The Directions of Public Administration
Reform Due to Romania’s Integration in the European Union
1Iulian M. Nedelcu
1University of Craiova, Faculty of Law, firstname.lastname@example.org
Abstract. Abstract. F rom the formal point o f view, in Romania there is an institutional framework that has
looked favourable for operation in at least satisfactory conditions for the authorities at the political level and
at the level of pub lic administration . In fact, things are different, and Romanians have to admit that the
signals from EU authorities made in the last few years are in co mpliance with the reality, namely: if the fact
that we complied with the political criterion has been accepted, public administrations do not operate
according to the standards established for adhesion. The faulty operation of public administration is obvious,
well known: “Public administration has become uncontrollable in certain fields, and the political level does
not know what decisions to make because it only listens and it is only interested in nothing else except
fratricide fights or other image related matters. There is a lack of political culture in making decisions. And
there is also the so called “psychological corruption” from the desire to keep the power with any price, you
are absolutely opaque, closed and refuse to change the way you work, the way to make decisions"
The persistence of the administration crisis is the expression of a faulty achievement of its functions in
the society and this occurs also because there is no real communication between decision makers and
the ones holding the information, the one deciding “what and how to do” and the ones knowing “what
and how to be done”. This state of things, the lack of communication, collaboration respectively
between people and structures following the same goal, is also illustrated in the lack of broad,
transparent political debates on the matter of public administration.
If in other countries the activity of public administration is permanently under political debate both in
Parliament and in mass-media, in our country public administration has only been discussed from the
point of view of critics, sometimes unqualified ones, regarding the “desk officer” who is either rude,
either demands bribery in order to solve the citizens’ demands.
We think it is necessary to reveal the fact that at a simple observation of the Romanian press, both
central and l ocal1, attention is paid to local public administration in 22 articles appeared in 8 and 12,
respectively, publications and to the Government and central administration in 3 articles appeared in
these publications. We also notice that the number of articles about local administration, no matter
their appearance day, is in the same number, while central administration is paid more attention during
We have to notice that before EU’s signalling, in writing, the increased disarticulation of
administration as well as the urgent need to reform it, were not seen as matters to be solved in political
debates or election platforms.
Therefore, confusion occurred between the various parts of the state power democratic system that
exists at present also. Paradoxically in appearance, the politization of administration has caused the
growth of its power and the loss of control of the state politics (of the Parliament) upon public
administration. In other words, the phenomenon of administration autonomization occurred.
Although, the most part of population opposes administration politization and believes in an
administration that serves everybody, two meanings of this phenomenon can be seen: on one hand,
politicians interfering in administration and on the other hand, people in the administration going
towards and cultivating relations with politicians.
1 Monitoring performed in Romanian press on the 10th (Saturday) and 22nd (Thursday) of May 2003