Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Freedom of Information in Romania: Legal and Empirical Insights

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Laws of Transparency in Action

Part of the book series: Governance and Public Management ((GPM))

  • 482 Accesses

Abstract

The access to public information was guaranteed in Romania starting with 2001 within the context of the country accession to the European Union. The adoption of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was a great achievement for the government and civil society; however, The efforts toward building administrative capacity for enforcing FOIA provisions were gradual, and they lacked a strong coordination agency. The overall assessment of FOIA shows a decline in the number of requests for information of public interest in the context of an increase in the amount of information disclosed ex officio by the public institutions; however, few public institutions proactively disclose public information. The number of cases brought to courts of appeals increased as the citizens and legal entities became more educated about their rights. The courts were instrumental in interpreting the law, and NGOs and think tanks also played an important role in creating precedent cases as grounds for future decisions by bringing strategic litigations to courts and allowing judges to pass rulings in this field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Birkinshaw 2001.

  2. 2.

    UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown apud Hazell and Worthy 2010, p. 356.

  3. 3.

    James 2006.

  4. 4.

    Cucciniello et al. 2017.

  5. 5.

    Hazell and Worthy 2010.

  6. 6.

    Worthy 2010.

  7. 7.

    Civil servants responsible for FOIA implementation in each public institution are named information officers in this manuscript. No confusion should be created between them and an Information Commissioner, as Romania does not have one.

  8. 8.

    Schnell 2016.

  9. 9.

    Dragoș 2006, p. 26.

  10. 10.

    Mungiu-Pippidi 2001, p. 2.

  11. 11.

    APADOR-CH 2007, p. 5.

  12. 12.

    Mungiu-Pippidi 2001, p. 2.

  13. 13.

    Law no. 544 from 12 October 2001 on free access to public information, published in the Official Gazette of Romania no. 663 from 23 October 2001.

  14. 14.

    Government Decision no. 123 from 7 February 2002 on implementation norms of Law no. 544/2001 on free access to public information, published in the Official Gazette of Romania no. 167 from 8 March 2002.

  15. 15.

    Law no. 52 from 21 January 2003 on transparency of decision making in public institutions, published in the Official Gazette of Romania no. 749 from 3 February 2003.

  16. 16.

    Dragoș et al. 2012.

  17. 17.

    Government Decision no. 478 from 6 July 2016 on modifying and improving the implementation norms of the Government Decision no. 123/2002, published in the Official Gazette of Romania no. 516 from 8 July 2016.

  18. 18.

    Pro Democracy Association and IRIS 2003.

  19. 19.

    Hazell and Worthy 2010, p. 354.

  20. 20.

    Societatea Academică Română 2009; APADOR-CH 2007.

  21. 21.

    Pelehatăi 2017.

  22. 22.

    Simina and Felseghi 2017.

  23. 23.

    Societatea Academică Română 2009, pp. 20–21.

  24. 24.

    Civil decision no. 5139/CA/2015 of Cluj Court of Appeal.

  25. 25.

    Such as National Union of Bars from Romania, National Union of Public Notaries from Romania, Romanian Order of Architects.

  26. 26.

    Dragoș 2009, p. 78.

  27. 27.

    Civil decision no. 5886/CA/2015 of Cluj Court of Appeal.

  28. 28.

    World Bank 2012; Pro Democracy Association and Transparency International 2007.

  29. 29.

    Dunn et al. 2006.

  30. 30.

    Pro Democracy Association and Transparency International 2007.

  31. 31.

    Foundation note for modifying the implementation norms of Law no. 544/2001, 2016.

  32. 32.

    Civil decision no. 2447/2010 of Alba Court of Appeal.

  33. 33.

    According to Scottish FOIA, public bodies are allowed to refuse to disclose information if the request is considered “vexatious” (Cherry and McMeneny 2013).

  34. 34.

    Pro Democracy Association and IRIS 2003.

  35. 35.

