Romanian Constitutional Bar

In 2002, the Deva Court recognized the legal personality of the "Bonis Potra" Charitable Association, which had included in its Statute, among other objects of activity, "the establishment of bars in compliance with the provisions of the Romanian Constitution, the provisions of international human rights pacts and conventions.".

After the finality of the court decisions, the "board of directors" of the Romanian Constitutional Bar was constituted, and Pompiliu Bota called himself "dean". On January 17, 2003, the "Annual Panel of Constitutional Bar Lawyers" was drawn up, in which 35 people were registered, 20 of whom were granted the pseudo-right to draw conclusions in courts and courts of appeal, the professional offices being located in Orăștie, Alba Iulia, Baia Mare, Timișoara, Reșița, Piatra Neamț, Satu Mare, Negrești Oaș, Turnu Severin, Petroșani and Bucharest.

It is obvious nonsense for a charity to be able to set up bars, unions, foundations or trade unions, as only courts of law can legally set up organizations, and they cannot delegate this prerogative to a private association.{{Cite web |last=E-JURIDIC.RO |first=Redactia |date=24 October 2011 |title=ICCJ a sanctionat baroul lui Pompiliu Bota |url=https://e-juridic.manager.ro/articole/iccj-a-sanctionat-baroul-lui-pompiliu-bota-7815.html |access-date=19 November 2021 |website=Stiri juridice, contracte si legislatie actualizata - E-JURIDIC.RO |language=ro}} That is why the Constitutional Bar was never a legally established organization. There is no court ruling that explicitly provides for the establishment of the Constitutional Bar. The "Bonis Potra" Association or the "Figaro Potra" Association could not issue court rulings.

The courts did not have a unitary practice in assessing the quality of lawyer of the members of the Constitutional Bar.

The following trends could be identified in the practice of the courts:Lupașcu, Dan. [http://www.unbr.ro/index.php?id=43&data=1242216000 Nr. 662/CSM/2004 Nr. 671C5/02-06-2004 Nr. 1581/IG/M/2004 Punctul de vedere al Direcției Inspecției Generale din Ministerul Justiției, punct de vedere însușit de către Consiliul Superior al Magistraturii cu privire la verificarea legalității constituirii Baroului Constituțional în raport de dispozițiile OG nr. 26/2000 și Legea nr. 51/1995 și identificarea instanțelor la care avocații respectivi au pledat și actele de reprezentare în baza cărora au făcut-o.] — its text can be read at {{Cite web |date=13 December 2017 |title=baroul lui POMPILIU BOTA |url=https://www.avocatnet.ro/forum/discutie_5188/baroul-lui-POMPILIU-BOTA.html |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Răspunsuri Avocatnet.ro |language=ro}}{{Cite journal |last=Tudurachi |first=Elena-Cătălina |year=2019 |title=The constitutionalisation of criminal standards concerning the exercise of the lawyer's profession |journal=Revista de Drept Constituțional |publisher=Editura Universitatii Alexandru Ioan Cuza din Iasi |pages=51–69 |doi=10.47743/rdc-2019-2-0004 |issn=2810-1979 |doi-access=free}}

1. accepting and allowing members of the Constitutional Bar to provide legal assistance and representation;
2. to consider the members of the "Constitutional Bar" to present "evidence regarding the quality of lawyer under the conditions of Law no. 51/1995" and, in their absence, not to be allowed to provide assistance and representation;
3. to qualify the mandate of representation as being given to a non-lawyer and, in accordance with the provisions of art. 68 paragraph 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the members of the mentioned bar are not allowed to draw conclusions.

On April 5, 2012, the Deva Court decided to sentence Pompiliu Bota, dean of the Constitutional Bar, to 6 months imprisonment for the unlawful exercise of a regulated profession and to 6 months imprisonment for the crime of complicity in the crime of unlawful pursuit of a regulated profession. Following the merging of the two sentences, the heaviest sentence of 6 months imprisonment was applied. The court also ordered the conditional suspension of the execution of the sentence applied to Pompiliu Bota for a probation period of 2 years and 6 months.[http://www.juridice.ro/195945/pompiliu-bota-a-fost-condamnat-pentru-exercitarea-fara-drept-a-profesiei-de-avocat-update.html Pompiliu Bota a fost condamnat pentru exercitarea fara drept a profesiei de avocat], 29 mai 2012, Juridice.ro.

The sentence given by the Deva Court was appealed by Pompiliu Bota on April 26, 2012, to the Alba Iulia Court of Appeal,[http://portal.just.ro/InstantaDosar.aspx?idInstitutie=57&d=MjIxMDAwMDAwMDAwNTY2MjY* Numãr unic dosar: 002147/221/2007], Portalul Instanțelor din România, Ministerul Justiției. but the appeal was rejected on May 29, 2012, so that the sentence of conviction of Pompiliu Bota by the Deva Court remained final. The action for annulment was also dismissed.{{Cite web |date=14 March 2013 |title=Curtea de Apel ALBA IULIA - Informații dosar 553/57/2012 |url=http://portal.just.ro/57/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=5700000000016244&id_inst=57 |url-status=unfit |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305105815/http://portal.just.ro/57/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=5700000000016244&id_inst=57 |archive-date=5 March 2016 |access-date=19 January 2022 |website=portal.just.ro}}

Bota and others will be tried in 2022 at the Suceava Court of Appeal for violating Art. 348 and Art. 367 of the Criminal Code; the injured parties (the plaintiffs who filed the complaint) number almost two hundred people.{{Citation |title=Curtea de Apel SUCEAVA - Informații dosar 8064/314/2015/a1 |url=http://portal.just.ro/39/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=31400000000108108&id_inst=39 |publisher=portal.just.ro}} On 28 November 2023, the Suceava Court of Appeal annulled the acquittal of some "lawyers" from the Bota Bar (including Pompiliu Bota), terminated the criminal proceedings against them due to the limitation of criminal liability, the assets used for the illicit practice of law remain confiscated, the insurance seizure on certain assets and real estate was maintained, and they were obliged to pay some expenses related to the criminal investigation.Sources for 'appeal':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |last=admin |date=29 November 2023 |title=Robe, insigne, ștampile, legitimații, împuterniciri și altele, confiscate de la Pompiliu Bota și încă 8 falși avocați |url=https://www.clujust.ro/robe-insigne-stampile-legitimatii-imputerniciri-si-altele-confiscate-de-la-pompiliu-bota-si-inca-8-falsi-avocati/ |access-date=7 December 2023 |website=CLUJUST |language=ro}}|{{cite web | first=Razvan | last=Robu | title=Avocaţii lui Pompiliu Bota lăsaţi fără robe, ştampile şi legitimaţii | website=Ziar Gazeta de Cluj | date=30 November 2023 | url=https://gazetadecluj.ro/avocatii-lui-pompiliu-bota-lasati-fara-robe-stampile-si-legitimatii/ | access-date=7 December 2023}}|{{cite web | last=Enciu | first=Vlad | title=Sfarsitul Baroului Bota! Curtea de Apel Suceava a constatat ca infractiunile savarsite de falsii avocati condusi de inginerul Pompiliu Bota s-au prescris | website=IMPACTPRESS | date=1 December 2023 | url=https://www.impactpress.ro/2023/12/01/sfarsitul-baroului-bota-curtea-de-apel-suceava-a-constatat-ca-infractiunile-savarsite-de-falsii-avocati-condusi-de-inginerul-pompiliu-bota-s-au-prescris/ | access-date=7 December 2023}}|{{cite web | last=Bălășcău | first=Sergiu | title=Ni s-au furat 10 ani și jumătate din viață | website=Despre Botosaniul interzis | date=28 November 2023 | url=https://www.botosaneanul.ro/breaking-news/punct-final-in-uriasul-proces-al-baroului-bota-dupa-mai-bine-un-deceniu-nu-a-fost-condamnat-nimeni-ni-s-au-furat-10-ani-si-jumatate-din-viata/ | language=ro | access-date=7 December 2023}}|{{cite web | first= Sandrinio | last=Neagu | title=Clona Baroului de Avocati vinovata pentru dosarele in care asa zisii avocati au intrat si au luat bani de la clienti | website=Monitorul de Suceava | date=29 November 2023 | url=https://www.monitorulsv.ro/Local/2023-11-29/Clona-Baroului-de-Avocati-vinovata-pentru-dosarele-in-care-asa-zisii-avocati-au-intrat-si-au-luat-bani-de-la-clienti | language=ro | access-date=7 December 2023}}}} The sentence is final (definitive). Pompiliu Bota filed a recourse in cassation, but that was also rejected by the HCCJ.{{cite web | last=Bone | first=Dragoș | title=Instanța supremă a respins recursul în casație formulat de inițiatorul "Baroului Constituțional" | website=Justnews.ro | date=23 September 2024 | url=https://justnews.ro/instanta-suprema-a-respins-recursul-in-casatie-formulat-de-initiatorul-baroului-constitutional/ | language=ro | access-date=14 October 2024}} In January 2025, the Constitutional Court rejected his complaint that the law about the bars of lawyers would be unconstitutional.{{cite web | title=DECIZIE 25 28/01/2025 | website=Portal Legislativ | url=https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/296820 | language=ro | access-date=27 April 2025}}{{cite web | title=LEX | website=Logowanie Borg | date=10 April 2025 | url=https://sintact.ro/legislatie/monitorul-oficial/decizia-25-2025-r-referitoare-la-exceptia-de-neconstitutionalitate-a-17038899 | language=pl | access-date=27 April 2025}}

