Romania once again finds itself in an uncomfortable position on the European rule-of-law map. The EU's chief prosecutor has delivered a blunt and unmistakable message: Romania's justice system must be cleaned up, following reports and cases pointing to suspicious rulings that appear to favor politically influential figures. This is neither diplomatic language nor an isolated remark - it is the result of accumulating warning signs coming from both inside and outside the system.

The issue is not the existence of sensitive cases - every country has them. The real problem is the growing perception that judicial decisions are selective, and that the law does not apply equally to everyone. When prominent politicians repeatedly avoid convictions or benefit from controversial rulings, suspicion becomes the norm rather than the exception.

The chief EU prosecutor's statements carry particular weight because they come from the institution tasked with protecting the European Union's financial interests. The message to Romania is clear: tolerance for a politically influenced justice system is rapidly running out. This directly affects the country's credibility at a time when Bucharest seeks to present itself as a mature and reliable EU partner.

Public reaction in Romania has been swift and sharp. Legal experts, magistrates, and political analysts have noted that this warning is hardly surprising. For years, civil society has accused the justice system of maintaining "protected zones" - cases that drift between courts, strategically expire, or are resolved through legally strained interpretations. Meanwhile, ordinary citizens face long, costly, and unpredictable trials, reinforcing the belief that there are two justice systems: one for the powerful and one for everyone else.

Social media reflects this frustration with striking clarity. Comments are blunt: "This is no longer corruption, it's institutionalized protection", "Justice has become a shield for politicians", "The EU is saying what we've known for years." These reactions stem not from extremism, but from societal exhaustion after countless promises of reform with little to show for them.

The Romanian government now stands at a crossroads. Any defensive or dismissive response risks validating the very criticism being leveled. Yet genuine reform would require confronting deeply entrenched political interests - something few governments have truly dared to do. Too often, "justice reform" has been reduced to cosmetic changes and rhetorical shifts, without addressing the core issue: true judicial independence combined with accountability.

The European warning should not be viewed as an external attack, but as a final alarm bell. Without a genuine cleansing of the system, Romania risks not only reputational damage or potential consequences at EU level, but also a permanent breakdown of trust between citizens and state institutions. When people lose faith in justice, democracy itself becomes an empty shell.

The conclusion is harsh, but unavoidable: Romania's justice problem can no longer be swept under the rug. When the EU's chief prosecutor openly states what many Romanians have been quietly saying for years, the moment of reckoning has arrived. Without political courage and real reform, the rule of law will remain nothing more than a hollow slogan.