were 303 onward appeals before the Administrative County Courts.[87] According to the information provided by the Administrative County Courts the number of onward appeals was 307. In 2023, according to the information provided by the courts, the number of appeals was 354. For 2024, we do not have any information from the Courts.
The law prescribes the possibility to appeal the decision of the Regional Court.[88] The competent court is the County Tribunal, Administrative Litigation Section (Administrative County Court), which has jurisdiction over the area of the Regional Court whose decision is appealed.[89] The Administrative County Court is composed of three judges. The onward appeal has to be lodged within 5 days from the day the Regional Court decision was pronounced and has automatic suspensive effect, if it is lodged in due time.[90]
In 2021 and 2022, IGI-DAI reported that there were no statistics on the average duration of the onward appeal.[91] In 2023, IGI-DAI reported an average duration of 3 months. No information on 2024 was provided.
The onward appeal does not look at facts but examines if the appealed decision is compliant with the applicable rules.[92] As a consequence, the onward appeal has to include the grounds for illegality on which the appeal is based.[93] The decision has to be motivated within 10 days from the day it is communicated by the Regional Court.
According to the Civil Procedure Code, the attorney who has represented or assisted the party during the hearing may, even without a mandate, take any action for the preservation of rights subject to a term and appeal against the judgment, that may be lost by failing to do so on time. In these cases, only the party will handle all the procedural documents. The support of the appeal can only be based on a new power of attorney.[94]
Therefore, attorneys can appeal the Regional Court decision even without a mandate in this regard, in order to preserve the rights of their client, which are subject to a term and will otherwise be lost by failure to act in time. The provision emphasises that the attorney may also appeal against a judgment without having a mandate. It also mentions that a new power of attorney is needed for representing/ arguing the appeal in the higher court. Therefore, the law makes a difference between declaring/filing an appeal and representing/arguing it.
Decisions
According to IGI-DAI, in 2022 364 onwards appeals were finalised, of which 283 were favourable for IGI-DAI and 81 for the asylum seekers.[95] However, the Administrative County Courts reported a total of 302 decisions issued. According to statistics provided by the courts, in 2023, a total of 272 decisions were issued. There is no information provided for 2024.
Legal assistance
According to Article 17(1)(e) of the Asylum Act, the asylum seeker has the right to counselling and assistance from a representative of a Romanian or foreign NGO, in any phase of the asylum procedure. The asylum seeker has the right to be given, upon request, legal and procedural information, including information on the first instance procedure, in line with the provisions on public judicial assistance in civil matters, taking into account their personal situation.[96]
The law sets out the right of the asylum seeker to be provided, upon request, according to the legislation on public judicial assistance in civil matters and taking into account the personal situation of the foreigner, information on the motivation of the rejection of the asylum application, the procedure for challenging the ordinance through which the measure of placement in a specially closed space was taken, as well as the possibility to challenge the decision which granted, reduced or withdraw the material reception conditions.[97]
Legal assistance at first instance
There are no restrictions or conditions for accessing legal counselling at first instance.
In the administrative phase of the procedure, free legal counselling and assistance is provided by NGOs through projects funded by the national Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) scheme and UNHCR Romania. The Romanian National Council for Refugees (CNRR) provides specialised legal counselling and assistance to all asylum seekers upon request in the 6 Regional Centres for Accommodation and Procedures for Asylum Seekers, through a project funded by the national Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) program. CNRR’s legal counsellors have an office in the regional centres where they are available every weekday for 8 hours per day.