    According to Civil decision no. 601/CA/2009 of Bacău Court of Appeal, the fact that the petitioner received an answer is not the fulfillment of the obligations under FOIA if the answer does not contain the requested information.

  36. 36.

    Civil decision no. 3715/2015 of Cluj Court of Appeal.

  37. 37.

    Civil decision no. 57/2015 of Cluj Court of Appeal.

  38. 38.

    Civil decision no. 990/CA/2010 of Cluj Court of Appeal.

  39. 39.

    Civil decision no. 57/CA/2015 of Cluj Court of Appeal; Civil decision no. 2047/CA/2010 of Bucharest Court of Appeal.

  40. 40.

    Civil decision no. 1974/R from 26 August 2014 of Brașov Court of Appeal.

  41. 41.

    Brașov Court of Appeal decided that a petitioner cannot require a public institution to create new documents that would generate a blockage of the respective public institution’s activity (Civil decision no. 169/2015).

  42. 42.

    Schnell 2016.

  43. 43.

    Constanța Court of Appeal decided in several cases against Constanța City Hall which refused to provide information ex officio upon citizens’ request because the information were already published on the City Hall webpage (Civil decisions nr. 639/CA from 20 of May 2015, 660/CA from 25 of May 2015, 11 of June 2015).

  44. 44.

    Law no. 380 from 5 October 2006 published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 846 from 13 October 2006.

  45. 45.

    Law no. 188 from 19 June 2007 published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 425 from 26 June 2007.

  46. 46.

    General Secretary of Government, Department for Government Strategies 2012, p. 7.

  47. 47.

    Ranta 2014, p. 111.

  48. 48.

    Databases created by the Ministry for Public Consultation and Civic Dialog based on the analysis of public institutions’ webpages are available at http://data.gov.ro/organization/ministerul-pentru-consultare-publica-si-dialog-civic.

  49. 49.

    (1) The normative acts governing the organization and functioning of public institutions; (2) the organization structure; (3) the attributions of the departments; (4) the functioning schedule; (5) the audience program; (6) the name of the persons occupying leading positions, and the name of the officer responsible for disseminating information of public interest; (7) the contact information of the public institution; (8) the financial sources; (9) the budget for 2015; (10) the balance sheet for 2014; (11) the programs and development strategies (2015); (12) the list with documents of public interest; (13) the list with documents produced or managed by the public institution; (14) the procedures for challenging the public institution’s decisions; (15) the annual FOIA report for 2014.

  50. 50.

    Law no. 677 from 21 November 2001 on the protection of persons with regard to processing of personal data and free circulation of these data, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 790 from 12 December 2001.

    Law no. 182 from 12 April 2002 on the protection of classified data, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 248 from 12 April 2002.

  51. 51.

    Civil decision no. 633/CA/2009 of Alba Court of Appeal.

  52. 52.

    Civil decision no. 35/CA from 21 January 2015 of Constanța Court of Appeal.

  53. 53.

    Civil decision no. 57/2015 of Cluj Court of Appeal.

  54. 54.

    File number no. 40291/3/2009 of Bucharest Tribunal.

  55. 55.

    File number 15267/3/2010 of Bucharest Tribunal.

  56. 56.

    Civil decision no. 623CA from 18 May 2015 of Constanța Court of Appeal.

  57. 57.

    Civil decision no. 1087 from 26 April 2010 of Bucharest Court of Appeal.

  58. 58.

    Civil decision no. 111/CA from 2 February 2015 of Constanța Court of Appeal.

  59. 59.

    Civil decision no. 5/CA from 6 January 2014 of Constanța Court of Appeal; Civil decision no. 1237/CA from 23 October 2014 of Constanța Court of Appeal.

  60. 60.

    Bucharest Court of Appeal, Decision no. 76/2003.

  61. 61.

    Civil decision no. 806 from 24 June 2015 of Constanța Court of Appeal. A City Hall answered a request about the property over several plots of land after 83 days and only after the petitioner started a lawsuit with a court of appeal. The Court of Appeal accepted the City Hall argument that it could not answer accurate information because it was in the process of surveying all land properties within the boundaries of the community. However, the City Hall should have informed the petitioner that would need more time for answering the request.

