After Iohannis’s stabilocracy: anti-corruption protests bring polarization back to Romania

Nova News, 16 December 2025

Context

The film “Captured Justice” (2025) by the Romanian investigative media outlet Recorder acted as a powerful public catalyst, drawing attention to deep-rooted problems in the Romanian judicial system and its dependence on the political elite.

1. Content of the film “Captured Justice”

The main thesis of the film is that, after the “golden age” of the fight against corruption (2014-2017, under the leadership of Laura Codruța Koveși), the criminal justice system was taken over and reorganized by corrupt political and business interests to ensure the impunity of the ruling elite.

• Key revelations: The film reveals how influential politicians and businesspeople manage to manipulate appointments to key positions in the judiciary, including the Judicial Inspectorate and the High Court of Cassation and Justice. The investigation presents concrete cases in which high-ranking magistrates acted in the service of the political class rather than in the name of the law. This is achieved by changing the judicial composition in court cases, which leads to delays in corruption cases and their conclusion due to the statute of limitations and without a conviction.
• Specific targets: The film directly criticizes individuals who are presented as being part of this system of collusion, including Judge Lia Savonea (head of the judicial unit of the Supreme Court), Cătălin Predoiu (former Minister of Justice and Minister of the Interior, representative of the ruling coalition), and Marius Voineag (current head of the DNA’s Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office).

2. Historical context: the era of “stabilocracy”

Recorder’s revelations must be viewed in the context of the political period that journalist Vladimir Mitev calls “stabilocracy” (the Klaus Iohannis administration—especially after the two major parties, the Social Democratic Party and the National Liberal Party, formed a coalition government in 2021).

• Weakening of the DNA: After the National Anti-Corruption Directorate (DNA), led by Laura Codruța Kövesi, secured convictions against prominent figures (including prime ministers and ministers), the ruling parties (mainly the PSD) launched an active campaign to weaken the institution during Liviu Dragnea’s time in power (2017-2019). This led to Kövesi’s dismissal and changes to the law that hampered the work of prosecutors.
• Political consensus: During Klaus Iohannis’s presidency, power was shared between the two major traditional parties (PSD and PNL – the latter being supported by Iohannis). This period was characterized by a lack of strong political interest in continuing the large-scale fight against corruption, as this would have affected the interests of the two forces in power. According to critics, this consensus allowed the system to “take back control.”

3. Anti-corruption protests and public reaction

Recorder’s film catalyzed a new wave of protests, even though Romania has a long history of mass demonstrations against corruption (e.g., protests against Emergency Ordinance 13 of 2017).

• Public outrage: “Captured justice” sparked a wave of outrage because it confirmed the public’s suspicions that the state was acting against the interests of its citizens by guaranteeing impunity for the political elite, which is considered corrupt.
• Demands: Protesters are calling for immediate reforms of the judiciary, the dismissal of compromised magistrates, and the restoration of the independence of the prosecution and the courts.
• Institutional response: In response to the pressure, the judicial inspectorate launched investigations into the allegations in the film. However, skepticism remains high, as the public does not trust the self-regulatory mechanisms of the system that is the subject of criticism.

Essentially, the film and the protests that followed represent a new stage in the ongoing struggle between reformist forces (supported by a large part of the NGO sector) and forces opposed to reform in Romanian politics.

Summary

Journalist Vladimir Mitev comments on the film “Captured Justice” produced by the Romanian website Recorder and the anti-corruption protests that followed.

• Objectives of the investigation: The documentary targets key figures in the Romanian judicial system who are considered to be linked to the period of so-called “stabilocracy” during Klaus Iohannis’ presidency. The film’s criticism is directed at Lia Savonea (president of the Supreme Court of Cassation and Justice), Cătălin Predoiu (former Minister of Justice, current Minister of the Interior) and Marius Voineag (head of the National Anti-Corruption Directorate, DNA).
• Interpretation of the film: According to Mitev, the film is an attempt to replace these leaders, who are considered insufficiently active in the fight against corruption during the period of stabilocracy (a period when the major traditional parties – PSD and PNL – governed together and showed no interest in large-scale anti-corruption activities).
• Lia Savonea and Laura Kövesi: Savonea is identified as the most important figure against whom the protesters’ hatred is directed and is a historical opponent of Laura Codruța Köveși (former head of the DNA and current European Chief Prosecutor). Savonea’s rise has come at the expense of the weakening and end of the “golden age of anti-corruption” under Köveși’s leadership. The fact that Köveși signed a petition for reform suggests that she may play a role in future proceedings.
• Reasons for the weakening of the fight against corruption: The era of aggressive anti-corruption efforts created strong tensions in Romanian society and administration (many people were afraid to sign documents). These tensions led to a negative reaction that weakened and froze the fight against corruption for a period of time.
• Current situation: Protests continue. In response to pressure, the Judicial Inspection has ordered an investigation into the allegations in the film. The magistrates concerned are defending themselves publicly, which has led to a media battle that reveals the mechanisms of justice and the power within it.