IGI-DAI stated that they did not have information on the total number of legal assistance requests submitted by applicants for international protection in 2024 in the context of the first instance procedure, nor on the breakdown of these requests by type of procedure (regular procedure, accelerated procedure, border procedure, Dublin procedure) or by outcome (granting or refusal of legal assistance) for each type of procedure.[98]
According to the Bucharest Bar Association, a total of 151 requests for legal assistance were submitted by applicants seeking international protection during the first-instance procedure in 2024.[99]
Through the “Advocacy for access to the territory, information regarding international protection, child protection and refugee integration” project, implemented by CNRR, UNHCR Romania has the possibility to grant lawyers’ fees for asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection, based on their vulnerability, complexity or strategic interest for advocacy campaigns. Through this project 14 attorneys’ fees were awarded in 2022.[100] In 2023 and 2024, CNRR continued with the implementation of this project and provided advice and information to asylum seekers and migrants who met the conditions for submitting a new asylum application. Concerning the procedure, it assisted in the drafting and submission of procedural documents and provided legal assistance in court through specialised lawyers. CNRR also provided legal assistance in court through lawyers to beneficiaries of international protection when their rights were violated. In this respect, in 2023 CNRR awarded a total of 24 fees to lawyers in this project: specifically, 21 fees on Output I – Access to territory (in the asylum procedure and for access to a new asylum procedure) and 3 fees on Output 3 – Child protection (in the asylum procedure). In 2023, 18 lawyers were remunerated for legal advice/assistance activities.[101] No updated information was available for 2024.
Legal representation by a lawyer under the Legal Aid Act includes representation in the administrative phase of the procedure.[102] According to Article 35 of the Legal Aid Act, legal aid may also be extra-judicial and consist in consultations, filing of applications, petitions, referrals, initiation of other related legal steps, as well as representation before public authorities or institutions other than judicial or with jurisdictional powers, with a view to achieving the individual’s legitimate rights or interests. This was confirmed by the National Union of Romanian Bar Associations.[103] However, according to the head of the Judicial Assistance Service at the Bucharest Bar Association no legal aid applications for representation in the administrative phase of the procedure had been lodged until now in any of the regional centres.
In all other cases, the asylum seeker has to pay the lawyer’s fee if they wish to be represented by a lawyer during the personal interview.
According to CNRR, in 2024, as in previous years, applications for public legal aid were accepted, and asylum seekers were assigned an ex officio lawyer. These lawyers may have experience in asylum law (including those from the CNRR network) or may be trainee lawyers. No documentation was required to verify the applicant’s income. Asylum seekers reported that one issue with ex officio lawyers was the lack of interaction before the court hearing, and the lawyers appeared unfamiliar with the case and provided superficial assistance.[104] JRS representatives in Galati noted that a limitation on legal assistance for asylum seekers is the duration of the projects that fund this support. Asylum seekers receive legal aid through NGOs that implement such projects. However, during gaps between projects, when there is a break in funding, ensuring continuous legal assistance for asylum seekers becomes problematic.[105]
Legal assistance in appeals
In court proceedings, legal aid may only be provided by CNRR, who have limited funds for legal representation.
As in previous years, in 2023 CNRR collaborated with lawyers to provide legal assistance to asylum seekers. Legal assistance was not provided at the administrative phase of the asylum procedure before the IGI-DAI, instead it was ensured during the legal phase at courts that have competencies in the asylum procedure: 60 lawyers ensured legal assistance in first instance and 40 lawyers in the appeal. According to CNRR, in 2023 there were cases where asylum seekers stated that the legal assistance provided by the ex officio lawyers was superficial, with applicants claiming that the lawyers did not discuss their case with them or did not show a willingness to know their situation thoroughly. In some cases, the ex officio lawyers did not perform the necessary procedure to file an appeal within the time limit provided by the law.[106] Other information on legal assistance and lawyers was not provided by organisations and institutions. No updated information was available for 2024.
[1] ibid. Article 52(4).
[2] ibid. Article 52(2).
[3] ibid. Article 52(3).
[4] ibid. Article 52(5).
[5] ibid. Article 52(6).
[6] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 16 January 2024.
[7] Experience of JRS Romania, April 2024.
[8] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 23 January 2025.
[9] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[10] Information provided by JRS representative in Galati in February 2025.
[11] Article 16(1) Asylum Act.
[12] ibid. Article 16(2).
[13] ibid. Article 19^11.
[14] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 16 January 2024.
[15] Information provided by CNRR, 16 January 2024.
[16] ibid. February 2025 and 7 February 2023.
[17] ibid..
[18] Article 19^6(2) Asylum Act.
[19] ibid. Article 45(3).
[20] ibid. Article 48.
[21] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 11 March 2022.
[22] ibid. 23 January 2025.
[23] EUAA, Evaluation Report – Operational Support to Romania 2023–2024, June 2025, available here.
[24] European Union Agency for Asylum, Country overview 2025 – Romania, February 2025, available here.
