EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Europaudvalget 2022-23 (2. samling)
EUU Alm.del Bilag 624
Offentligt

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels, 5.7.2023

COM(2023) 800 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN

PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL

COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

2023 Rule of Law Report

The rule of law situation in the European Union

{SWD(2023) 801 final} - {SWD(2023) 802 final} - {SWD(2023) 803 final} -

{SWD(2023) 804 final} - {SWD(2023) 805 final} - {SWD(2023) 806 final} -

{SWD(2023) 807 final} - {SWD(2023) 808 final} - {SWD(2023) 809 final} -

{SWD(2023) 810 final} - {SWD(2023) 811 final} - {SWD(2023) 812 final} -

{SWD(2023) 813 final} - {SWD(2023) 814 final} - {SWD(2023) 815 final} -

{SWD(2023) 816 final} - {SWD(2023) 817 final} - {SWD(2023) 818 final} -

{SWD(2023) 819 final} - {SWD(2023) 820 final} - {SWD(2023) 821 final} -

{SWD(2023) 822 final} - {SWD(2023) 823 final} - {SWD(2023) 824 final} -

{SWD(2023) 825 final} - {SWD(2023) 826 final} - {SWD(2023) 827 final}

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

1. INTRODUCTION

The rule of law stands alongside democracy and fundamental rights as founding values of the

Union. It is common to all Member States and a bedrock of the Union’s identity. It is a core

factor in Europe’s political stability and economic prosperity. In recent years, these founding

values have come under attack around the world, testing the resilience of the EU and its

Member States. The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine serves as a tragic reminder

that these values can never be taken for granted. Constant proactive action is needed to

safeguard these values and protect European society in the face of evolving challenges.

Every year the rule of law cycle contributes to a strong and healthy European democracy.

The

annual Rule of Law report takes the pulse of the rule of law situation in each Member

State and the EU as a whole, detecting and preventing emerging challenges and

supporting rule of law reforms.

The report continues to rest on a transparent and objective

methodology, taking specific national contexts and traditions into account and ensuring equal

treatment of all Member States. Since its launch in 2020, the annual reporting cycle has served

as a basis for constructive discussions and a rich exchange of best practices among Member

States – at both political and technical level – in the European Parliament, and in national

parliaments. It has played a central role in the efforts to promote and safeguard the rule of law

in practice.

As in previous years, the 2023 Rule of Law report examines rule of law developments in

Member States under four pillars:

justice, anti-corruption, media freedom and pluralism,

and broader institutional issues related to checks and balances.

Discussions in the Council

on the 2022 report have been positive and constructive, with Member States welcoming the

report’s findings and recommendations. This is also illustrated by the efforts made by Member

States to implement the recommendations. Almost 65% of the specific recommendations

issued last year to Member States have already been followed up. This reflects a positive trend,

while it should be acknowledged that certain rule of law reforms may take a longer time to bear

fruit

The rules-based order is central to the credibility of the EU and a broader toolbox has been

developed over recent years to safeguard respect for the rule of law. Infringement procedures,

institutional mechanisms such as Article 7 proceedings, and policy drivers such as the

Recovery and Resilience Facility all have significant rule of law dimensions. The general

regime of conditionality offers a targeted tool to protect the EU budget where breaches of the

rule of law affect or seriously risk affecting its sound financial management or the EU's

financial interests

. These tools seek to ensure that the rule of law is not just a principle, but a

tangible reality on which each and every person and business in the EU can rely.

The rule of law and a rules-based international order are a key protection against the spread of

authoritarian regimes and the violation of international law. Upholding the rule of law is

therefore a crucial element of the EU’s external action, alongside consolidating democratic

structures and protecting human rights. It is central to the EU’s engagement with candidate

countries and potential candidates through the enlargement process, its work with partners in

the neighbourhood, and broader EU engagement with countries worldwide.

There was found to be significant progress or full implementation on over a quarter of recommendations, and

some progress on about 40% of the recommendations. No progress was noted on the remainder.

