Justice vs Abuse — Part 4: Returned, Then Taken Again
On Monday 19 October 2026, after 818 days, the state handed my treatment back to me. Two hours later, gendarmes took it again. The story of that day, what the institutions say, and what comes next.
The two hours of 19 October
On Monday 19 October 2026, the Bureau for Combating Organised Crime (BCCO) returned my medical cannabis treatment to me, under the final court ruling. They had taken it from me at Otopeni Airport on 23 July 2024. That is 818 days.
It was in an evidence bag, with the case number and the BCCO seal still stuck on it. And I was happy, I won't pretend otherwise. I said so right then, to the camera: that it was an unexpected victory, that I had many times lost all optimism, but that I was enormously glad. That I am not a criminal, I am only a patient, and that after two years I think I had finally managed to prove it. “I think the hardest part is behind me,” I said. “I hope it's only a formality, and that from here on only good things follow.”
It didn't last.
About two hours later, in a taxi on the way to a hearing, with my lawyers, a Gendarmerie van stopped us in traffic, in Bucharest. Several gendarmes got out, between six and eight, I didn't manage to count them, all with their cameras already in their hands. They knew what I was carrying, although I hadn't taken anything out of the evidence bag. They told me they had noticed “a suspicious paper bag” and cited Law 143/2000.
I explained what can be explained on a street: that Romanian law has no “prohibited substances”, only controlled substances, that this is a legally prescribed medical treatment, that I had the final ruling ordering its return. The answer, in short: the court returned it to me, but that doesn't mean I'm allowed to walk down the street with it. I tried a bitter joke: “They put it in my hand to go to Mars with it straight from BCCO! They were launching me into orbit!”
The gendarme said it plainly: “I am taking it with a view to confiscation. Others decide whether it is confiscated or not.”
They took the treatment that had just been returned. They also took the treatment I had come into the country with two days earlier: on 17 October I had declared it at Otopeni, in the red channel, with my prescriptions and all my documents, and after checks I was allowed in. I was left without any treatment again. For Crohn's disease and for chronic pain, that is not a formality. “I have to stay without treatment until Saturday,” I said into the camera. “Again.”
How did I feel? I said it in the moment, and I repeat it without changing a word: “I don't even have the words to explain what I feel now. It is incredible!” I could hardly work out how I had ended up in trouble again. And a little later: “I don't want to go through this nightmare for another two years. I can't anymore.” As for my state of mind, with a kind of black humour, I said I had left it at the station. The next day I was still processing what had happened.
In the moment I said something else too: that it all felt like a trap, like something premeditated. I have no proof of that and I don't present it as fact. That is how it felt then.
I filmed the scene myself, for the documentary “Pacient. Infractor”, which Ștefan Schultz is making about my case. A clip reached Facebook as a reel, and from there HotNews, Antena 3 CNN and PressOne picked it up.
How I got to 818 days
If you haven't read Part 1 and Part 2, here is the thread, as DIICOT itself confirmed it in its public explanation of 23 October:
March 2023
I enter legally, with my treatment declared
Invited by an MP to Parliament's Health Committee, I declare my treatment at Otopeni. After a few dozen minutes of checks at the border, I am allowed in.
23 July 2024
My treatment is taken
I declare my treatment again, at the same airport. This time, my treatment, prescribed in the United Kingdom, is taken from me.
20 September 2024
The case is closed
The prosecutor closes the case, because the act was not committed “with the guilt required by law”. Confiscation is ordered in the same decision.
17 October 2025
The judge rejects confiscation
The judge rejects the confiscation request and orders the treatment returned.
28 January 2026
The ruling becomes final
The Bucharest Court of Appeal rejects DIICOT's challenge as inadmissible, in a final ruling.
17 October 2026
I enter again, with my treatment declared
I declare my current treatment at Otopeni, in the red channel, with my prescriptions and all my documents. After checks, I am allowed in.
19 October 2026
Returned, then taken again
BCCO returns my treatment, after 818 days. Two hours later, gendarmes take it again, together with the treatment I had come in with.
21 October 2026
New criminal file
A new criminal file is registered at DIICOT, Central Structure, and is being handled.