Video with auto-generated subtitles in English

Interview

Recorder’s film encourages a change in the current leadership of the Romanian judicial system

Vladimir Mitev: Hello.

TV Host: What can we add to the basic information circulating in the media? Are the protests continuing? What has caused people’s discontent? What does this investigation reveal? And what does it show Romanians? Perhaps we should start at the end—with the investigation.

Okay. The investigation targets some of the key figures in the judiciary. These include Lia Savonea, who heads the Supreme Court of Cassation, but critical remarks are also made about the former Minister of Justice, the current Minister of the Interior, Cătălin Predoiu, as well as the head of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (DNA), Marius Voineag.

One thing I can add here is that they are clearly perceived as being linked to the previous period, when Klaus Iohannis was president and there was a stabilocracy – that is, the two major parties of the transition period were in power, there were no reforms, and there was a lack of significant anti-corruption activities. So, one interpretation we can give to the film is that it attempts to replace the people whom the filmmakers consider insufficiently active in the fight against corruption with other people who might be more active. Perhaps here I should provide a little more context about Romanian society or politics in general…

The main character in the film, Lia Savonea, is a long-time opponent of the current head of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, Laura Köveși.

Can we pause for a moment? You mentioned two names, let’s clarify the story around them, because I’ve heard that these are names that have been discussed at various press conferences – for example, Lia Savonea. Tell us about this story, because it is very important. You mentioned two people who are criticized for the dysfunctionality of the Romanian judicial system. Or at least that’s how I understand it.

Perhaps Lia Savonea is the most important figure, because she is the target of the most hatred. Here, we should mention that, according to press reports, she was part of a different trend than Laura Codruța Köveși – about 10 years ago, in what we know as the golden age of anti-corruption. Over time, this anti-corruption effort was weakened and eventually stopped. I can provide more details on this if you wish.

But that’s how things are – in the judiciary, as in the state itself, there are always different trends. And it seems that Lia Savonea has imposed herself on the departure of Laura Köveși from Romania. It is interesting to note that Laura Köveși’s term as head of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) expires in the new year, in October, if I am not mistaken. She is one of the women and, in fact, one of the magistrates who signed a petition calling for reforms in the judicial system. In other words, Laura Köveși could play a role from now on in what will happen in Romania. Of course, it remains to be seen what exactly will happen.

In Bulgaria, we have not noticed that the Romanian state has severely restricted and almost frozen the fight against corruption during Klaus Iohannis’s term.

All right. Mr. Mitev, I would like to ask you one more question. I am sure you could tell us many other things. Unfortunately, our time is limited. But what happened to that Romania which, until very recently—I think my guest will correct me if I am wrong—until very recently was considered an example of a country that had undergone very serious changes, very serious judicial proceedings, and which had resulted in convictions for corruption. In a way, Romania was a benchmark for a country that was a few steps ahead of us in this regard. What happened? Where did things go wrong?

I think our society missed an important development in the Romanian judicial system and politics in general through the years. I am referring to the fact that, during Liviu Dragnea’s time and then when Iohannis was a powerful figure, Romania entered a period of stabilocracy—that is, the two major parties of the transition period, traditionally considered more corrupt, held power, distributed the spoils, state funds, European funds, and ultimately had no interest in fighting corruption on a significant scale. Perhaps the fight against corruption only existed for some lower-level local figures.

In other words, we in Bulgaria may wonder where this Romania of the fight against corruption has disappeared to, but in fact, Romania has always had different tendencies. What Laura Köveși was doing was not perceived unequivocally, it was not seen only as something positive. I remember that at the time, many people in the administration refused to sign orders or documents because they feared that they would be used to remove them from the administration. In other words, there was a lot of tension in Romania at the time, and over time this tension led to a negative reaction that weakened and ultimately even halted the fight against corruption for a period. Now that Iohannis has left, we are witnessing an attempt to revive this anti-corruption campaign.

Following Recorder’s film, checks were ordered in the judicial institutions regarding the facts presented, and the magistrates targeted by the attacks are publishing documents in their defense.

Thank you, Mr. Mitev, for joining us live. We will keep in touch with you. The protests will continue, I suppose. What information do you have? Because it is very important to follow the trials.

Yes, the protests are continuing. The Ministry of Justice has now ordered inspections of judicial institutions. The Judicial Inspectorate will verify the allegations made in Recorder’s film. There are statements by Marius Voineag, whom I mentioned, from the National Anti-Corruption Directorate (DNA) and so on. Everyone is trying to defend themselves. And, in fact, it is becoming a battle in which institutions are making public orders from within their activities. And, to a certain extent, you can see the mechanisms by which justice and power within the justice system work.

Thank you. Thank you once again. Vladimir Mitev, journalist, correspondent from Romania, live on “Your Day”

Photo: Protesters demanding reform of the Romanian judicial system want “justice without phone calls (i.e., calls from politicians)” (source: YouTube)

Subscribe to the channel of the blog “The Bridge of Friendship” in YouTube, where a number of video and audio interviews are published! The blog can also be followed in Facebook and Twitter. Its Telegram channel is here. And here is its Substack account.

About Author