Regulation 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020, OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

2. KEY ASPECTS OF THE RULE OF LAW SITUATION IN MEMBER STATES

As in previous years, this report sets out significant common themes and trends, specific

challenges, and positive developments. The examples given reflect these trends and are drawn

from the assessments to be found in the 27 country chapters, which are an integral part of this

report and provide the detailed context for each Member State

. The report also includes

specific recommendations to Member States

and reports on progress in implementing the

specific recommendations issued last year

. These are structured into four key pillars:

Justice systems

in the Member States, focusing on their independence, quality and

efficiency. These are key parameters to ensure that the application and enforcement of EU

law is effective and that the rule of law is upheld. Well-functioning and fully independent

justice systems are crucial for ensuring that justice works to the benefit of citizens and of

businesses. They are also essential for judicial cooperation across the EU, as well as for the

functioning of the Single Market and the EU’s legal order as a whole.

Anti-corruption frameworks,

focusing on the effectiveness of national anti-corruption

policies and assessing different key areas of action taken by Member States to prevent and

fight corruption. Effective anti-corruption action, transparency and integrity help ensure the

strength and reliability of state power and are essential to citizen and businesses’ trust in

public authorities.

Media freedom and pluralism,

focusing on core areas including the independence of the

media regulatory authorities; transparency and concentration of media ownership;

transparency and fairness in the allocation of state advertising; the safety of journalists and

access to information; and the governance of public service media. These are essential to

how the media exercises its role in a healthy democracy.

Institutional issues related to checks and balances,

focusing on areas of key importance

for the rule of law, such as: the quality and inclusiveness of the national legislative process;

the role of Constitutional Courts and independent authorities such as the Ombudsperson,

equality bodies

and national human rights institutions; and the role of civil society

organisations in safeguarding the rule of law.

Methodology of the Rule of Law report and its recommendations

The assessment in the country chapters has been prepared in line with the scope and

methodology followed when drawing up the previous editions of the report

. The country

chapters rely on a qualitative assessment autonomously carried out by the Commission,

The country chapters are available

here.

The recommendations are referenced in footnotes throughout this report, listed in the Annex by order of the

pillars in the country chapters and included in the individual country chapters.

The assessments included in the country chapter do not prejudge any future assessment under Article 24 of

Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing

the Recovery and Resilience Facility or under Article 15 of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional

Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the

European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum,

Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for

Border Management and Visa Policy.

In December 2022, the Commission proposed measures to strengthen the role and independence of equality

bodies.

The methodology is available

here.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

focusing on a synthesis of significant developments since July 2022 and presenting both

challenges and positive aspects identified in Member States. In each country chapter, the

analysis focuses in particular on topics where there have been significant developments, or

where significant challenges have been identified in the previous report and persist during

this reporting period.

The analysis also contains a qualitative assessment of the progress made by the Member

States towards implementing the 2022 recommendations. Progress on implementing the

recommendations is based on a qualitative assessment of developments since July 2022,

taking into account the overall context in the Member States. Depending on the progress

made on the various subparts of each recommendation, the Commission concluded in each

case using the following categories: no progress, some progress, significant progress, and

full implementation

The objective of the 2023 recommendations continues to be to assist and support Member

States in their efforts to take forward reforms and to identify where improvements or follow-

up to recent changes or reforms may be needed, based on continuous dialogue

The report is the result of close collaboration with Member States and relies on a variety of

national, international and other sources

. All Member States were invited to contribute to

the process, provide written input

and participate in dedicated country visits. These country

visits provided an opportunity to exchange on the follow-up to recommendations issued in

the 2022 report and on all other significant developments

. In addition, the Commission at

political level has discussed the report with national authorities and governments, as well as

with representatives in national Parliaments. A targeted stakeholder consultation also

provided valuable cross-cutting and country-specific contributions

. The Council of Europe

also provided an overview of its recent opinions and reports on EU Member States

. Prior

to the adoption of this report, Member States have been given the opportunity to provide

factual updates to their country chapter.

2.1 Justice systems

Well-functioning and fully independent justice systems are crucial to ensure that justice works

to the benefit of citizens and of businesses. They are also essential for trust in operations across

Recommendations from 2022 are, in general, carried into this year’s report, with adaptations as necessary,

when the steps taken in Member States amount to no progress or notably where only some progress has been

made.

The principles on the basis of which the recommendations were prepared are the same as last year. See

COM(2022) 500 final, p. 3-4 and the methodology for the Rule of Law report. The recommendations are

without prejudice to any proceedings the Commission may initiate under other legal instruments, such as

infringement procedures or the General Conditionality Regulation.