One thing seems essential to me: over 18 months of proceedings I won three times in court, the last at the Bucharest Court of Appeal, and the judges ordered the treatment returned. The ruling is final. Everything that happened on 19 October comes down to how institutions apply, or don't apply, a decision that has already been made.
The beginning wasn't like this either. In 2023 I had come through the same airport, with my treatment and my prescription, after a few dozen minutes of checks at the border. An MP had invited me to give evidence to Parliament's Health Committee, and I brought the cannabis right there, in front of the experts and the politicians. So a year later I believed I could travel without worry. In July 2024, through that same airport door, the story of the 818 days began.
What the institutions say
The Gendarmerie. The explanation they gave me on the spot: the Bucharest Court of Appeal ruling gave me the right only to the return of the treatment, not the right to possess it in Romania. Digi24 notes it received no official response from the Gendarmerie, so the explanation above is theirs as it was told to me.
DIICOT. On 23 October, two days after the press conference in Parliament, DIICOT published a public response. The prosecutors say the confiscation request was not aimed at punishing me, but at taking out of circulation a substance whose possession, in their view, is prohibited under current law. They say the rulings in this case do not change the legal status of cannabis in Romania and cannot serve as a precedent. They also say court decisions in similar cases are “not uniform” and ask Parliament to clarify the rules. They rejected accusations that they acted harshly and say the proceedings stayed “within the limits of the law and under court supervision”.
I won't go through every argument here. I'll hold on to just two things.
First: DIICOT itself acknowledges that the law is unclear and asks Parliament to clarify it. On that, we agree.
The second is the question that gives me no peace. How is a patient supposed to comply with a law that the prosecutors themselves call unclear? How do you know what you are allowed to do, when one state institution checks your papers and lets you in with your treatment, and two days later another one takes it from you?
Why I say “treatment”, not “drugs”
At the press conference on 21 October, MP Emanuel Ungureanu, Alexandra Cârstea (Victoria Mea Association) and Eugen Teodorovici asked the press for something simple, which I repeat too: treatment, not drugs.
For me these words are not a matter of style. Crohn's disease took me, in 2014-2015, to 38-40 kilograms, to a point where I could no longer stand on my feet. I emigrated in 2015, because the health system here had not found any treatment that kept my illness under control. In the United Kingdom I campaigned for legalisation, and since 2019 I have received legally prescribed medical cannabis, as one of the first ten patients in the country. It gave me my life back after years in which I had become a burden to those around me and could no longer work.
This is not recreational use and it is not a party-political issue. The bill, PL-x 631/2019 (the Victoria Law), began in 2019 with a national civil-society petition and carries the signatures of 83 parliamentarians from across the parties.
And Romanian law has no concept of a “prohibited substance”. It speaks of substances under national control. The words matter, because they show whether a person is seen as ill or as a criminal.
What comes next
- The new criminal file is ongoing. I will not comment on its substance here while it is ongoing.
- The Victoria Law (PL-x 631/2019) remains before Parliament. The 21 October conference brought it back into the discussion.
- The treatment taken on 19 October remains with the authorities, and others decide whether it is confiscated or not. I have returned to the United Kingdom and resumed my treatment.
I am not asking for an exception to the law. I am asking that a final ruling should mean something, that every state institution should apply the same rule, at customs, at the border and on the street, and that patients in Romania should finally have a clear law. Until then, I'll say it the way I know it: I am a patient, not a criminal.
If you are a patient travelling to Romania with a treatment prescribed in another country, read the Practical Guide. My case shows that a prescription recognised at the border does not yet protect you from a second stop.
Sources
Every statement above rests on at least one of these. Headlines are the outlets' own, in Romanian, except where noted.
- HotNews, 20 October 2026: the exchange between gendarmes and the patient
- Digi24, 22 October 2026: the Gendarmerie's explanation
- Adevărul, 23 October 2026: DIICOT's explanation
- Mediafax, 23 October 2026: DIICOT's explanation, with the timeline
- Juridice.ro, 23 October 2026: the new criminal file
- Agerpres, 21 October 2026: statement by MP Ungureanu
- Antena 3 CNN, 20 October 2026
- Informat.ro, English edition, 20 October 2026
This text describes ongoing events. Everyone is presumed innocent until a final ruling.
New articles, directly to your inbox
Neuro-affirming content on ADHD, autism, AuDHD and PDA
— no spam, no aggressive frequency.