  62. 62.

    Government Ordinance no. 27 from 30 January 2002 regulating the settlement of petitions, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 84 from 1 February 2002.

  63. 63.

    Foundation note for modifying the implementation norms of Law no. 544/2001, 2016.

  64. 64.

    Civil decision no. 1295/CA/2010 of Bucharest Court of Appeal.

  65. 65.

    World Bank 2012, p. 13.

  66. 66.

    Petroiu 2014, p. 112; Dragoș 2006, p. 31.

  67. 67.

    Cobârzan et al. 2008, p. 59.

  68. 68.

    Civil decisions of Constanța Court of Appeal nr. 872/CA from 8 September 2014 and nr. 1006/CA from 24 September 2014; Civil decision nr. 40291/3/2009 of Bucharest Tribunal; Civil decision nr. 44188/3/2009 of Bucharest Tribunal.

  69. 69.

    Institute for Public Policies 2011, p. 5.

  70. 70.

    World Bank 2012, p. 13; Societatea Academică Română 2009, p. 31.

  71. 71.

    Eximbank director refused to execute the final decision nr. 40515/3/2009 of Bucharest Court of Appeal and disclose a publicity contract.

  72. 72.

    Baia Mare mayor repeatedly refused to execute the decisions of Cluj Court of Appeal which required Baia Mare City Hall to disclose information about spending of public money. When finally the mayor invited the petitioner to photocopy, for a cost, several documents, totaling 402 pages, those papers were disparate documents containing information that could have different interpretations so that the mayor’s response could not be considered to have implemented the decision of the Cluj Court of Appeal.

  73. 73.

    The information officer from Cluj-Napoca City Hall declared that the majority of complaints were filed by the same citizen who submited large number of requests monthly.

  74. 74.

    According to Ministry for Public Consultation and Civic Dialog, the number of lawsuits in Tribunals increased from 812 in 2013 to 1,530 in 2015.

  75. 75.

    Institute for Public Policies 2011, p. 37.

  76. 76.

    World Bank 2012, p. 15.

  77. 77.

    Institute for Public Policies 2004, p. 2.

  78. 78.

    World Bank 2012, p. 15.

  79. 79.

    Ministry for Public Consultation and Civic Dialog 2016.

  80. 80.

    Institute for Public Policies 2011, p. 32.

  81. 81.

    Institute for Public Policies 2011, p. 35.

  82. 82.

    Dragoș and Neamțu 2009a, p. 61; Institute for Public Policies 2009, p. 4.

  83. 83.

    Petroiu 2014, p. 130.

  84. 84.

    A petitioner requested a copy of a procurement contract of 2,824 pages and the total cost mounted to 8,472 lei (approx. 1,814 Euros). Brașov Court of Appeal decided that the public institution did not refuse to disclose information when asking the petitioner to pay the multiplication costs (Civil decision no. 2017/R/2014).

  85. 85.

    Pro Democracy Association 2003, p. 40.

  86. 86.

    According to the 2007 version of the law, the fee could not exceed the cost of collection, production, reproduction and dissemination of documents. After 2008, when the law was amended first time, the charge was limited to the cost of copying the documents. See also Dragoș and Neamțu 2009b, pp. 18–22.

  87. 87.

    Dragoș and Neamțu 2015, pp. 210–211.

References

  • APADOR-CH. (2007). Transparența decizională în administrația publică în România anului 2007 – contexte, constatări și perspective (Decision transparency in Romanian public administration in 2007 – context, findings and perspectives) [Online]. Available at http://www.apador.org/transparenta-decizionala-in-administratia-publica-in-romania-anului-2007-context-constatari-si-perspective/. Accessed 15 Mar 2017.