Florin Talpan, jurist of the Steaua București Army Sports Club (CSA Steaua), stated: "First of all, Bota is not a lawyer! He is a jurist, who has repeatedly violated the law, being sentenced to suspended imprisonment. He is a person of bad faith who evades the law all the time, making a point of it."{{Cite web |date=3 October 2019 |title=EXCLUSIV - Talpan îl distruge pe Bota: "Nici măcar nu este avocat. A fost condamnat la închisoare!" Ce se va întâmpla cu marca înregistrată de Pompiliu Bota în Europa: "Avem protectie absoluta asupra ei!" |url=//www.telekomsport.ro/exclusiv-talpan-il-distruge-pe-bota-nici-macar-nu-este-avocat-a-fost-condamnat-la-inchisoare-ce-se-va-intampla-cu-marca-inregistrata-de-pompiliu-bota-in-europa-avem-protectie-absoluta-asupra-ei-19131708 |access-date=19 November 2021 |website=Telekomsport |language=ro}} Bota entered into a conflict with CSA Steaua by abusively registering their trademark with the European Union Intellectual Property Office.

Two alleged lawyers from the Constitutional Bar have been definitively convicted either of illicitly practicing law as a lawyer or of threatening government officials during the investigation of the illegal practice of law (one of them went to jail and the other is or was wanted by the Romanian Police for being landed in jail).Sources for 'jail':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |last=Bone |first=Dragoș |date=13 January 2021 |title=Decizie definitivă: un fost avocat, exclus din branșă, condamnat a doua oară pentru exercitarea fără drept a profesiei |url=https://justnews.ro/decizie-definitiva-un-fost-avocat-exclus-din-bransa-condamnat-la-amenda-penala-pentru-exercitarea-fara-drept-a-profesiei/ |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=Justnews.ro |language=ro}}|{{cite web | title=CONSTANTIN VICTOR | website=Poliția Română | date=28 January 2021 | url=https://www.politiaromana.ro/ro/persoane-urmarite/constantin-victor | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230406020714/https://www.politiaromana.ro/ro/persoane-urmarite/constantin-victor | archive-date=6 April 2023 | url-status=dead | access-date=23 September 2023}}|{{cite web | first=Marian | last=Mocanu | title=Bârlădeanul care a amenințat cu moartea doi magistrați, condamnat la închisoare | website=Monitorul de Vaslui | date=28 September 2020 | url=http://www.monitoruldevaslui.ro/2020/09/barladeanul-care-a-amenintat-cu-moartea-doi-magistrati-condamnat-la-inchisoare/ | language=ro | access-date=19 August 2021}}|{{cite web | first=Ciprian | last=Nedelcu | title=Un avocat a amenințat un procuror și un judecător cu moartea | website=BZI.ro | date=22 September 2020 | url=https://www.bzi.ro/un-avocat-a-amenintat-un-procuror-si-un-judecator-cu-moartea-a-postat-pe-facebook-ca-ii-va-decapita-pe-amandoi-cum-s-a-terminat-razboiul-pornit-din-instanta-4032360 | language=ro | access-date=19 August 2021}}|{{cite web | last=Zagoneanu | first=Ionuț | title=Constanța. Avocat judecat din pușcărie pentru exercitarea fără drept a profesiei. A fost achitat | website=ZIUA de Constanta | date=19 April 2021 | url=https://www.ziuaconstanta.ro/stiri/justitie/constanta-avocat-judecat-din-puscarie-pentru-exercitarea-fara-drept-a-profesiei-a-fost-achitat-745018.html | language=ro | access-date=19 August 2021}}|{{cite web | title=CURTEA DE APEL CONSTANȚA - Informații dosar 5832/327/2019 | website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină | date=24 January 2022 | url=http://portal.just.ro/36/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=32700000000119425&id_inst=36 | language=ro | access-date=24 January 2022}}}} In fact, one of them was already excluded from the Bota Bar when he pretended to be a lawyer, so when the penal trial was being judged against the doubly false lawyer, the Bota Bar asked for damages from the doubly fake lawyer (asked 10 thousands RON as civil party to the trial); but since the Bota Bar was not recognized as a legally established bar association, the fake lawyer was not sentenced to pay damages to the Bota Bar.{{Cite web |date=24 January 2021 |title=Fals avocat, condamnat pentru exercitarea fără drept a profesiei. UNBR-Bota a cerut daune! |url=https://www.clujust.ro/fals-avocat-condamnat-pentru-exercitarea-fara-drept-a-profesiei-unbr-bota-a-cerut-daune/ |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=CLUJUST |language=ro}}

A Bucharest resident who was a member of the Bota Bar was also definitively sentenced to three years and six months in prison, among other things for violating Art. 348.{{Cite web |last=Marcu |first=Ionel |date=22 March 2021 |title=Avocat din Baroul scos in afara legii, condamnat definitiv la inchisoare. A incasat 25.000 euro de la un medic |url=https://adevarul.ro/locale/oradea/avocat-baroul-scos-afara-legii-condamnat-definitiv-inchisoare-incasat-25000-euro-medic-1_60589ddd5163ec42712e089e/index.html |access-date=18 November 2021 |website=adevarul.ro |language=ro}}{{Citation |title=Curtea de Apel ORADEA - Informații dosar 3252/271/2018 |url=http://portal.just.ro/35/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=27100000000246270&id_inst=35 |publisher=portal.just.ro}}