The sources used to prepare this report include written input received from Member States, contributions

received during the targeted stakeholder consultation and information produced by international organisations

or received from national authorities and stakeholders during country visits. These sources inform the

Commission’s assessment, and do not as such represent the Commission’s position. The Commission’s

conclusions remain its own responsibility.

See

here.

Information on the country visits can be found in the country chapters. During these country visits, held online,

the Commission spoke to Member States’ national authorities, including judicial and independent authorities,

law enforcement, and other stakeholders, such as journalists’ associations and civil society.

See

here.

2023 Rule of law report - stakeholder contribution - Council of Europe | European Commission (europa.eu)

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

borders in the EU and judicial cooperation, as well as for the functioning of the Single Market,

and the EU’s legal order as a whole

Effective justice systems are crucial for the application and enforcement of EU law and

upholding the rule of law. Judicial independence is a requirement stemming from the principle

of effective judicial protection, referred to in Article 19 of the Treaty on European Union

(TEU), and from the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal enshrined in

Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Independent judges and courts

guarantee the fairness of judicial proceedings and the protection of

rights of individuals. They

are also essential for safeguarding the values set out in Article 2 TEU

When reforming their justice systems, Member States must fully respect the requirements set

by EU law and the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU)

. It is also important

that Member States take European standards into account when designing reforms. European

judicial networks and associations

also help promote and uphold the rule of law, as they work

on further developing European standards concerning their professions and rule of law more

broadly and make important contributions to the preparation of the Rule of Law report.

Perceived independence

As set out in the 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard, Eurobarometer surveys conducted in 2023 show

that the perception of independence among the general public improved in 12 Member States

when compared to 2022

. However, among companies, surveys showed decreases in the

perception of judicial independence in 13 Member States. In

Finland, Denmark, Austria,

Germany

and

Luxembourg,

the level of perceived independence continues to be particularly

high among the general public (above 75%), while in

Poland

and

Croatia,

it remains very low

(below 30%).

Councils for the Judiciary and procedures for the appointment and dismissal of judges as key

safeguards for judicial independence

Many Member States have continued to carry out reforms related to key elements of their

justice system, such as the procedures for appointment and dismissal of judges or as regards

Councils for the Judiciary. It is important that such reforms safeguard judicial independence,

based on the principles established by the CJEU.

Where Councils for the Judiciary are established, they act as an important safeguard for judicial

independence, as recognised in the case-law of the CJEU

. They can act as a buffer between

the judiciary and the other branches of power in matters such as the appointment and career of

judges or magistrates, and in the management of the justice system. Key European standards

have been developed by the Council of Europe on how the Councils for the Judiciary should

The 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard sets out a comparative analysis of national justice systems.

CJEU judgment of 5 June 2023,

Commission v. Poland,

C-204/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:442, paras 64-74.

A reference to the key judgments since the last report can be found in section 4.

Such as the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary, the Network of the Presidents of the Supreme

Judicial Courts of the European Union and the Association of the Councils of State and Supreme

Administrative Jurisdictions of the European Union and the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe.

Figures 49 and 51, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.

The CJEU has recognised that where a Council for the Judiciary participates in an appointment process

involving political bodies, it can contribute to making that process more objective, by circumscribing the

discretion which the political bodies have in exercising their powers, provided that such Council is sufficiently

independent from the executive and legislative powers and from the body to which it is submitting an opinion.

See for example judgment of 2 March 2021,

AB and Others (Appointment of judges to the Supreme Court –

Actions),

C-824/18, paras. 123-125, and case-law cited.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

be established to best safeguard their independence, including on their composition

. Councils

for the Judiciary also need adequate resources to function in an effective way and fulfil their

mandates, and they must be able to manage their budget independently.

