Romania’s anti-mafia prosecutors at DIICOT have rejected a proposed law that would decriminalise possession of drugs for personal use. The initiative, registered at the Senate in early October and backed by a request for urgent procedure, would change Romania’s Law 143/2000 and the Customs Code. DIICOT said it cannot be fixed through amendments and criticised the plan for removing criminal penalties without setting a way to clearly separate consumers from traffickers. Prosecutors pointed to the lack of a clear definition or any quantitative threshold to distinguish “personal use” from trafficking. DIICOT said the new approach would turn activities such as cultivation, production, extraction and possession into fines. It would mean fines of 1,000 to 1,500 lei for “risk drugs” and 1,500 to 3,000 lei for “high-risk drugs”, with fines of 1,500 to 3,500 lei for introducing drugs into the country. The prosecutors also criticised a new article they say would impose fines without a quantitative limit for manufacturing, extracting, preparing and processing drugs. DIICOT argued that this could include making improvised synthesis or extraction laboratories, as well as cannabis crops of any size if the intended purpose is not shown to be commercial. DIICOT warned the proposal would shift key decisions from prosecutors to police officers in the field. It said discretion over whether a quantity is “personal use” could create vulnerability to pressure and corruption, and that paying a fine quickly could end a potential criminal investigation. The prosecutors added that, without thresholds, people receiving parcels from abroad could present them as “import for personal use”. They said each recipient could become a contravention offender with a fine payable in 15 days at half the minimum, while a foreign seller would have no contact with Romanian jurisdiction. DIICOT also said the plan does not guarantee a health-focused response. It would make evaluation of dependent users optional, decided by a police officer, and would require written consent from the consumer for any medical evaluation. DIICOT concluded that the bill would not reduce drug trafficking, would keep consumers outside any therapeutic circuit, and would not relieve the justice system because the same structures would face additional contravention work.