The Suceava Tribunal sentenced two people that were part of the Bota Bar to suspended sentences, but the decision is not final, being appealed.Sources for 'suspended sentence':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |date=22 September 2021 |title=Avocat din Botoșani condamnat la închisoare cu suspendare. Vezi pentru ce! |url=https://www.botosaninews.ro/496177/social/justitie/avocat-din-botosani-condamnat-la-inchisoare-cu-suspendare-vezi-pentru-ce/ |access-date=4 January 2022 |website=BotosaniNews.ro |language=ro}}|{{cite web | first=Sandrinio | last=Neagu | title=Lovitura de gratie toti avocatii care au profesat in Baroul Bota achitati de judecatori - Marți, 21 Septembrie 2021 | website=Monitorul de Suceava | date=21 September 2021 | url=https://www.monitorulsv.ro/Ultima-ora-local/2021-09-21/Lovitura-de-gratie-toti-avocatii-care-au-profesat-in-Baroul-Bota-achitati-de-judecatori | language=ro | access-date=4 January 2022}}}}{{Cite web |last=Gaci |first=Stere |date=2 March 2022 |title=Hotărârea judecătorilor provoacă schimbări majore în justiție. Ce s-a stabilit în legătură cu membrii barourilor paralele |url=https://evz.ro/hotararea-judecatorilor-provoaca-schimbari-majore-in-justitie-ce-s-a-stabilit-in-legatura-cu-membrii-barourilor-paralele.html |access-date=13 August 2022 |website=evz.ro |language=ro}}{{Cite web |date=4 January 2022 |title=Tribunalul SUCEAVA - Informații dosar 8064/314/2015/a1 |url=http://portal.just.ro/86/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=31400000000108108&id_inst=86 |access-date=4 January 2022 |website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro}} In the same decision, the Suceava Tribunal ordered the annihilation of many documents signed by several "lawyers", i.e. the annihilation of many invoices, but this will produce legal effects only if the decision remains final [annihilation=making them void]. The legal doctrine on the civil law effects of the annihilation of documents in criminal proceedings is unclear and controversial.{{Cite web |last1=Kuglay |first1=Irina |last2=Toma-Dăuceanu |first2=Laura |last3=Trandafir |first3=Andra-Roxana |date=30 January 2020 |editor-last=Societatea de Stiinte Juridice |title=Desființarea înscrisurilor și anularea actelor juridice în procesul penal |url=https://www.juridice.ro/671243/desfiintarea-inscrisurilor-si-anularea-actelor-juridice-in-procesul-penal.html |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=JURIDICE - in Law we Trust |language=ro}} The appeal has been judged, see above.

Another "lawyer" from the Bota Bar was definitively sentenced to a RON 7200 criminal fine in 2018 for practicing a regulated profession without having the right to do so.{{Cite web |last=Mureșan |first=Ionuț |date=17 October 2018 |title=Avocata Laura Vicol, achitată de Instanța supremă |url=https://evz.ro/avocata-laura-vicol-achitata-de-instanta-suprema.html |access-date=23 January 2022 |website=evz.ro |language=ro}}

The head of UNBR Botomei, a former associate of Pompiliu Bota, was definitively sentenced to prison with immediate effect.

Another fake lawyer from Constanța or Tulcea, belonging to the Bota Bar, was sentenced to prison.Sources for 'prison':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |last=Albu |first=Daniel |date=12 October 2020 |title=Un fals avocat, care a dat în judecată toată justiția de la malul mării, se căznește să demonstreze că e nevinovat, după ce a fost condamnat |url=https://focuspress.ro/un-fals-avocat-care-a-dat-in-judecata-toata-justitia-de-la-malul-marii-se-cazneste-sa-demonstreze-ca-e-nevinovat-dupa-ce-a-fost-condamnat/ |access-date=9 May 2022 |website=focuspress.ro}}|{{cite web | last=Gavrilaş | first=Călin | title=Fals avocat, condamnat la închisoare cu executare | website=adevarul.ro | date=15 February 2018 | url=https://adevarul.ro/stiri-locale/constanta/fals-avocat-condamnat-la-inchisoare-cu-executare-1843946.html | language=ro | access-date=16 January 2023}}|{{cite web | last=Hagi | first=Cristian | title=Un fals avocat a ajuns după gratii | website=CT100.ro | date=31 January 2017 | url=https://www.ct100.ro/un-fals-avocat-a-ajuns-dupa-gratii/ | access-date=16 January 2023}}}} The appeal trial of this person was cancelled due to exceeding the statute of limitations (the trial has ended without declaring him either guilty or innocent).{{Cite web |last=D.A. |date=23 January 2023 |title=Tulceanul condamnat pentru exercitarea fără drept a profesiei de avocat, a scăpat de acuzații: s-a prescris răspunderera penală |url=https://focuspress.ro/tulceanul-condamnat-pentru-exercitarea-fara-drept-a-profesiei-de-avocat-a-scapat-de-acuzatii-s-a-prescris-raspunderera-penala/ |access-date=13 February 2023 |website=focuspress.ro}}

A pretended lawyer from Cluj was sentenced to 7200 RON penal fine for exercising the profession of lawyer without having the right to do so.{{Cite web |last=Bețu |first=Camelia |date=27 November 2021 |title=Un avocat clujean riscă să-și piardă locuința, după ce a fost acuzat că își exercită profesia ilegal |url=https://gazetadecluj.ro/un-avocat-clujean-risca-sa-si-piarda-locuinta-dupa-ce-a-fost-acuzat-ca-isi-exercita-profesia-ilegal/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220411231939/https://gazetadecluj.ro/un-avocat-clujean-risca-sa-si-piarda-locuinta-dupa-ce-a-fost-acuzat-ca-isi-exercita-profesia-ilegal/ |archive-date=11 April 2022 |access-date=22 July 2022 |website=Ziar Gazeta de Cluj}} He has to pay a total of 35 thousands RON penal fines. E.g. he got one sentence to pay a 9000 RON penal fine and 10000 RON damages to the real Cluj Bar Association.{{Cite web |last=Bursașiu |first=Veronica |date=1 September 2020 |title=ÎCCJ a respins cererea de recurs în casație a unui clujean acuzat de exercitarea FĂRĂ DREPT a profesiei de AVOCAT |url=https://www.bihorjust.ro/iccj-a-respins-cererea-de-recurs-in-casatie-a-unui-clujean-acuzat-de-exercitarea-fara-drept-a-profesiei-de-avocat/ |access-date=1 May 2023 |website=Bihor Just |language=ro}}

Another pretended lawyer received a postponed prison sentence.{{Cite web |date=25 October 2022 |title=Încurajat de clasări și achitări, un fals avocat a continuat să profeseze. În cele din urmă a primit o pedeapsă cu amânare |url=https://www.clujust.ro/incurajat-de-clasari-si-achitari-un-fals-avocat-a-continuat-sa-profeseze-in-cele-din-urma-a-primit-o-pedeapsa-cu-amanare/ |access-date=25 October 2022 |website=CLUJUST |language=ro}}

A woman pretending to be lawyer has been sentenced in Constanța.{{Cite web |last=Albu |first=Daniel |date=20 January 2022 |title=O falsă avocată, condamnată la Constanța, nu este de acord cu amenda primită după ce și-a recunoscut fapta în fața procurorilor |url=https://focuspress.ro/o-falsa-avocata-condamnata-la-constanta-nu-este-de-acord-cu-amenda-primita-dupa-ce-si-a-recunoscut-fapta-in-fata-procurorilor/ |access-date=16 January 2023 |website=focuspress.ro}}