Legislative efforts to strengthen the independence and effectiveness of Councils for the

Judiciary were finalised in a number of Member States, following the 2022 report

recommendations. In others, discusssions are ongoing. In

Luxembourg,

two significant reforms

have been adopted: a constitutional reform creating the National Council for Justice and a

legislative reform aligning the composition of the National Council for Justice with European

standards and setting out the status of magistrates. In the

Netherlands,

more than half of the

members of the Council for the Judiciary are now judges. In

Hungary,

a new law strengthens

the role of the National Judicial Council, by allowing it to effectively counterbalance the

powers of the President of the National Office for the Judiciary, including by ensuring that its

opinions on a number of important matters are binding. In

Portugal,

a new legislative

framework for the High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts providing for

administrative and financial autonomy has been finalised. In

Italy,

the directly applicable

provisions of the reform of the High Council for the Judiciary have now been put into use; the

full extent of their effect on the work of the Council is being evaluated. In

Sweden,

a Committee

of Inquiry has completed its work and recommended measures to strengthening the

independence of the judiciary, including setting up of a new court administration agency that

would be more independent from the Government. In

Finland,

the previously established

National Courts Administration continued its work and developed new initiatives to further

support the courts.

In other Member States, concerns regarding the Councils for the Judiciary have yet to be

addressed. In

Slovakia,

the issue of insufficient safeguards when it comes to dismissal of

members of the Judicial Councils appointed by the executive branch and the Parliament

remains. In

Bulgaria,

the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council remains a concern. In

Spain,

the situation of the Council for the Judiciary raises serious concerns, as firstly, the

Council has not been renewed in spite of the urgency and, secondly, no steps have been taken

to adapt the appointment procedure for its judges-members. This lack of renewal has an impact

on the appointments at the Supreme Court and the justice system as a whole. In

Cyprus,

following the recent reform on the appointments of judges, the composition of the Supreme

Council of the Judicature was extended to include members who are not judges, with a view to

enhancing the Council’s democratic legitimacy, although there is not yet a broader participation

of judges chosen by their peers, as the judicial component still consists exclusively of judges

of the Supreme Court. In

Poland,

serious concerns related to the National Council for the

Judiciary remain to be addressed, as there are legitimate doubts as to its independence

The method used for the appointment and dismissal of judges acts as a key safeguard for

judicial independence and can have an impact on public perception of independence. As

established by the CJEU, in order to guarantee judicial independence, substantive conditions

and procedural rules governing judicial appointments must be sufficient to prevent reasonable

doubts as to the imperviousness of these judges to external factors, and as to their neutrality as

judges

See in particular Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Council of Europe.

Recommendations concern BG, ES and SK..

See judgments of 15 July 2021,

Commission v Poland,

C-791/19, paras. 98-108; of 20 April 2021,

Repubblika

and Il-Prim Ministru,

C-896/19, para. 66; of 2 March 2021,

AB and Others (Appointment of judges to the

Supreme Court – Actions),

C-824/18, paras. 66, 124 and 125; and of 19 November 2019,

AK et al,

joined cases

C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18, paras. 137 and 138.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Since the last report, several Member States have improved judicial appointment procedures

and the functioning of their highest courts, including as a follow-up to the 2022

recommendations. In

Finland,

a Ministry of Justice working group proposed constitutional

amendments to strengthen judicial independence, including to reform the appointment

procedure for lay judges, to set a maximum number of judges on the Supreme Court, and to set

a compulsory retirement age for judges. In

Austria,

a law was adopted to provide for judicial

involvement in the appointment of the Supreme Court president and vice-president, though the

lack of judicial involvement in appointments for administrative court presidents continues to

raise concerns. In

Slovenia,

new reforms envisage transferring the power to appoint judges

from Parliament to the President and Judicial Council, though the lack of safeguards for judicial

independence raises concerns. In

Cyprus,

a new system of appointments of judges to the

Supreme Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court includes a positive step involving the

judiciary, in line with European standards. In

Sweden,

recent developments led to a wider

societal discussion on the nomination system for lay judges, which is done via political parties

and therefore raises concerns on ensuring their independence. In

Hungary,

the risk of arbitrary

decisions on the career of judges is expected to be limited by a new law, which ensures that the

National Judicial Council gives a binding opinion. New laws addressed several concerns

related to the functioning of the Kúria (supreme court), including removing the Kúria’s power

to review the necessity of preliminary references, in line with EU law requirements. Case

allocation in the Kúria is expected to be more transparent following a legislative reform and

the full implementation of the reform.