  • Birkinshaw, P. (2001). Freedom of information. The law, the practice and the ideal (3rd ed.). London: Butterworths.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherry, M., & McMeneny, D. (2013). Freedom of information and “vexatious” requests – The case of Scottish local government. Government Information Quarterly, 30(3), 257–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobârzan, B., Dragoș, D., & Neamțu, B. (2008). Free access to public information: Enforcement, appeals and judicial review. A comparative perspective from CEE countries. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 24E, 53–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cucciniello, M., Porumbescu, G., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2017). 25 years of transparency research: Evidence and future directions. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 32–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dragoș, D. (2006). Transparency in public administration: Free access to public information. A topical comparative analysis of several jurisdictions from central and Eastern Europe. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 17E, 26–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dragoș, D. (2009). Legea contenciosului administrativ. Comentarii și explicații (Law on administrative contentious. Comments and explanations) (2nd ed.). Bucharest: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dragoș, D., & Neamțu, B. (2009a). Regulating and implementing freedom of information regimes in the new EU member states: A comparative analysis of Romania, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 27E, 39–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dragoș, D., & Neamțu, B. (2009b). Reusing public sector information – Policy changes and experiences in some of the member states with an emphasis on the case of Romania. European Integration Online Papers, 13(4) [Online]. Available at http://eiop.or.at/eiop/pdf/2009-004.pdf. Accessed 15 Mar 2017.

  • Dragoș, D., & Neamțu, B. (2015). Mimicking environmental transparency: The implementation of the Aarhus convention in Romania [Online]. Available at SSRN https://ssrn.com/abstract=2591824. Accessed 5 Apr 2017.

  • Dragoș, D., Neamțu, B., & Cobârzan, B. (2012). Procedural transparency in rural Romania: Linking implementation with administrative capacity. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(1), 134–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, W., Staronova, K., & Pushkarev, S. (2006). Implementation. The missing link in public administration reform in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foundation note for modifying the implementation norms of law no. 544/2001. (2016, July 6) [Online]. Available at http://gov.ro/ro/guvernul/procesul-legislativ/note-de-fundamentare/nota-de-fundamentare-hg-nr-478-06-07-2016&page=39. Accessed 19 Mar 2017.

  • General Secretary of Government, Department for Government Strategies. (2012). Raport de monitorizare asupra Legii nr. 544/2001 privind liberul acces la informațiile de interes public și Legii nr. 52/2003 privind transparența decizională în administrația publică în anul 2011 (Report on monitoring the Law no. 544/2001 regarding the free access to public information and Law no. 52/2003 transparency of decision making in public institutions in 2011), Bucharest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Decision no. 123 from 7 February 2002 on implementation norms of Law no. 544/2001 on free access to public information, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 167 from 8 March 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Decision no. 478 from 6 July 2016 on modifying and improving the implementation norms of the Government Decision no. 123/2002, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 516 from 8 July 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Decision no. 878 from 28 July 2005 on public access to environmental information, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 760 from 22 August 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government Ordinance no. 27 from 30 January 2002 regulating the settlement of petitions, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 84 from 1 February 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazell, R., & Worthy, B. (2010). Assessing the performance of freedom of information. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4), 352–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute for Public Policies. (2004, July 2). Accesul la informații și participarea la decizii. O analiză la nivelul instanțelor judecătorești (Access to Information and Participation to Decisions. An Analysis at the Level of Courts). Bucharest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute for Public Policies. (2011). Accesul (ne)îngrădit la informații de interes public la 10 ani de la adoptarea legii. Analiză asupra jurisprudenței cauzelor în materia legii privind liberul acces la informațiile de interes public (Access (un)restricted to information of public interest 10 years after the adoption of law. Analysis of the jurisprudence regarding access to free public information), Bucharest. [Online]. Available at https://www.juridice.ro/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Studiu-544.pdf. Accessed 5 Apr 2017.