A fake lawyer from Tulcea was also sentenced.{{Cite web |date=15 January 2023 |title=Un FALS AVOCAT, trimis în judecată pentru înşelăciune |url=https://www.replicaonline.ro/un-fals-avocat-trimis-in-judecata-pentru-inselaciune-460916 |access-date=16 January 2023 |website=replicaonline.ro |language=ro}}

Two sons of a Romanian (ex)judge are being prosecuted for illegal practice as lawyers.{{Cite web |date=6 April 2022 |title=Inculpatul Alexandru Ion-Tudoran, avocatul impostor, gata de judecata penală. Urmează fratele Tudor |url=https://www.national.ro/justitie/inculpatul-alexandru-ion-tudoran-avocatul-impostor-gata-de-judecata-penala-urmeaza-fratele-tudor-758455.html |access-date=16 January 2023 |website=national.ro |language=ro}}{{Cite web |last=Sidorov |first=Andrei |date=7 April 2022 |title=Beizadeaua judecătorului Ion Tudoran ajunge la proces. Nu ca avocat, ci ca inculpat |url=https://cetateanul.net/articol-principal/beizadeaua-judecatorului-ion-tudoran-ajunge-la-proces-nu-ca-avocat-ci-ca-inculpat/ |access-date=16 January 2023 |website=Cetateanul.net - Orașul tău, știrile tale}} They had been illegally registered as members of the Madrid Bar Association, which apparently could not distinguish between fake and genuine credentials of being a Romanian lawyer. One of them was saved by the statute of limitations.{{cite web | last=Rotaru | first=Victor | title=Alexandru Ion-Tudoran, avocatul impostor, a scăpat basma curată | website=replicaonline.ro | date=5 December 2023 | url=https://www.replicaonline.ro/alexandru-ion-tudoran-avocatul-impostor-a-scapat-basma-curata-576720 | language=ro | access-date=22 December 2024}}

A fake lawyer from Cluj was saved by the statute of limitations.{{Cite web |last=Robu |first=Razvan |date=15 April 2023 |title=Prescripția scapă un avocat clujean de acuzația de înșelăciune |url=https://gazetadecluj.ro/prescriptia-scapa-un-avocat-clujean-de-acuzatia-de-inselaciune/ |access-date=21 April 2023 |website=Ziar Gazeta de Cluj}}

Currently, there are many decisions of the Constitutional Court of Romania or the European Court of Human Rights on the issue of the organization of the lawyer profession and bars in Romania as a result of the conflict between "classic bars" and "Bota bars", but the practice has long been non-uniform at the level of various courts.Sources for 'non-uniform':{{Bulleted list|Decizia nr. 233/2004 referitoare la excepția de neconstituționalitate a dispozițiilor art. 48 alin. (1) teza întâi și ale art. 57 alin. (1) și (3) din Legea nr. 51/1995 pentru organizarea și exercitarea profesiei de avocat, republicată, cu modificările și completările ulterioare, precum și a dispozițiilor art. 26 alin. 1 și 2 și ale art. 27 din Legea notarilor publici și a activității notariale nr. 36/1995, cu modificările și completările ulterioare. Publicată în Monitorul Oficial, Partea I nr. 603 din 05/07/2004.|Decizia nr. 234/2004 referitoare la excepția de neconstituționalitate a dispozițiilor art. 48 alin. (1) teza întâi și ale art. 57 alin. (1) și (3) din Legea nr. 51/1995 pentru organizarea și exercitarea profesiei de avocat, republicată, cu modificările și completările ulterioare. Publicată în Monitorul Oficial, Partea I nr. 532 din 14/06/2004.|ECHR Decision of 12 October 2004 regarding the admissibility of the request no. 24057/03 presented by Pompiliu Bota vs. Romania.}}

On September 21, 2015, the High Court of Cassation and Justice ruled in an recourse in the interest of the law (RIL) on the non-unitary practice regarding lawyers in alternative bars.

The minute reads as follows: {{blockquote|The act of a person exercising activities specific to the lawyer profession within entities that are not part of the forms of professional organization recognized by Law 51/1995 on the organization and exercise of the lawyer profession, republished, with subsequent amendments and completions, constitutes the felony of practicing without permission of a regulated profession provided by Art. 348 of the Criminal Code.{{Cite web |last=cristiu |date=22 September 2015 |title=RIL admis: exercitarea profesiei de avocat in afara UNBR este infractiune |url=http://consilierjuridic.com/309/ril-admis-exercitarea-profesiei-de-avocat-in-afara-unbr-este-infractiune.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170731143853/http://consilierjuridic.com/309/ril-admis-exercitarea-profesiei-de-avocat-in-afara-unbr-este-infractiune.html |archive-date=31 July 2017 |access-date=26 March 2020 |website=Consilier juridic |language=ro}}{{Cite web |title=Decizia ICCJ - RIL nr. 15/2015. Avocatura ilegală. Barouri paralele |url=https://legeaz.net/monitorul-oficial-816-2015/decizie-ril-iccj-15-2015 |access-date=26 March 2020 |website=LegeAZ |language=ro}}}}

Since then, the practice of law by the "lawyers" of the Constitutional Bar has been a crime, without any doubt in this regard.Sources for 'declared illegal':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |date=5 November 2015 |title=Adio, avocatură clandestină! Decizia ÎCCJ a fost publicată în Monitorul Oficial. DOCUMENT |url=https://www.clujust.ro/adio-avocatura-clandestina-decizia-iccj-a-fost-publicata-in-monitorul-oficial/ |access-date=22 September 2023 |website=CLUJUST |language=ro}}|{{cite web | last=Miron | first=Teodora | title=Baroul Bota, declarat ILEGAL de Curtea Supremă | website=Viața Liberă Galați | url=https://www.viata-libera.ro/justitie/70542-baroul-bota-declarat-ilegal-de-curtea-suprema | language=ro | access-date=23 January 2022 | date=23 September 2015}}}} This was confirmed by the Constitutional Court of Romania on 17 September 2019, citing, inter alia, the rejection as inadmissible of application 24.057/03 to the European Court of Human Rights.{{Cite web |title=DECIZIE 502 17/09/2019 |url=http://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/219421 |access-date=26 March 2020 |website=Portal Legislativ |language=ro}}

The Constitutional Court has stipulated again on 19 January 2021, decision no. 30, that bars alternative to the real UNBR are not allowed.Sources for 'alternative bars':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |title=DECIZIE 30 19/01/2021 |url=https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/FormaPrintabila/00000G1Y598HRFO6S6I2J69OGFHZ4QUY |access-date=12 September 2022 |website=Portal Legislativ |language=ro}}|{{cite web | last=Clop | first=Gianina | title=Hotărâre definitivă: un avocat din baroul "paralel" condamnat la închisoare | website=JURIDICE - in Law we Trust | date=24 March 2021 | url=https://www.juridice.ro/723711/hotarare-definitiva-un-avocat-din-baroul-paralel-condamnat-la-inchisoare.html | language=ro | access-date=12 September 2022}}}} Confirmed again in 2024.{{cite web | title=DECIZIE 187 26/03/2024 | website=Portal Legislativ | url=https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/288858 | language=ro | access-date=23 November 2024}}{{cite journal | title=Decizia nr. 187 din 26 martie 2024 | issue=962 | journal=Monitorul Oficial al României | date=25 September 2024 | url=https://monitoruloficial.ro/Monitorul-Oficial--PI--962--2024.html | language=ro | access-date=23 November 2024}}

