The Constitutional Bar (), also known as the Romanian Constitutional Bar () or the Bota Bar () and which falsely claimed to be the National Association of Romanian Bars () in order to obtain material benefits, also called UNBR Bota () by then; was a parallel, illegal bar, lacking legal personality, established by Pompiliu Bota in 2002 as an alternative to the "classic bars" of Romanian lawyers, reorganized after 1990 within UNBR, which is the genuine Romanian bar association.
The Constitutional Bar had as object of activity the practice of law as lawyers by persons who legally did not have the right to practice as lawyers, according to Art. 348 of the new Romanian Criminal Code (Art. 281 of the old code). It also violates Art. 367 of the Criminal Code, as an organization that has the purpose of committing crimes or organized criminal group."Organized crime" has certainly been the charge according to
History
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. 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. Or, even stronger: even a court is not allowed to establish a UNBR, only the Parliament can do that.
Non-unitary practice of courts
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. 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
accepting and allowing members of the Constitutional Bar to provide legal assistance and representation; 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; 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.
Criminal conviction of Pompiliu Bota
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.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,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.
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. 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': The sentence is final (definitive). Pompiliu Bota filed a recourse in cassation, but that was also rejected by the HCCJ. In January 2025, the Constitutional Court rejected his complaint that the law about the bars of lawyers would be unconstitutional.
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." Bota entered into a conflict with CSA Steaua by abusively registering their trademark with the European Union Intellectual Property Office.
Mr. Bota died in January 2026.
Criminal conviction of others
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': 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. 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.
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': 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. 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. 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': 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). 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. 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. Another pretended lawyer received a postponed prison sentence. A woman pretending to be lawyer has been sentenced in Constanța. A fake lawyer from Tulcea was also sentenced. A fake lawyer from Cluj was saved by the statute of limitations.
Two sons of a Romanian (ex)judge are being prosecuted for illegal practice as lawyers. 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.
Four people are being tried for practicing law without having the right.
Legal decisions on the Constitutional Bar 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':
Appeal in the interest of law
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:
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': 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. 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': Confirmed again in 2024.
Websites
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': Since February 2026 the website unbr.eu was rendered offline.
Trademark
The UNBR trademark registered by the Constitutional Bar was definitively annulled by the decision of the HCCJ.Sources for 'trademark': 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). 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, requesting, among other things, the recusal of the entire court (i.e. judicial panel). The annulment appeal is an extraordinary remedy and can only be exercised for a limited number of reasons specifically provided by law. 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':