In other Member States, challenges remain regarding appointments to high-level judicial

positions and for court president positions. In

Malta,

there is still no involvement of the

judiciary in the procedure for appointment of the Chief Justice. In

Greece,

no steps have been

taken with regard to the involvement of the judiciary in the appointment procedure for senior

positions of judges. In

Lithuania,

there was some progress in improving the transparency of

judicial appointments, with new legislation, though there are calls for additional safeguards. In

Latvia,

no process has been initiated to ensure appropriate safeguards against undue political

influence in the appointment of Supreme Court judges. In

Ireland,

the envisaged composition

of the Judicial Appointment Commission continues to raise concerns

In a few Member States, other concerns exist with regard to judicial independence. In

Slovakia,

the crime of abuse of law introduced for judges as regards their judicial decisions continues to

raise concerns, as it creates a negative psychological effect on judges, as well as being

burdensome for the investigatory authorities

Poland,

serious doubts remain as to whether a number of Supreme Court judges appointed

in 2018 and 2019, including its First President, comply with the requirements of a tribunal

established by law. A preliminary ruling by the CJEU related to a judicial appointment to the

Chamber of Extraordinary Control has so far not been implemented. In

Hungary,

steps are

being taken to address the milestones related to judicial independence under the Recovery and

Resilience Plan. Other concerns relate to the case allocation systems in lower courts

The autonomy and independence of the prosecution service continue to be important topics of

reforms

There is no single model in the EU for the institutional set-up for prosecution services.

However, institutional safeguards are always needed to ensure that prosecution is sufficiently

Recommendations include IE, EL, LV, LT, MT, AT, SI, FI and SE.

A recommendation concerns SK.

A recommendation concerns HU.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

autonomous and can carry out effective and impartial investigations, bringing cases to court

without political pressure. This is not only essential for national and EU criminal law, but also

has a direct impact on the EU in ensuring issues such as the protection of the financial interests

of the EU or application of sanctions since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Following the 2022 report recommendations, several Member States have initiated or

continued reforms of their prosecution services, with varying degrees of progress. In

Malta,

new disciplinary system for prosecutors has been set up establishing different levels of

disciplinary offences as well as the procedure to be followed. In

Luxembourg,

constitutional reform strengthens the independence of the Prosecutor’s Office in exercising

individual investigations and prosecutions. In the

Netherlands,

the removal of the executive’s

power to give instructions to prosecutors in individual cases is under discussion. In

Czechia,

draft law was tabled in Parliament, introducing certain safeguards for the dismissal of the

Prosecutor General by the Ministry of Justice. In

Slovenia,

legislative amendments are being

prepared to introduce safeguards for judicial independence and autonomy of prosecutors in the

rules on parliamentary inquiries.

However, a number of issues identified in previous Rule of Law reports, and reflected in the

recommendations of the 2022 report, remain unaddressed. In

Spain,

no measures have been

taken to strengthen the statute of the Prosecutor General and address the separation of the term

of office of the Prosecutor General from that of the Government. In

Austria,

plans to establish

an independent Federal Prosecution Office, including to ensure the independent operation of

specialised anti-corruption prosecution service, have not progressed further. In

Cyprus,

the

prosecution service, headed by the Attorney General, is part of the Law Office of the Republic

and there is no clear separation between staff entrusted with advisory tasks and those carrying

out prosecutorial tasks. The absence of a possibility to review decisions of the Attorney General

not to prosecute or to discontinue proceedings also raises concerns. In

Slovakia,

the power of

the Prosecutor General to annul decisions by lower ranking prosecutors remains a concern, in

relation both to a lack of judicial review and to its application by the Prosecutor General in

several high-profile corruption cases. In

Poland

some progress has been made to ensure the

functional independence of the prosecution service from the Government, but the functions of

the Minister of Justice and the Prosecutor General have still not been separated

Ensuring accountability and safeguarding independence in disciplinary procedures involving

judges and prosecutors

In its case-law, the CJEU has established essential safeguards to ensure that the disciplinary

framework cannot be used as a manner of political control on the judiciary

. These safeguards

include rules defining conduct amounting to disciplinary offences and the applicable penalties.

