Тази страница е достъпна само на английски.

Whistleblower law in Romania #

Romania implemented Directive (EU) 2019/1937 through Legea nr. 361/2022 privind protecția avertizorilor în interes public. The Romanian framework pairs the standard 50-employee private-sector trigger with a visible role for ANI as both external authority and practical guidance body.

Applicable law #

Who must establish an internal channel #

All public-sector entities — authorities, public institutions, and other public-law legal entities — regardless of headcount.
Private-law entities with at least 50 employees.
Certain Annex 3 sector entities (financial services, anti-money-laundering, insurance) — regardless of headcount.

Private entities with between 50 and 249 employees may pool or share resources for their internal channel (Art. 9(4)). Deadlines were phased: the law entered into force on 22 December 2022 for the public sector and entities with 250+ employees, while the 50–249 employee tier had until 17 December 2023 to comply (Art. 36).

Penalties and enforcement #

Failing to establish an internal reporting channel is an administrative contravention under Article 28(2)(c), not a criminal offense. The headline figures (EUR approximate at ~5 RON = €1):

Conduct	Fine (RON)	≈ EUR
Preventing a report by any means, by the person designated to receive and register reports (Art. 28(2)(a))	2,000–20,000	~€400–4,000
Refusing to respond to the Agency’s requests	3,000–30,000	~€600–6,000
Failing to establish internal channels (Art. 28(2)(c))	3,000–30,000	~€600–6,000
Non-compliance with Art. 10(1)(a) obligations	4,000–40,000	~€800–8,000
Breaching whistleblower confidentiality	4,000–40,000	~€800–8,000
Knowingly false report (Art. 29)	2,500–30,000	~€500–6,000

Verbatim, Art. 28(2)(c): “nerespectarea de către persoanele juridice prevăzute la art. 1 alin. (1) a obligației de a institui canalele interne de raportare prevăzute la art. 9 alin. (1), cu amendă de la 3.000 lei la 30.000 lei” (legislatie.just.ro).

An honest assessment of enforcement. The fines above are what the statute provides. In practice, no public record of a company being fined specifically for a missing internal channel has surfaced, and enforcement to date appears reactive — driven by reports reaching ANI rather than proactive audits. ANI registered 329 external reports in 2025, 188 of them in domains regulated by Legea 361/2022; those are reports received by the authority, not sanctions issued against employers. Independent analysis (CEELI Institute, 2023) documents a gap between the law on paper and its implementation.

The practical conclusion: the obligation is real and the operational exposure is a report arriving at ANI with no internal channel in place — not a large fine. A compliant internal channel is best treated as low-cost infrastructure that removes that exposure, not as insurance against a penalty that has rarely, if ever, been levied.

External reporting authority #

The official external channel is the Agenția Națională de Integritate (ANI). ANI receives reports, can redirect them to the competent authority where needed, and publishes practical guidance for both reporters and employers.

Data protection authority #

For GDPR complaints about the handling of report data, the relevant authority is the ANSPDCP.

Key compliance points #

If a private entity has fewer than 50 workers and no internal channel, the practical route is often the external channel.
Anonymous reports may be examined if they contain sufficient indications of a breach, but identified reporters have fuller procedural rights.
ANI explicitly positions itself as both an intake authority and a guidance body for implementation questions.

Official sources #

Primary law and authority

Enforcement and independent analysis

Deploy your whistleblowing channel →