[25] Information provided by the EUAA, 14 March 2025.
[26] ibid.
[27] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[28] UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, Concluding observations on the combined sixth and seventh periodic reports of Romania, CRC/C/ROU/CO/6-7, 5 June 2025, available here.
[29] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[30] ibid.
[31] ibid.
[32] UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, Concluding observations on the combined sixth and seventh periodic reports of Romania, CRC/C/ROU/CO/6-7, 5 June 2025, available here.
[33] Article 45(2) Asylum Act.
[34] Order no. 2907/C/2340/2020, available in Romanian here.
[35] ibid.
[36] Law no. 178/1997 for the authorization and payment of interpreters and translators, available in Romanian here.
[37] CNRR, Input by civil society organisations to the Asylum Report 2024, 2023, available here.
[38] Information provided by CNRR, 16 January 2024.
[39] ibid. February 2025.
[40] Meeting with CNRR during ECRE fact-finding visit to Romania, 17 March 2025.
[41] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[42] Meeting with CNRR during ECRE fact-finding visit to Romania, 17 March 2025.
[43] Information provided by JRS Representative in Galati in February 2025.
[44] Article 231(4) Civil Procedure Code: The court will record the court hearings. If the parties are challenging the content of the clerk’s notes, it will be verified and, if necessary, supplemented or rectified based on the records of the court hearing.
[45] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 18 January 2024.
[46] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[47] Article 45(5) Asylum Act.
[48] ibid. Article 45(7).
[49] ibid. Article 45(6).
[50] ibid. Article 45(8).
[51] ibid. Article 45(9).
[52] ibid. Article 45(10).
[53] ibid. Article 54(1).
[54] ibid. Article 54(1^1).
[55] ibid. Article 54(1).
[56] CNRR, Input by civil society organisations to the Asylum Report 2024, 2023, available here.
[57] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[58] Information provided by JRS Galati in February 2025.
[59] Information provided by UNHCR in March 2025.
[60] Meeting with UNHCR during ECRE fact-finding visit to Romania, 19 March 2025.
[61] Meeting with CNRR during ECRE fact-finding visit to Romania, 17 March 2025.
[62] Article 65 Asylum Act.
[63] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 22 February 2023.
[64] ibid. 23 January 2025.
[65] Article 55(1) Asylum Act.
[66] ibid. Article 55(2).
[67] ibid. Article 69.
[68] ibid. Article 69(1).
[69] ibid. Article 69(2).
[70] ibid. Article 69(3).
[71] ibid. Article 69(4).
[72] ibid. Article 57(1)(c).
[73] ibid. Article 56.
[74] ibid. Articles 56(1) and 57.
[75] Article 425(b) Civil Code.
[76] Information provided by CNRR, 9 January 2018.
[77] Article 62(1) Asylum Act.
[78] ibid. Article 64(2).
[79] ibid. Article 64(3).
[80] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 16 February 2021.
[81] ibid. 11 March 2022.
[82] ibid. 22 February 2023.
[83] ibid. 23 January 2025.
[84] Article 63 Asylum Act.
[85] Information provided by Bucharest Bar, 16 February 2021.
[86] Ministry of Justice, Portalu linstanţelor de judecată, available in Romanian here.
[87] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 22 February 2023.
[88] Article 66 Asylum Act.
[89] ibid. Article 67.
[90] ibid. Article 66(2) and (4).
[91] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 11 March 2022 and 22 February 2023.
[92] Article 483(3) Civil Procedure Code.
[93] ibid. Article 486(1)(d).
[94] ibid. Article 87(2)(3).
[95] Information provided by IGI-DAI, 22 February 2023.
[96] Article 17(1)(s) Asylum Act.
[97] ibid.
[98] Information provided by IGI in January 2025.
[99] Information provided by the Bucharest Bar Association in January 2025.
[100] Information provided by CNRR, 7 February 2023.
[101] ibid. 16 January 2024.
[102] Government Emergency Ordinance 51/2008.
[103] Information provided by the National Union of Romanian Bar Associations, 8 January 2018.
[104] Information provided by CNRR in February 2025.
[105] Information provided by JRS Galati in February 2025.
[106] Information provided by CNRR, 16 January 2024.