  • Institute for Public Policies and Center for Independent Journalism. (2009). Informația de interes public – un drept fundamental și o responsabilitate pe măsură (Information of public interest – a fundamental right and a responsibility), Bucharest [Online]. Available at http://www2.cji.ro/userfiles/file/Resurse_oportunitati/Studiu%20final%20IPP_informatia%20de%20interes%20public%20octombrie%202009.pdf. Accessed 5 Apr 2017.

  • James, S. (2006). The potential benefits of freedom of information. In R. A. Chapman & M. Hunt (Eds.), Open government in a theoretical and practical context (pp. 17–32). Hampshire: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 52 from 21 January 2003 on transparency of decision making in public institutions, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 749 from 3 February 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 86 from 10 May 2000 to ratify the Convention on access to information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters, signed in Aarhus on 25 June 1998, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 224 from 21 May 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 109 from 25 April 2007 on reuse of public information, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 300 from 5 May 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 144 from 12 July 2016 for modifying the art. 2 lit. a) of Law no. 544/2001 on free access to public information, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 528 from 14 July 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 182 from 12 April 2002 on the protection of classified data, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 248 from 12 April 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 371 from 5 October 2006 for modifying the Law no. 544/2001 on free access to public information, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 11 October 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 544 from 12 October 2001 on free access to public information, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 663 from 23 October 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law no. 677 from 21 November 2001 on the protection of persons with regard to processing of personal data and free circulation of these data, published in Official Gazette of Romania no. 790 from 12 December 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry for Public Consultation and Civic Dialog. (2016). Open data [Online]. Available at http://data.gov.ro/organization/ministerul-pentru-consultare-publica-si-dialog-civic. Accessed 22 Mar 2017.

  • Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2001). Coalition for transparency – The passage of the Freedom Information Act (Foia) in Romania case study [Online]. Available at http://www.sar.org.ro/files_h/docs/advocacy_foia/7_case_study.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2017.

  • Pelehatăi, I. (2017, July 4). 7 pentru 544: La ce e bună legea accesului la informații de interes public? (7 for 544: What is the law on free access to public information good for?) [Online]. Available at http://www.scena9.ro/article/544-legea-accesului-la-informatii-de-interes-public. Accessed 22 July 2017.

  • Petroiu, M. (2014). Dreptul de acces la informațiile de interes public. De la litera legii, la abuzul autorităților (Right to information of public interest. From the law provisions to the abuse of public authorities). Bucharest: Hamangiu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pro Democracy Association and Center for Institutional Reform for the Informal Sector (IRIS). (2003). Monitorizarea modului de aplicare a legii nr. 544/2001 (Monitoring the implementation of law no. 544/2001), Bucharest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pro Democracy Association and Transparency International Romania. (2007). Raport privind liberal acces la informațiile de interes public în România. Analiză comparativă 2003–2007 (Report on free access to information of public interest in Romania. Comparative analysis 2003–2007), Bucharest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranta, A. (2014). Accesul la informațiile de interes public – obligație legală în sarcina autorităților administrației publice. Studiu de caz privind gradul de accesibilitate al informațiilor de interes public comunicate din oficiu (Access to Public Information – A Legal Obligation on the Part of Public Authorities. Case Study on the Degree of Accessibility of Information of Public Interest Communicated Ex Officio). Revista Transilvană de Științe Administrative, nr. 3(35), 98–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romanian Academic Society. (2009). ‘Banul public și interesul privat. O valoare a eficienței, integrității și transparenței sistemului de achiziții publice în România’ (Public funds and private interest. An analysis of the efficiency, integrity and transparency of the public procurement in Romania), Bucharest [Online]. Available at http://sar.org.ro/files/409_paper-final.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2017.

  • Schnell, S. (2016, August 4). From information to predictability: Transparency on the path to democratic governance. The case of Romania. International Review of Administrative Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852316648756.

  • Simina, C., & Felseghi, B. (2017, June 6). Guvernul se pregătește să modifice Legea accesului la informațiile publice (Government prepares to amend the Law on access to free information) [Online]. Available at https://pressone.ro/guvernul-se-pregateste-sa-modifice-legea-accesului-la-informatiile-publice/. Accessed 23 July 2017.