Disciplinary proceedings need to be carried out with the involvement of an independent body,

in accordance with a procedure which fully safeguards the rights enshrined in Articles 47 and

48 of the Charter, in particular the rights of defence. Rules must also allow for the possibility

of challenging the disciplinary bodies’ decisions in Court

Continuing a trend observed in previous Rule of Law reports, some Member States have

implemented or are preparing reforms to increase safeguards for judicial independence in

Recommendations concern CZ, ES, CY, AT, PL, SI and SK.

The Court has recalled this principle in cases referring to the disciplinary chamber of the Polish Supreme Court

(Judgment of 5 June 2023, C-204/21,

Commission v Poland)

and the Romanian Judicial Inspection (Judgments

of 11 May 2023,

Inspecţia Judiciară,

case 817/21, and of 18 May 2021,

Asociaţia 'Forumul Judecătorilor din

România' and Others v Inspecţia Judiciară and Others,

joined Cases C-83/19, C-127/19, C-195/19, C-291/19,

C-355/19 and C-397/19).

Court of Justice of the European Union, Judgment of 25 July 2018,

LM,

C-216/18 PPU, para. 67.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

disciplinary proceedings. In

Slovakia,

a new disciplinary procedure for judges, prosecutors,

enforcement agents and notaries before the Supreme Administrative Court is in place and is

reported to function well. In

Czechia,

a reform to the disciplinary procedure for judges is being

prepared, to introduce the possibility of appealing decisions taken by a disciplinary court. In

Slovenia,

changes to the Judicial Council Act are being drawn up, focusing on its procedural

role in disciplinary proceedings. In

Croatia,

following last year’s recommendations, periodic

security checks on all judges were removed by way of a Constitutional Court decision and

those on all state attorneys are envisaged to be removed by amendments being prepared. In

Romania,

changes to the civil and disciplinary liability regimes have strengthened the

independence of the judiciary.

However, there are also situations where challenges exist regarding the disciplinary framework,

and concerns remain that disciplinary proceedings may be used a means to curtail judicial

independence. In

Poland,

a number of judges continued to be subject to disciplinary

investigations and proceedings related to the content of their judicial decisions and forced

transfers. To strengthen provisions protecting judges against disciplinary liability based on the

content of their judicial decisions, a new law was adopted by Parliament and is currently under

examination by the Constitutional Tribunal. In

Bulgaria,

the functioning of the Inspectorate to

the Supreme Judicial Council, responsible for opening disciplinary proceedings, has been at

risk of political influence

The effective protection of judicial independence also requires a culture of integrity and

impartiality. Several Member States are implementing policies and practices to promote

integrity within the judiciary. In

Portugal,

the High Council for the Judiciary has presented a

proposal to regulate ‘revolving doors’ in the judiciary. However, the incompatibilities regime

for judges continues to raise concerns in

Spain.

Belgium,

the Government is now reflecting

on revisions to the proposal to introduce regular security checks conducted by the National

Security Agency on all judges, following criticism by the High Council for Justice.

Efforts to improve the quality and efficiency of justice

An efficient justice system manages its caseload and backlog of cases and delivers its decisions

without undue delay. Excessively long proceedings and substantial backlogs undermine the

trust citizens and businesses place in national justice systems. For the justice system to work

properly, adequate resources, including the necessary investments in physical and technical

infrastructure, and well qualified, trained and adequately paid staff, are indispensable. A

number of Member States have recognised this by allocating additional resources to strengthen

the resilience of justice systems in their national Recovery and Resilience Plans, which

continue to be implemented.

One method of ensuring the long-term resilience of the justice system is to ensure the

attractiveness of judicial professions, including through adequate remuneration, and to

minimise the number of vacancies open for judges, prosecutors and court staff. Following the

2022 report recommendations, positive steps have been taken in several Member States. In

Ireland,

the Government has announced a significant increase in the number of judges,

following the recommendations of a judicial planning working group. In

Spain,

the total

number of judges has increased and measures are being taken to address challenges regarding

the resourcing of the justice system. In

France,

the human and financial resources allocated to

the justice system have again increased significantly, and initiatives are in progress to further

address current needs. In

Finland,

the resources for the justice system have increased, however,

the Government’s report on the administration of justice has identified that shortages remain.

A recommendation concerns BG.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Portugal,

efforts are being taken to ensure adequate human resources for the justice system,

although concerns continue regarding a shortage of non-judicial staff.

