Practical Aspects Regarding the Involvement of the Romanian Intelligence Service in Criminal Investigation Files - When the Technical Support Acquires the Value of a Criminal Investigation Act


  • Andrei Apostol


Romanian Intelligence Service, technical support, technical surveillance logistics


In the light of the Decisions no. 51 of 16-th of February 2016, respectively no. 26 of 16-th of January 2019 of the Constitutional Court of Romania, the national courts were invested with researching the manner in which the technical surveillance mandates were executed. Specifically, the defenders of the persons whose conversations were recorded requested to verify whether the technical surveillance mandates were executed by a competent authority. Nationwide, there was outlined a practice of the National Anticorruption Directorate to answer the questions addressed by the courts in the sense of specifying whether the Romanian Intelligence Service provided a simple technical support in the criminal investigation activity, without carrying out criminal investigation acts. The defense of the National Anticorruption Directorate was based on the fact that the technical support does not concretely imply a criminal investigation activity, aspect that was also held by the Constitutional Court of Romania by its Decision no. 26 of 16-th of January 2019, paragraph no. 155. The notion of “technical support” is a very vague one, being necessary a distinction between the simple provision of logistic support in order to execute the technical surveillance mandate by the competent body and the support of the Romanian Intelligence Service agents in the stage of obtaining evidence through the evidentiary procedure of interception and recording of telephone calls/ conversations. This paper aims to highlight, by means of examples from the national judicial practice, the cases in which the "technical support" provided by the Romanian Intelligence Service acquires the valence of a procedural act that must be sanctioned with absolute nullity.


Romanian Constitutional Court, Decision no. 26/2019 published in the Official Jorunal no. 193 dated 12-th of March 2019

Romanian Constitutional Court, Decision no. 51/2016 published in the Official Jorunal no. 190 dated 16-th of February 2016

Iasi Court of Appeal, judegement of 19-th of February 2021 in file no. 2192/89/2015

G. Theodoru, Treaty of criminal procedural law, Hamangiu Publishing House, Bucharest, 2007, p. 397

The High Court of Cassation and Justice, Criminal Section, panel of 2 preliminary chamber judges, judgement no. 31 / C of 27-th of September 2018

Law no. 506/2004 on the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector

M. Suian, Special methods of surveillance or research, Solomon Publishing House, 2021

Protocol no. 00750 of 4-th of February 2009 concluded between the Romanian Intelligence Service and the Public Ministry

Protocol no. 9331 of the 7-th of December 2016 on the cooperation between the Romanian Intelligence Service and the Public Ministry for establishing the concrete conditions for access to technical systems of the National Center for Communications Interception

The report dated 5-th of February 2021 regarding the verification performed by the President of the High Court of Cassation and Justice pursuant to art. 301 of Law no. 304/2004 regarding the judicial organization, republished, with the subsequent modifications and completions

S. Gradinaru Aspects in connection to the interception and the recording of talks or conversations performed under the provisions of the Law 51/1991 regarding the national security of Romania, 8-th International Conference on European Integration - Realities and Perspectives, Danubius University, Galati, 2013

S. Gradinaru Usage of interceptions and audio or video recordings as evidence in criminal proceedings and compatibility of regulation with European and international requirements, Presa Universitara Clujeana Publishing House, 2017

S. Gradinaru, Technical Surveillance in the New Criminal Procedure Code, C. H. Beck Publishing House, 2014

Iasi Courthouse, judgement of the judge of the preliminary chamber from 18-th of December 2020 in the file no. 3813/99/2018/a1






Legal Sciences in the New Millennium