Abstract: Law no. 356 of 2006 and GEO no. 60 of 2006 have brought a number of changes to criminal procedure legislation, aimed at reducing abuses and at increasing efficiency in criminal proceedings. Some of these changes have brought totally different rules from the previous ones, others have only modified some aspects (for an increased efficiency of the criminal trial), and a third category of changes consists in details which clarify and facilitate criminal proceedings. A substantial change has occurred referring to the prior complaint. Previously, the prior complaint could be addressed directly to the court, but now the prior complaint must be addressed only to the prosecuting authorities, to avoid unnecessary loading of the courts. Another change (corresponding to the changes of the Penal Code on the criminal liability of legal persons) consists in introducing procedural provisions regarding the procedure for the criminal responsibility of legal persons, also instituting preventive measures applicable to legal entities. A measure which increases the efficiency of the criminal trial is the repeal of the provisions that allowed restitution for completing the criminal prosecution in cases when the criminal case had already been brought before court; obviously, such a measure avoids undue prolongation and makes the court more responsible in the procedure of taking evidence. In the category of the changes that are only specifications designed to optimize the trial, we noticed, for example, that the Criminal Procedure Code now provides that, before court, the questions between the participants can be asked directly. We appreciate the useful changes brought by the legislative acts reviewed and we express our view that the rules of criminal procedure must be further modified in the future, because there are still issues that need to be improved.

Key-words: criminal trial, prior complaint, the Criminal Procedure Code, relocation of the trial, legal entity.