Author
Directives and other CEAS measures transposed into national legislation
| Directive | Deadline for transposition | Date of transposition | Official title of corresponding act | Web Link |
| Directive 2011/95/EU
Recast Qualification Directive |
21 December 2013 |
27 January 2014 |
Ordonanța nr. 1/2014 pentru modificarea și completarea Legii nr. 122/2006 privind azilul în România și a Ordonanței Guvernului nr. 44/2004 privind integrarea socială a străinilor care au dobândit o formă de protecție sau un drept de ședere în România, precum și a cetățenilor statelor membre ale Uniunii Europene și Spațiului Economic European | https://bit.ly/3wlJrax (RO) |
| Directive 2013/32/EU
Recast Asylum Procedures Directive |
20 July 2015 | 24 December 2015 | Legea nr. 331/2015 pentru modificarea și completarea unor acte normative în domeniul străinilor | https://bit.ly/3wpLlXU (RO) |
| Directive 2013/33/EU
Recast Reception Conditions Directive |
20 July 2015 | 24 December 2015 | Legea nr. 331/2015 pentru modificarea și completarea unor acte normative în domeniul străinilor | https://bit.ly/3wpLlXU (RO) |
| Regulation (EU) No 604/2013
Dublin III Regulation |
Directly applicable
20 July 2013 |
24 December 2015 | Legea nr. 331/2015 pentru modificarea și completarea unor acte normative în domeniul străinilor | https://bit.ly/3wpLlXU (RO) |
The following section contains an overview of incompatibilities in transposition of the CEAS in national legislation:
| Directive | Provision | Domestic law provision | Non-transposition or incorrect transposition |
| Directive 2011/95/EU
Recast Qualification Directive |
art. 17 (1) (d) | 28 (1) (d) Asylum Law | Article 17 (1) (d) from the Directive 2011/95/EU stipulates that a third-country national or a stateless person is excluded from being eligible for subsidiary protection where there are serious reasons for considering that they constitute a danger to the community or to the security of the Member State in which they are present.
The national legislation, namely Law No. 122/2006 on asylum in Romania, with subsequent amendments and additions, stipulates in Article 28(1)(d) that “subsidiary protection shall not be granted to foreign nationals and stateless persons when there are serious grounds for believing that they constitute a danger to public order and national security of Romania”, thus establishing a cumulative condition, and it is not sufficient that a foreign national or stateless person is only a danger to public order or national security. In view of this state of affairs, the operational situation revealed the need to amend the above-mentioned legal provision in order to establish the conditions for exclusion in an alternative, rather than cumulative, manner, depending on the degree of danger.
|
| Directive 2013/33/EU
Recast Reception Conditions Directive |
Art 20(5) | Art 55^1 Asylum Decree | According to article 20(5) decisions for reduction or withdrawal of material reception conditions shall be based on the particular situation of the person concerned, especially with regard to persons covered by Article 21, taking into account the principle of proportionality. Member States shall ensure a dignified standard of living for all applicants. These provisions were not transposed in the Asylum Act and Decree. |
| Regulation (EU) No 604/2013
Dublin III Regulation |
18(2) | 94^1 Asylum Act | For persons whose applications are considered to have been tacitly withdrawn, i.e. persons who have left Romania and moved on to another EU Member State, and the asylum procedure has been discontinued, the asylum procedure may be continued if the person makes an asylum claim within 9 months of the decision to close the file, issued in case of implicit withdrawal. If the time limit has expired, the asylum claim is considered a Subsequent Application.
Therefore, persons who withdraw their asylum applications and have not left the territory of the EU for at least 3 months or have not been returned to a third country or to the country of origin cannot continue their asylum procedure in case they return to Romania. As a consequence, they will have to lodge a subsequent application. This is not in line with the second paragraph of the article 18(2), which clearly states that when the Member State responsible had discontinued the examination of an application following its withdrawal by the applicant before a decision on the substance has been taken at first instance, that Member State shall ensure that the applicant is entitled to request that the examination of their application be completed or to lodge a new application for international protection, which shall not be treated as a subsequent application. Moreover, the Dublin III Regulation does not foresee a time limit for the possibility to continue the asylum procedure. The Romanian Asylum Act does not prescribe the possibility to continue the asylum procedure if the previous application of the returned person has been rejected at first instance. In this case the person returned has to submit a subsequent application. According to Article 18(2), Member States responsible shall ensure that the person whose application was rejected only at first instance has or has had the opportunity to seek an effective remedy. |