The web domain www.bota.ro was deleted as a result of the Decision 2384/2019 of October 17, 2019 of the Bucharest Tribunal.Sources for 'www.bota.ro':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |date=26 March 2020 |title=Tribunalul BUCUREȘTI - Informații dosar 12517/3/2019 |url=http://portal.just.ro/3/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=300000000872869&id_inst=3 |access-date=26 March 2020 |website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro}}|http://www.bota.ro , consulted on 19 August 2021. Quote: "DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN".|{{cite web | title=bota.ro down? Current problems and status. | website=Down For | url=https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/bota.ro?www=1 | access-date=19 August 2021}}}}{{Cite web |last=Florea |first=Av. dr. Sonia |date=3 November 2022 |title=Acțiunea în decădere din drepturile conferite de marcă și acțiunea în anularea înregistrării mărcii. Cazul înregistrării ca marcă a insignei profesiei de avocat de către o entitate lipsită de personalitate juridică |url=https://www.juridice.ro/808458/actiunea-in-decadere-din-drepturile-conferite-de-marca-si-actiunea-in-anularea-inregistrarii-marcii-cazul-inregistrarii-ca-marca-a-insignei-profesiei-de-avocat-de-catre-o-entitate-lipsita-de-perso.html |access-date=16 January 2023 |website=JURIDICE - in Law we Trust |language=ro}}

The UNBR trademark registered by the Constitutional Bar was definitively annulled by the decision of the HCCJ.Sources for 'trademark':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |date=28 June 2021 |title=Uniunea Națională a Barourilor din România și Baroul București au câștigat litigiul contra structurii Bota care a înregistrat abuziv marca UNBR |url=https://www.unbr.ro/uniunea-nationala-a-barourilor-din-romania-si-baroul-bucuresti-au-castigat-litigiul-contra-structurii-bota-care-a-inregistrat-abuziv-marca-unbr/ |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=UNBR |language=ro}}|{{Cite web |title=Detalii dosar 42445/3/2017 |url=https://www.scj.ro/1094/Detalii-dosar?customQuery%5B0%5D.Key=id&customQuery%5B0%5D.Value=300000000790617 |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție a României |language=ro}}}} The deregistration or cancellation of the trademark is also confirmed by the Register of Trademarks kept by the Romanian State Office for Inventions and Trademarks (OSIM).{{Cite web |title=JSP Page |url=https://api.osim.ro:8443/tm-registry/results.htm |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=Welcome to WildFly |language=lb}} The same holds true on 13 February 2023 about Pompiliu Bota's own trademarks. UNBR Bota, led by Constantin Bălăcescu, filed an annulment appeal with the HCCJ,{{Cite web |title=Detalii dosar 2257/1/2021 |url=https://www.scj.ro/1094/Detalii-dosar?customQuery%5B0%5D.Key=id&customQuery%5B0%5D.Value=100000000335404 |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție a României |language=ro}} requesting, among other things, the recusal of the entire court (i.e. judicial panel).{{Cite web |title=Detalii dosar 2257/1/2021/a3 |url=https://www.scj.ro/1094/Detalii-dosar?customQuery%5B0%5D.Key=id&customQuery%5B0%5D.Value=100000000337293 |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție a României |language=ro}} The annulment appeal is an extraordinary remedy and can only be exercised for a limited number of reasons specifically provided by law.{{Cite web |last=Indaco Systems |date=24 January 2022 |title=Contestația în anulare - Noul Cod de Procedură Civilă actualizat 2022 |url=https://lege5.ro/gratuit/gyztaojtgy/contestatia-in-anulare-codul-de-procedura-civila |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Lege5 |language=ro}} On 3 May 2022, the annulment appeal was definitively rejected for failing to pay the required court fees (stamp duty).

The Constitutional Court rejected the objection of unconstitutionality invoked by Bălăcescu and Bota regarding the UNBR Bota trademark; the European Court of Justice will not be consulted in this case.Sources for 'ECJ':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |last=Indaco Systems |date=2 August 2023 |title=Decizia nr. 4/2023 referitoare la respingerea excepției de neconstituționalitate a dispozițiilor art. 5 alin. (1) lit. n) din Legea nr. 84/1998 privind mărcile și indicațiile geografice |url=https://lege5.ro/gratuit/geztqojwga4tm/decizia-nr-4-2023-referitoare-la-respingerea-exceptiei-de-neconstitutionalitate-a-dispozitiilor-art-5-alin-1-lit-n-din-legea-nr-84-1998-privind-marcile-si-indicatiile-geografice |access-date=2 August 2023 |website=Lege5 |language=ro}}|Monitorul Oficial, Partea I nr. 699 din 31 iulie 2023.}}

On the OSIM Trademark Register, Pompiliu Bota appears with 11 trademarks: 10 rejected and one canceled. The UNBR trademarks registered by RODALL SRL have had varying degrees of success: some are still registered, some have been canceled, some have been rejected, and some are currently ({{As of|2023|February|lc=y}}) listed as "pending litigation". Although civil law would allow their use, in criminal law their use is a crime (punishable by imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years or a fine). Registering those trademarks is not a felony, but actually using them is.

The point of view of the Romanian Ministry of Justice is that UNBR Bota and INPPA Bota are not juridical entities: "The two entities do not have the capacity of use within the meaning of art. 205 para. (1) Civil Code, i.e. they cannot acquire rights and they cannot have obligations. They are not subjects of law."{{Cite web |date=2 November 2017 |title=UNBR - BOTA ȘI INPPA - BOTA NU AU EXISTENȚĂ LEGALĂ! |url=https://www.unbr.ro/unbr-bota-si-inppa-bota-nu-au-existenta-legala/ |access-date=18 November 2021 |website=UNBR |language=ro}}Morecuț, Veronica, [https://www.unbr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/comunicat-021117_EN.pdf UNBR - BOTA AND INPPA - BOTA DO NOT HAVE LEGAL EXISTENCE!] unbr.ro, 3 November 2017. This view has been communicated to the courts for implementation. This has to do with their lack of juridical personhood, not with the mental state of their leaders: these two structures formally do not exist, so they cannot stand trial because they not exist. Speaking of civil law, organizations that do not exist cannot stand trial. Verbatim quote: "Correspondingly, the article 56 paragraph (2) of the Code for Civil Procedure expressly states that the two entities that are not established under the law cannot stand trial."

According to lawyer Gheorghe Florea, the president of the real UNBR, the National Union of Romanian Bars, led by Constantin Bălăcescu, is "an entity without legal personality".{{Cite web |last=Florea |first=Gheorghe |date=3 November 2017 |title=UNBR – BOTA AND INPPA – BOTA DO NOT HAVE LEGAL EXISTENCE! |url=https://rlw.juridice.ro/12137/unbr-bota-and-inppa-bota-do-not-have-legal-existence.html |access-date=23 April 2023 |website=Romanian Lawyers Week}} Florea's point of view is enacted by the courts. Indeed, no such entity appears in the National Register of NGOs (data from 2 March 2020).{{Cite web |date=17 April 2012 |title=Registrul National ONG – Ministerul Justitiei |url=http://www.just.ro/en/registrul-national-ong/ |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=Ministerul Justitiei – Ministerul Justiției}} Also confirmed for data from 26 May 2021 and for associations registered until 1 March 2016.{{Cite web |date=10 October 2014 |title=Registrul National ONG |url=https://data.gov.ro/dataset/registrul-national-ong |access-date=19 August 2021 |website=data.gov.ro |language=ro}}

According to the Romanian Ministry of Finance, UNBR-Bota did not register any declarations as economic agent after 22 April 2019 (data from 5 July 2024).{{Cite web |title=Agenți economici și instituții publice - date de identificare, informații fiscale, bilanțuri - MFP |url=https://mfinante.gov.ro/domenii/informatii-contribuabili/persoane-juridice/info-pj-selectie-dupa-cui |access-date=5 July 2024 |website=Acasa}} The date of the last processing is 25 March 2021.