  • World Bank. (2012). Implementing right to information. A case study of Romania [Online]. Available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PUBLICSECTORANDGOVERNANCE/Resources/285741-1343934891414/8787489-1344020463266/RTI-CS-Romania.pdf. Accessed 20 Mar 2017.

  • Worthy, B. (2010). More open but more trusted? The effect of the freedom of information act 2000 on the United Kingdom central government. Governance, 23(4), 561–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Good Governance Studies, Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, Romania

    Bianca V. Radu & Dacian C. Dragos

Authors
  1. Bianca V. Radu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dacian C. Dragos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bianca V. Radu .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Good Governance Studies, Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj Napoca, Romania

    Dacian C. Dragos

  2. Faculty of Administration, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Polonca Kovač

  3. Department of Constitutional Law, Administrative Law and Public Administration, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Albert T. Marseille

Annex 11.1: List of Public Institutions Whose Annual FOIA Reports Were Analyzed

Annex 11.1: List of Public Institutions Whose Annual FOIA Reports Were Analyzed

1

City Halls of cities county residence: Arad, Bacău, Baia Mare, Bistrița, Botoșani, Brăila, Brașov, Bucharest General City Hall, Buzău, Călărași, Cluj-Napoca, Constanța, Craiova, Deva, Focșani, Iași, Oradea, Pitești, Ploiești, Râmnicu-Vâlcea, Reșița, Sfântu Gheorghe, Sibiu, Slobozia, Suceava, Târgoviște, Târgu-Jiu, Târgu-Mureș, Timișoara, Tulcea, Vaslui, Zalău

32

2

City Halls of smaller cities: Câmpulung (Argeș), Dorohoi (Botoșani), Făgăraș (Brașov), Turda (Cluj), Gherla (Cluj), Lugoj (Timișoara), Adjud (Vrancea), Moreni (Dâmbovița), Zărnești (Brașov), Urziceni (Ialomița), Săliștea de Sus (Maramureș), Sighișoara (Mureș), Iernut (Mureș), Luduș (Mureș), Bicaz (Neamț), Jibou (Sălaj), Câmpulung Moldovenesc (Suceava), Fălticeni (Suceava), Frasin (Suceava), Gura Humorului (Suceava), Sulina (Tulcea), Huși (Vaslui), Negrești (Vaslui)

and three City Halls of Bucharest Sectors: Sectors 1, 2 and 4

26 (23+3)

3

County Councils: Alba, Arad, Argeș, Bacău, Bistrița, Botoșani, Brașov, Brăila, Buzău, Caraș-Severin, Cluj, Constanța, Covasna, Dâmbovița, Dolj, Galați, Giurgiu, Gorj, Harghita, Hunedoara, Ialomița, Ilfov, Mureș, Neamț, Olt, Prahova, Satu Mare, Sălaj, Suceava, Teleorman, Timiș, Vaslui, Vâlcea

33

4

Prefectures: Arad, Bacău, Bihor, Bistrița, Brașov, București, Buzău, Constanța, Covasna, Dolj, Gorj, Iași, Mureș, Prahova, Sălaj, Tulcea, Vâlcea, Vrancea

18

5

Ministries: Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, Ministry of National Defense, Ministry of Public Finance, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Work and Social Justice, Ministry of Transportation, Ministry of Agriculture

7

6

Public institutions subordinated to the government or ministries: General Secretary of Government, National Agency of Civil Servants, General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations, Agency for Driving License and Vehicle Registration, National Agency for Consumer Protection

5

7

Police County Inspectorates: Bacău, Bihor, Bistrița-Năsăud, Cluj

4

8

Chamber of Deputy and Senate

2

 

Total

127

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Radu, B.V., Dragos, D.C. (2019). Freedom of Information in Romania: Legal and Empirical Insights. In: Dragos, D.C., Kovač, P., Marseille, A.T. (eds) The Laws of Transparency in Action. Governance and Public Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76460-3_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation