No. XLII/1 (2020)

The emergence of community control sanctions in the Romanian sanctioning system

Wdrożenie kar probacyjnych do systemu kar w Rumunii

Gabriel Oancea
University of Bucharest
Mihai Ioan Micle
Romanian Academy, Institute of Philosophy and Psychology

Published 2023-02-15


  • Romania,
  • probation system,
  • community control sanctions,
  • Penal Code,
  • prisons

How to Cite

Oancea, G., & Micle, M. I. (2023). The emergence of community control sanctions in the Romanian sanctioning system: Wdrożenie kar probacyjnych do systemu kar w Rumunii. Archives of Criminology, (XLII/1), 207–224.


This article presents the context that led to the establishment of the probation system in Romania, on the background of undertaking of some reforms of the criminal sanctions system. The necessity of achieving them was represented by the difficulties faced by the penitentiary system before and after 1989, but also by the need to align the administration of penalties to the requirements imposed by the country‘s accession to the Council of Europe and the European Union. Eighteen years after the creation of the probation system within the Ministry of Justice, it can be stated that, this endeavor constitutes a success, but it is absolutely necessary to continue the efforts towards its consolidation. In addition, these measures have to be accompanied by a change of vision in relation to how other community members can be involved in the process of social reintegration of persons in conflict with the criminal law.


  1. Boldur-Lățescu G. (2005). The Communist Genocide in Romania. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
  2. Bonta J. and Andrews D.A. (2007). ‘Risk-need-responsibility model for offender assessment and rehabilitation’. Rehabilitation 6(1), pp. 1–22.
  3. Cartner H. (1992). Prison Conditions in Romania. New York: Human Rights Watch.
  4. Day A., Casey S., Ward T., Howells K. and Vess J. (2010). Transitions to Better Lives: Offender Readiness and Rehabilitation. Uffculme: Willan Publishing.
  5. Deletant D. (2018). Romania under Communism: Paradox and Degeneration. London: Routledge.
  6. Durnescu I. (2015). ‘Empty shells, emulation, and Europeanization’. In G. Robinson and F. McNeil (eds.) Community Punishment: European Perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 156–172.
  7. Durnescu I. (2018). ‘Brutal release: Resettlement in Romania – A case study’. In F. Dünkel, I. Pruin, A. Storgaard and J. Weber (eds.) Prisoner Resettlement in Europe. Milton: Routledge, pp. 266–277.
  8. Durnescu I. (2019). ‘Work as a drama: The experience of former prisoners on the labour market’. European Journal of Criminology, DOI: 1477370819838718.
  9. Durnescu I., Istrate A., Teoroc C., Pitiu E. and Rotariu L. (2016). ‘Routes to freedom: Romanian and Roma prisoners finding their way back into Romanian society’. In R. Armstrong and I. Durnescu (eds.) Parole and Beyond: International Experience of Life after Prison. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 271–301.
  10. Illner M. (1996). ‘Post-communist transformation revisited’. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review 4(2), pp. 157–169.
  11. Klimek L. (2016). Mutual Recognition of Judicial Decisions in European Criminal Law. Cham: Springer.
  12. McGuire J. (2001). ‘What works in correctional intervention? Evidence and practical implications’. In G.A. Bernfeld, D.P. Farrington and A.W. Leschied (eds.) Offender Rehabilitation in Practice: Implementing and Evaluating Effective Programs. Hoboken: Wiley, pp. 25–43.
  13. Meško G. and Tankebe J. (2014). Trust and Legitimacy in Criminal Justice: European Perspectives. Cham: Springer.
  14. Micle M.I., Oancea G. and Săucan D.Ş. (2012a). ‘Tehnici cognitiv-comportamentale în reabilitarea infractorilor’ [Cognitive-behavioural techniques in the rehabilitation of offenders]. Revista de Asistenţă Socială 1, pp. 49–57.
  15. Micle M.I., Oancea G. and Săucan D.Ş. (2012b). ‘Tipuri de motivaţii în reabilitarea condamnaţilor aflaţi în evidenţa serviciilor de probaţiune’ [Types of motivation in the rehabilitation of convicted people under the probation services’ supervision]. Revista de Asistenţă Socială 3, pp. 147–158.
  16. Oancea G. (2012). Probaţiunea în România: Evaluări normative și sociologice [Probation in Romania: Normative and Sociological Evaluation]. București: C.H. Beck.
  17. Pescaru M. (2007). ‘Probation services in Romania’. Revista Universitara de Sociologie 3(2), pp. 210–216.
  18. Popa C. (2018). ‘Nicolae Ceauşescu – mecanismele unei dictaturi (1965–1967)’ [Nicolae Ceausescu – The mechanisms of a dictatorship (1965–1967)]. Studii şi materiale de istorie contemporană (SMIC) 1, pp. 115–136.
  19. Pusca A.M. (2018). Revolution, Democratic Transition, and Disillusionment: The Case of Romania. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  20. Stefan B. (2006). ‘Istoria si reforma inchisorilor romanesti’ [History and Romanian prison reform]. Revista Română de Sociologie 17(5–6), pp. 485–512.
  21. Stoenescu A.M. (2005). Istoria loviturilor de stat din România: 1821–1999. Vol. 4. Part 2: Revoluția din Decembrie 1989 – o tragedie românească [History of the coup d’etats in Romania: 1821–1999. Vol. 4. Part 2: The Revolution of December 1989 – A Romanian tragedy]. București: Editura RAO.
  22. Tismaneanu V. and Stan M. (2018). Romania Confronts Its Communist Past: Democracy, Memory, and Moral Justice. Cambridge–New York: Cambridge University Press.
  23. Viets V.L., Walker D.D. and Miller W.R. (2002). ‘What is motivation to change? A scientific analysis’. In M. McMurran (ed.) Motivating Offenders to Change: A Guide to Enhancing Engagement in Therapy. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 15–30.
  24. Young C. and Light D. (2016). ‘Multiple and contested geographies of memory: Remembering the 1989 Romanian “revolution”’. In D. Drozdzewski, S. De Nardi and E. Waterton (eds.) Memory, Place, and Identity: Commemoration and Remembrance of War and Conflict. London: Routledge, pp. 70–87.