The National Union of Romanian Bars - Bota, with Fiscal Identification Code (CIF) 20626000, was declared a person without procedural capacity of use (capacity to contract).{{Cite web |date=30 September 2021 |title=Judecătoria SECTORUL 6 BUCUREȘTI - Informații dosar 1258/303/2020 |url=http://portal.just.ro/303/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=30300000000369190&id_inst=303 |access-date=30 September 2021 |website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro}} The decision was appealed by Pompiliu Bota and UNBR Bota. The lack of this capacity shows that the organization cannot be a party to civil law proceedings (cannot stand trial).{{Cite web |title=Capacitate procesuală de folosință |url=https://legeaz.net/dictionar-juridic/capacitate-procesuala-de-folosinta |access-date=30 September 2021 |website=LegeAZ |language=ro}} In the context of the decision, this means that UNBR Bota cannot own or rent real estate and cannot pay or owe money to anyone — economically or financially this organization does not exist and has no money rights or obligations, property or rental. The appeal was reinstated, the Bucharest Municipal Tribunal requesting proof of the economic activities, income, property and bank accounts of UNBR Bota and Pompiliu Bota. Pompiliu Bota and the National Union of Romanian Bars (Bota Structure) requested public aid, but the court ruled: "Rejects the requests for public aid as unfounded."{{Citation |title=Tribunalul BUCUREȘTI - Informații dosar 1258/303/2020 |url=http://portal.just.ro/3/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=30300000000369190&id_inst=3 |publisher=portal.just.ro}} It is a matter of Bota and UNBR-Bota claiming that they cannot afford to pay a lawyer, and in general the costs of the proceedings (experts, executors, etc.), this is what public legal aid is all about.{{Cite web |title=Ajutor public judiciar – Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție a României |url=https://www.iccj.ro/informatii-publice/cetateanul/harta-site-ului/ |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție a României |language=ro}} These conditions are "the average monthly net income per family member, in the last two months prior to the application, is below the level of 600 lei" for 50% compensation and below 300 lei, for 100% compensation [lei=RON]. The court either did not receive evidence that Bota and UNBR Bota met the legal requirements for granting them public aid, or considered that an "organization" without procedural capacity of use has no basis for receiving public aid, or considered that an "organization" clearly has no family members.

On 18 March 2022, the Bucharest Municipal Tribunal rejected the demand for reexamination of the public legal aid.{{Cite web |date=6 April 2022 |title=Tribunalul BUCUREȘTI - Informații dosar 1258/303/2020/a1 |url=https://portal.just.ro/3/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=300000001008817&id_inst=3 |access-date=6 April 2022 |website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro |ref={{sfnref|Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină|2022}}}}

On 21 April 2023, the Bucharest Municipal Tribunal ruled that the Bota Bar cannot stand trial. The verdict got attacked with recourse (still pending).{{Cite web |date=25 June 2023 |title=Curtea de Apel BUCUREŞTI - Informaţii dosar 1258/303/2020 (1413/2023) |url=https://portal.just.ro/2/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=30300000000369190&id_inst=2 |access-date=25 June 2023 |website=Portalul instanţelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro |ref={{sfnref|Portalul instanţelor de judecată - Prima pagină|2023}}}} And merely technically, the failure to recuse the judges can be appealed.

On 5 September 2023, the Bucharest Court of Appeal decided: "Cancel the request for public judicial aid, for lack of signature. With the right of re-examination within 5 days of communication." The request for re-examination of the stamp duty was refused by the Bucharest Court of Appeal on 21 September 2023; the decision about stamp duty is final (definitive).{{Cite web |date=22 September 2023 |title=Informații dosar 1258/303/2020/a3 (1549/2023 ) |url=https://portal.just.ro/2/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=200000000424192&id_inst=2 |access-date=22 September 2023 |website=Curtea de Apel BUCUREȘTI |language=ro}}

In Italy, the lawyer's certificates as being registered in the Bota Bar were considered worthless scraps of paper, and the Italians who used them were not allowed to register in the Italian bars or were erased from the Italian bars due to lacking the title "lawyer".{{Cite web |last=Stan |first=Filip |date=2 July 2013 |title=Fraudă cu diplome românești de Drept în Italia |url=https://www.romaniatv.net/frauda-cu-diplome-romanesti-de-drept-in-italia_87379.html |access-date=19 January 2022 |website=Romania TV |language=ro}}Sources for 'Italy':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |last1=Amalfitano |first1=Chiara |last2=Federico |first2=Giacomo di |date=15 June 2021 |title=Long Read: "The Imaginary Lawyers: The Case of the UNBR Bota Avocati (Finally) Before the EU Courts" |url=https://eulawlive.com/long-read-the-imaginary-lawyers-the-case-of-the-unbr-bota-avocati-finally-before-the-eu-courts-by-chiara-amalfitano-and-giacomo-di-federico/ |access-date=16 February 2024 |website=EU Law Live}}|{{cite web | first=Anna | last=Dichiarante | title=Toghe nella bufera: ecco la scorciatoia per diventare avvocati | website=L'Espresso | date=31 October 2022 | url=https://espresso.repubblica.it/inchieste/2022/10/31/news/inchiesta_avvocati_ordine-372125863/ | language=it | access-date=16 January 2023}}|{{cite web | url=https://www.ordineavvocatisondrio.it/formazione-continua/deontologia/2019/febbraio/sentenza-corte-di-cassazione-3706-del-%202019.pdf |title=Civile Sent. Sez. U Num. 3706 Anno 2019 |website=ordineavvocatisondrio.it |access-date=2024-04-21}}|{{cite web | title=62018CO0392 - EN - EUR-Lex Ordonnance de la Cour (sixième chambre) du 7 mars 2019. Mauro Bettani contre Commission européenne. | website=EUR-Lex | date=7 March 2019 | url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62018CO0392 | access-date=20 February 2022 | language=fr}}|{{cite web | title=Documents ORDINANZA DELLA CORTE (Sesta Sezione) 3 settembre 2020 | website=CURIA | url=https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document_print.jsf;jsessionid=79BFB1CAA8D332F63D9148440287EA90?docid=231401&text=&dir=&doclang=IT&part=1&occ=first&mode=DOC&pageIndex=0&cid=5681407 | language=it | access-date=20 February 2022}}|{{cite web | title=titolo di avocat conseguito in Romania - titolo BOTA - inidoneità | website=DirittoItaliano.com | date=19 November 2020 | url=https://www.dirittoitaliano.com/giurisprudenza/provvedimento.php?Avvocato-stabilito---titolo-di-avocat-conseguito-in-Romania---titolo-BOTA---inidoneita-2849 | language=it | access-date=6 April 2022}}|{{cite web | last=Francini | first=Giacomo | title=Avvocati: invalida l'iscrizione negli elenchi se il titolo abilitante é rilasciato da una sezione distaccata dell'universita straniera | website=La Previdenza | url=http://www.laprevidenza.it/notizie/giurisprudenza/avvocati-invalida-l-iscrizione-negli-elenchi-se-il-titolo-abilitante-e-rilasciato-da-una-sezione-distaccata-dell-universita-straniera-cassazione-sezioni-unite-civilli-sentenza-382017-n-19403 | language=it | access-date=6 April 2022}}|{{cite web | author=TeleConsul Editore | title=Giurisprudenza - CORTE DI CASSAZIONE - Sentenza 17 maggio 2019, n. 13437 | website=TeleConsul Notiziario | date=21 May 2019 | url=https://www.tcnotiziario.it/Articolo/Index?settings=K25ETWlpSkhOL284elp6REV2RjB0eVJvd0YrSFBOTXY4MmFKOG9jU1VjSGhmVzFDT0RmMWJPUUc2UkF0RGJkSTQrTDMwNEpzZXVsbWVTdGUxSG1vV3VpQkludDNLR2tvSWg3cnZqSzhtN2VVRkoxQXBaKzJIWWtMUmVndWR1bWk= | language=it | access-date=6 April 2022}}|{{cite web | title=Cancellato l'"avocat" abilitato irritualmente in Romania | website=NT+ Diritto | date=6 February 2019 | url=https://ntplusdiritto.ilsole24ore.com/art/cancellato-l-avocat-abilitato-irritualmente-romania-AFgBOaJ | language=it | access-date=6 April 2022}}|{{Citation |date=17 June 2021 |author1=La Scala Società tra Avvocati |publisher=Iusletter |language=it |title=Avvocati stabiliti, arriva la stretta |url=https://iusletter.com/oggi-sulla-stampa/avvocati-stabiliti-arriva-la-stretta/}}|{{cite web | title=Il Consiglio Nazionale Forense sulla delibera di cancellazione dall'Albo degli Avvocati | website=Diritto e Giustizia | url=https://www.dirittoegiustizia.it/#/documentDetail/9153972 | language=it | date=9 September 2020 | access-date=6 April 2022}}|{{cite web | last=Ferrari | first=Marcella | title=Avvocati: il procedimento di cancellazione dall'albo per assenza di titolo non ha natura disciplinare | website=Altalex | date=1 August 2022 | url=https://www.altalex.com/documents/news/2022/08/01/avvocati-procedimento-cancellazione-albo-per-assenza-titolo-non-ha-natura-disciplinare | language=it | access-date=13 August 2022}}|{{cite web | last=Mancusi | first=Avv. Amilcare | title=Iscrizione nell'elenco speciale avvocati stabiliti per l'advocat rumeno solo se titolo rilasciato da UNBR | website=PuntodiDiritto | date=1 August 2022 | url=https://www.puntodidiritto.it/iscrizione-elenco-speciale-avvocati-stabiliti-advocat-rumeno-solo-se-titolo-rilasciato-da-unbr/ | language=it | access-date=27 August 2022}}|{{cite web | last=Mascherin | first=Avv. Andrea|url=https://www.ordineavvocatimodena.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/n.-1-C-2016-iscrizione-nella-Sezione-speciale-dellAlbo-Avvocati-stabiliti-provenienti-dalla-Romania.pdf | title=Circ. 1-C-2016 --- iscrizione nella sezione speciale dell'Albo degli Avvocati stabiliti provenienti dalla Romania|publisher=Consiglio Nazionale Forense|date=3 February 2016}}|{{cite web|title=RACCOLTA CRONOLOGICA DELLE MASSIME IN MATERIA DEONTOLOGICA E DISCIPLINARE DELLA CORTE DI CASSAZIONE (ANNI 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022) Aggiornamento al 31.12.2022|date=10 January 2023|url=https://www.consiglionazionaleforense.it/documents/20182/2586684/Rassegna+Cassazione+deontologia+e+disciplinare.pdf/1ef14d68-e3bd-7bf0-60c7-e0faaf6439ee?t=1658214787922|publisher=Consiglio Nazionale Forense|author=Commissione Deontologia}}}} Each false certificate costs 7000 Euro, plus VAT, payable to the Bota Bar.

After Viviana Onaca, from the Romanian Justice Department, officially notified the Order or Lawyers from Tivoli, Italy, that UNBR Bota does not exist (i.e. it is neither recognized nor legally established), UNBR Bota attacked her notification in court, but UNBR Bota definitively lost the trial.{{Cite web |date=10 December 2015 |title=UNBR-Bota a pierdut procesul cu Ministerul Justitiei |url=https://www.medierenet.ro/2015/12/10/unbr-bota-a-pierdut-procesul-cu-ministerul-justitiei/ |access-date=8 March 2024 |website=MediereNet.ro |language=ro}}{{Cite web |last=Radu |first=Florin |date=9 December 2015 |title=Ministerul Justiției câștigă procesul cu "UNBR-Bota" |url=https://www.juridice.ro/412924/ministerul-justitiei-castiga-procesul-cu-u-n-b-r-bota.html |access-date=8 March 2024 |website=JURIDICE.ro |language=ro}}

The European Court of Human Rights judged the Affair Bota vs. Romania. This is not about being a lawyer, but about a trial regarding unregistered cigarettes (a stamp had to be used in order to show that the cigarettes were legit).{{Cite web |date=4 February 2009 |orig-date=4 November 2008 |title=AFFAIRE BOTA c. ROUMANIE |url=https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#%7B%22itemid%22:[%22001-89253%22]%7D |access-date=16 February 2024 |website=HUDOC}}

Several petitions were addressed to the EU Commission. Those were answered in 2015.[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PETI-CM-551830_EN.pdf Notice to members] European Parliament. Committee on Petitions. 28 February 2015.[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PETI-CM-571584_EN.pdf Notice to members] European Parliament. Committee on Petitions. 30 October 2015.

Bota sent a request for judgment at the International Criminal Court, claiming the lawyers from the Bota Bar were and still are victims of genocide.{{Cite web |last=L.J. |date=5 June 2022 |title=BAROUL BOTA, PLANGERE PENALA LA HAGA – Avocatul Pompiliu Bota acuza la Curtea Penala Internationala zeci de judecatori CCR si ICCJ, presedintii, premierii si sefii de camere parlamentare ai Romaniei de genocid si crime impotriva umanitatii pentru persecutarea avocatilor din Baroul Bota: "Actiunea politica premeditata de exterminare, persecutarea unui grup, prin privare de drepturile fundamentale, din 2004 pana in prezent, impotriva a 2.177 avocati UNBR-2004" (Plangerea) BAROUL BOTA, PLANGERE PENALA LA HAGA – Avocatul Pompiliu Bota acuza la Curtea Penala Internationala zeci de judecatori CCR si ICCJ, presedintii, premierii si sefii de camere parlamentare ai Romaniei de genocid si crime impotriva umanitatii pentru persecut |url=https://www.luju.ro/baroul-bota-plangere-penala-la-haga-avocatul-pompiliu-bota-acuza-la-curtea-penala-internationala-zeci-de-judecatori-ccr-si-iccj-presedintii-premierii-si-sefii-de-camere-parlamentare-ai-romaniei-de-genocid-si-crime-impotriva-umanitatii-pentru-persecutarea |access-date=18 June 2022 |website=Lumea Justitiei |language=ro}} There is no indication that the Office of the Prosecutor will accept to start an investigation.WP:BLUE

At one point there was UNBR-Botomei, which had split from UNBR-Bota, for which Vasile Botomei, who had been a colleague of crimes with Pompiliu Bota, was criminally convicted.Sources for 'Botomei' (1):{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |last=Ilas |first=Gheorghe |date=14 May 2013 |title=Prima arestare a unui "avocat" din barourile paralele, perceputa la Timisoara ca inceputul sfarsitului pentru avocatura clandestina din Romania |url=https://www.opiniatimisoarei.ro/prima-arestare-a-unui-avocat-din-barourile-paralele-perceputa-la-timisoara-ca-inceputul-sfarsitului-pentru-avocatura-clandestina-din-romania/14/05/2013 |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Opinia Timisoarei – Stiri din Timisoara cu foto si video}}|{{cite web | last= Voicu | first=Simona | title=A treia condamnare pentru initiatorul barourilor paralele. Judecator: Timp de 10 ani si-a arogat calitati neadevarate | website=adevarul.ro | date=25 May 2017 | url=https://adevarul.ro/locale/bacau/a-treia-condamnare-initiatorul-barourilor-paralele-judecator-timp-10-ani-si-a-arogat-calitati-neadevarate-1_5f4ba4a85163ec42717e3315/index.html | access-date=24 January 2022}}|{{youTube|gR1nqdpK62w|Vasile Botomei, arestat preventiv pentru 29 de zile - www.1tvbacau.ro (09.05.2013)}}}}{{Cite web |date=7 June 2018 |title=Publicăm Decizia nr. 160/2018 a Curții Constituționale a României referitoare la respingerea excepției de neconstituționalitate a dispozițiilor art. 60 alin. (6) din Legea nr. 51/1995 pentru organizarea și exercitarea profesiei de avocat |url=https://www.unbr.ro/publicam-decizia-nr-160-2018-a-curtii-constitutionale-a-romaniei-referitoare-la-respingerea-exceptiei-de-neconstitutionalitate-a-dispozitiilor-art-60-alin-6-din-legea-nr-51-1995-pentru-organizar/ |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=UNBR |language=ro}}{{Cite web |last=Chifu |first=Cătălina |date=19 July 2017 |title=Sentințe definitive pentru Vasile Botomei și judecătorul Sorin Curpăn. Ultimul își pierde funcția |url=https://www.desteptarea.ro/2017-sentinte-definitive-pentru-vasile-botomei-si-judecatorul-sorin-curpan-ultimul-isi-pierde-functia/ |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Deșteptarea- Ziarul Bacăului |language=ro}} Botomei was or is serving a "clandestine lawyer" prison sentence as a repeat offender.Sources for 'Botomei' (2):{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |date=24 January 2022 |title=Tribunalul BACĂU - Informații dosar 2609/180/2021 |url=http://portal.just.ro/110/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=18000000000287802&id_inst=110 |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro}}|{{cite web | first=Vlad | last=Enciu | title=DURA LEX! Unul dintre fondatorii "barourilor paralele" si a avocaturii clandestine din Romania, condamnat la 4 ani si opt luni de inchisoare | website=IMPACTPRESS | date=1 September 2020 | url=https://www.impactpress.ro/2020/09/01/dura-lex-unul-dintre-fondatorii-barourilor-paralele-si-a-avocaturii-clandestine-din-romania-condamnat-la-4-ani-si-opt-luni-de-inchisoare/ | language=ro | access-date=24 January 2022}}}}{{Cite web |last=Boacnă |first=Cătălin |date=2 March 2016 |title=Sentinta trasnet la Curtea de Apel Iasi! Judecator celebru achitat la Iasi, dupa ce agata studente pe facebook! |url=https://www.bzi.ro/sentinta-trasnet-la-curtea-de-apel-iasi-judecator-celebru-achitat-la-iasi-dupa-ce-agata-studente-pe-facebook-543214 |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=BZI.ro |language=ro}} The judge who recruited clients for the Botomei Bar for a fee had to endure the rigors of the law, being definitively convicted and subsequently released from office by Romanian President Klaus Iohannis.Sources for 'Iohannis':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite web |date=21 July 2017 |title=Președintele Iohannis a eliberat din funcție trei magistrați condamnați definitiv pentru săvârșirea unor infracțiuni |url=https://www.replicaonline.ro/presedintele-iohannis-a-eliberat-din-functie-trei-magistrati-condamnati-definitiv-pentru-savarsirea-unor-infractiuni-325074/ |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Replica ONLINE |language=ro}}|{{cite web | first=Iasmina | last=Ardelean | title=Iohannis a ELIBERAT din funcție trei magistrați. Ce INFRACȚIUNI au SĂVÂRȘIT | website=evz.ro | date=20 July 2017 | url=https://evz.ro/iohannis-eliberat-functie-magistrati-infractiuni.html | language=ro | access-date=24 January 2022}}}}

The Independent Union of Romanian Jurists, led by Pompiliu Bota, is another clandestine lawyers structure. Bota's union has promoted nonsensical actions in court, in which it claims to consult (see) the act of establishment of the real UNBR. Or the real UNBR has no other act of establishment than the special law, published in the Official Gazette (Monitorul Oficial), the law can be consulted publicly by absolutely everyone. As such, the deed of establishment of the real UNBR cannot be the object of "law no. 544/2001 on free access to information of public interest" (Romanian FOIA law).{{Cite web |date=15 December 2021 |title=Baroul Suceava a învins în instanță așa numitul Sindicat independent al juriștilor din România |url=https://www.unbr.ro/baroul-suceava-a-invins-in-instanta-asa-numitul-sindicat-independent-al-juristilor-din-romania/ |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=UNBR |language=ro}}{{Cite web |date=24 January 2022 |title=Curtea de Apel SUCEAVA - Informații dosar 883/86/2020 |url=http://portal.just.ro/39/SitePages/Dosar.aspx?id_dosar=8600000000152359&id_inst=39 |access-date=24 January 2022 |website=Portalul instanțelor de judecată - Prima pagină |language=ro}}

Pompiliu Bota also makes great efforts (but without much success) to obtain criminal prosecutions for some of his enemies, including two former associates of his:

• file 7129/2/2021 (3180/2021) Gheorghe Gheorghiu, former vice-president of the Association of Romanian Jurists (real)All these files are public on https://portal.just.ro , but it only displays the development of trial, in provisional steps taken by the court and/or an overview of the verdict. It also mentions the available avenues for challenging the court decision.
• file 12741/4/2021 Ina Spînu (Racovita), vice-president of the Bota Bar
• file 306/57/2021 Cosmin Alin Roncioiu, dean of the Hunedoara Bar (real)
• file 8076/2/2021 (3721/2021) Ion Dragne, dean of the Bucharest Bar (real)
• file 46664/299/2021 Viorel Nimernicu, vice-president of the Bota Bar

This is after in the file 5397/303/2020 he tried to obtain the criminal prosecution of the real UNBR.[https://www.unbr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/RAPORTUL-CONSILIULUI-UNBR_2020_v4_CLEAN-FINALTOATE_ANEXELE_BUGET_ETC_191120.pdf RAPORT DE ACTIVITATE AL CONSILIULUI UNBR (între Congresul avocaților 2019 și Congresul avocaților 2020)]. Annex 7. #9 and #126.

• [https://web.archive.org/web/20200912155603/https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/regprof/index.cfm?action=regprof&id_regprof=16548 Lawyer/Barrister/Solicitor] website of the European Union (archived on 12 September 2020)
• Ligia Cecilia Popescu, Andreea Zvâc, Sorin Dumitru and Andrei Salageanu and Andreia Moraru-Peltecu, Wolf Theiss; Dan Marinescu, Fintax Consulting [https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-022-1126?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true "Private Client law in Romania: Overview. Procedural Capacity of Use"] at Thomson Reuters Practical Law, 1 September 2021
• Association of the Councils of State and Supreme Administrative Jurisdictions of the European Union [https://www.aca-europe.eu/en/eurtour/i/countries/romania/romania_en.pdf "ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE IN EUROPE - ROMANIA REPORT - 29. Court fees"], 10 October 2017 — explains stamp duty in Romanian civil law

Category:Organized crime groups in Romania

Category:2002 establishments in Romania