Romania's mayors tried for corruption and abuse of office, 2016–2026: what became of every case

The mayors of any Romanian commune

Type the name of a commune, town or city. The card lists the mayors elected there in 2016, 2020 and 2024 and any trials for corruption or abuse of office found on portal.just.ro.

What a trial ended by the limitation period means

For many offences, criminal liability lapses after a limitation period calculated under the law. For the basic form of abuse of office, the general limitation period is eight years. When liability becomes time-barred, the court may end the trial. The defendant may ask for it to continue in order to seek an acquittal. A trial ended this way is not a conviction.

Under the law, certain procedural acts interrupt the period, which then starts again; a longer limit also applies. In 2018, the Constitutional Court struck down the rule allowing interruption by any procedural act. In 2022, it found that, from publication of the 2018 decision until the new legislation, the law provided for no grounds for interruption. An emergency ordinance in force from 30 May 2022 provided for interruption by acts that must be communicated to the suspect or defendant. In decision 67/2022, the High Court held that the rules on interruption are subject to the principle of the more favourable criminal law. The effect on a case depends on its facts and the rules applicable to it. In 2023, the EU Court of Justice held that, in cases of serious fraud affecting the EU's financial interests, courts must disapply the national more favourable rule insofar as it sets aside interruptions caused by acts before 25 June 2018.

In 11 of the 18 mayors' trials ended by a final limitation ruling, the summary published on the portal cites one of the 2018 or 2022 decisions.

One example from the data: Constantin Bîlea, mayor of Oarja (Argeș county), elected in 2016, 2020 and 2024, was convicted at first instance in March 2022 by the Argeș county court and given a three-year suspended sentence under supervision for abuse of office. The case had reached court in December 2016. In February 2025 the Pitești Court of Appeal set the conviction aside and ended the trial because the limitation period had run out.

Mayors' trials in which at least one charge lapsed under the limitation period by a final ruling

• Morărescu Costel, Filipeștii de Pădure, Prahova: abuse of office (Curtea de Apel Ploiești, 20 Oct 2026)
• Mateescu Virgil-Remo, Corbeni, Argeș: use of false documents for EU funds (Curtea de Apel Pitești, 2 Sep 2026)
• Iusein Visel, Dobromir, Constanța: complicity in use of false documents for EU funds (Curtea de Apel Constanța, 25 Jun 2026)
• Jicu Petre-Damian, Prăjești, Bacău: using office to favour another (Curtea de Apel Bacău, 10 Jun 2026)
• Horăscu Ion, Prundeni, Vâlcea: abuse of office (Tribunalul Vâlcea, 10 Mar 2026)
• Bucur Teodor, Cojocna, Cluj: abusive conduct, forgery by an official, use of forged documents (acquittal: embezzlement) (Curtea de Apel Cluj, 27 Nov 2025)
• Stan Silviu Ionuţ, Albeni, Gorj: disclosure of information (one count) (conviction: influence peddling, bribe-taking, participation in disclosing information) (Curtea de Apel Craiova, 6 Jun 2025)
• Cazacu Iordache, Fitionești, Vrancea: bribe-taking, forgery by an official, instigation to forgery, use of forged documents, embezzlement, instigation to false testimony, a public-finance offence (acquittal: abuse of office (two charges), material forgery) (Curtea de Apel Galați, 17 Apr 2025)
• Bîlea Constantin, Oarja, Argeș: abuse of office, complicity in forgery of private documents (Curtea de Apel Pitești, 6 Feb 2025)
• Tilibaşa Gheorghe, Glăvănești, Bacău: removal or destruction of documents, abuse of office for undue gain (Curtea de Apel Târgu Mureș, 17 Jan 2025)
• Marian Elena, Brateiu, Sibiu: use of false documents for EU funds (Curtea de Apel Alba Iulia, 22 Nov 2024)
• Pelei Marcel, Homorod, Brașov: complicity in use of false documents for EU funds (Curtea de Apel Brașov, 20 Aug 2024)
• Buraga Gianin-Loredan, Mihălășeni, Botoșani: abuse of office (Curtea de Apel Suceava, 8 Aug 2024)
• Toma Dorel, Ghimbav, Brașov: abuse of office (acquittal: misuse of subsidies) (Curtea de Apel Brașov, 25 Apr 2024)
• Stoica Marius-Simion, Orșova, Mehedinți: forgery by an official, use of forged documents (conviction: embezzlement) (Curtea de Apel Craiova, 4 Apr 2024)
• Popescu Marius-Ştefan, Gostavățu, Olt: fraud, instigation to forgery, instigation to use of forged documents (conviction: bribe-taking) (Curtea de Apel Craiova, 9 Feb 2024)
• Horăscu Ion, Prundeni, Vâlcea: abuse of office, money laundering, use of false documents for EU funds (Curtea de Apel Pitești, 8 Jan 2024)
• Pecheanu Gelu, Drânceni, Vaslui: forgery by an official (conviction: use of false documents to obtain EU funds) (Curtea de Apel Iași, 7 Sep 2023)

Who was on trial on election day

26 of the mayors elected on 9 June 2024 had a trial for corruption or abuse of office that is known to have been open that day: the case was registered in court before the vote, and hearings or a ruling followed after it. Trials whose stage is unknown are not counted. By party, the data show no difference between PSD and PNL larger than chance could produce (Fisher exact test, p ≈ 1.00). The numbers are small, and the search is not yet complete for every name.

How the list was made, and what it does not show

The list of the 4,782 people elected mayor in 2016, 2020 or 2024 comes from Romania's Permanent Electoral Authority and data.gov.ro. Each name was looked up on the courts' portal (portal.just.ro) through the Ministry of Justice's public query service on 1 November 2026. For common names, where the portal stops at 1,000 cases (615 names), the search was repeated court by court within the county on 1 and 2 November. 612 were completed; for the rest, the portal returned an error on every attempt at one or two courts in Galați, and the cards of the 3 communes affected say so.

A case enters the list if a defendant carries exactly the mayor's name, the trial began at a court in the mayor's county, and the offence is one of corruption or abuse of office: bribery, influence peddling, abuse of office, abusive conduct, conflict of interest, embezzlement, forgery by an official, fraud with public funds and similar. Drink-driving, assault and other ordinary offences are left out.

An identical name does not prove the same person. A case is attributed to a mayor only if the mayor's own commune is a party to the case or is named in the ruling, or if the press or the DNA links the case to them. Another 60 name matches could not be confirmed: they are neither counted nor named, and the commune card only notes that such a match exists.

The outcome of each trial was read from the text of the rulings published on the portal, in the passages that concern the mayor. A ruling counts as final if it was given on appeal or the text says it is final (definitivă).

The portal mainly keeps cases active after 2018–2020; trials closed earlier are often missing, so the page does not compare years. Trials heard directly by the High Court and mayors elected only before 2016 are not included. The offence was not necessarily committed while in office as mayor.

Sources

• Romanian courts' portal (Ministry of Justice), public query service
• Permanent Electoral Authority: 2020 local election results
• Code for Romania: results of the 9 June 2024 local elections
• data.gov.ro: mayors elected in 2016
• DNA statement on CJEU ruling C-107/23 and the limitation decisions (25 July 2023)
• Constitutional Court of Romania: decision 358/2022
• Bågenholm and Charron (2020), Accountable or untouchable? Electoral Studies