EU Court rules Romania's prescription rules breach EU law

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its judgment in case “Lin II”, finding that the interpretation of the Romanian Supreme Court of Justice (Înalta Curte de Casație şi Justiție, ÎCCJ) on the interruption of the criminal‑prescription period is incompatible with Union law. The ruling confirms that national standards that allowed the prescription of serious fraud offences – including those affecting EU funds – cannot be applied when they create a systemic risk of impunity. The CJEU stressed the primacy of EU law over national rulings that have acquired res judicata and clarified that the principle of “lex mitior” cannot override EU rules in such cases.

Romanian officials reacted strongly. President Nicolae Dan said the main blame for the situation lies with Parliament, noting that the Constitutional Court’s decision was not implemented within the constitutionally required deadline. Former Justice Minister Stelian Ion called the judgment “an institutional failure”, arguing that Romania must choose between respecting EU‑law standards or preserving national interpretations that protect fraudsters. Legal commentator Traian Briciu emphasized that the CJEU decision follows the earlier “Lin I” ruling and does not overturn the principle of res judicata for cases already decided.

The judgment is expected to affect a large number of pending criminal cases involving severe financial fraud, potentially reopening investigations that were closed on the basis of the disputed national prescription rules.