In other Member States, concerns regarding resources persist. In

Lithuania,

there are serious

concerns regarding the level of remuneration for prosecutors, and court staff, which has

remained largely unchanged since 2008, although new legislation has been enacted. In

Croatia,

the level of remuneration of judges, state prosecutors and judicial staff is being addressed,

although concerns remain. In

Belgium,

further policy and legislative initiatives have been taken

to remedy the budgetary and staff shortages in the justice system, but structural resource

deficiencies persist despite these significant investments. In

Denmark,

although analyses are

ongoing to ensure sufficient human and financial resources for the justice system, the resource

situation is a concern and increasingly affects the length of proceedings. In the

Netherlands,

judges and public prosecutors have expressed concerns regarding staff shortages and

challenging working conditions due to a high workload. In

Czechia,

funding for assistant

staffing in courts and public prosecution is insufficient, leading to difficulties in recruiting

qualified staff and undermining the proper functioning of the prosecution and judiciary. In

Germany,

the Pact for the Rule of Law which had provided federal funding for the justice

system has not been prolonged, and no further steps have been taken at the federal level to

ensure adequate resources for the judiciary and in relation to the level of salary of judges. In

Slovenia,

the level of remuneration of judges and state prosecutors, largely unchanged since

2012, raises concerns and was, as far as judges’ salaries are concerned, declared

unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. In

Poland,

the budgetary law for 2023 adversely

affected the remuneration of judges and prosecutors. Those voicing concerns include the

Supreme Court, the National Council for the Judiciary, the Ombudsperson, and associations of

judges and prosecutors

. In

Romania,

despite continued efforts to improve the situation, the

increasing shortage of magistrates is generating serious concerns

Investing in infrastructure and digitalisation of the justice system is essential to meet the

broader efficiency challenges in a number of Member States. In

Malta, Cyprus

and

Greece,

increased resources for the judiciary and other measures taken have not yet resulted in a

reduction as regards the length of proceedings, and backlogs of cases remain a serious

challenge. In

Croatia,

the justice system further extended electronic communication tools and

decreased backlogs, but significant efficiency and quality issues remain, as the length of trials

generally increased. In

Italy,

two Legislative Decrees were adopted to implement the civil and

criminal justice reforms to improve the quality and efficiency of the justice system, including

as regards the length of proceedings. The effectiveness of the reforms remains to be seen. In

Portugal,

measures to address efficiency challenges, in particular in administrative and tax

courts have been enacted, with others in preparation. The Portuguese Recovery and Resilience

Plan also includes measures to increase the efficiency of administrative and tax courts.

Initiatives to improve digitalisation have continued and Member States are taking further steps

in this respect, also following 2022 report recommendations. It is particularly important to

ensure that digital tools can be effectively used in practice, including through sufficient

training. The digitalisation of the justice system continues to be overall very advanced in

Estonia, Germany, Latvia, Poland, Spain, Slovakia, Lithuania, Hungary

and

Austria.

Croatia,

the use of the electronic communication system was further increased and most

remaining courts were integrated into a unified system already used by all other courts. In

France,

work to complete the full digitalisation of civil and criminal court proceedings has

The President of the Supreme Administrative Court and the First President of the Supreme Court requested

that the Constitutional Tribunal declare the contested provisions unconstitutional (the case remains pending).

Recommendations concern BE, DK, DE, FR, HR, LT, PT, RO and SI.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

further advanced. In the

Netherlands,

the level of digitalisation has improved, with the

introduction of more digital solutions for court proceedings. In

Estonia,

further improvements

have been made in digitalisation, improving cross-system document access. In

Bulgaria,

steps

have been taken to amend legislation related to the digitalisation of justice. In

Italy,

the

digitalisation of the civil justice system has progressed significantly, while the amended

procedural rules allowing digitalisation in the criminal justice system remain to be fully

implemented

Access to justice and the role of lawyers in the justice system

Lawyers play a key role in ensuring the protection of fundamental rights and the strengthening

of the rule of law, including the right to a fair trial. Steps towards ensuring the right of access

to a lawyer are ongoing in several Member States. In

Spain,

the legal aid framework has been

further strengthened, and in

France

the budget for legal aid further increased. In

Finland,

new

legislation provides courts with wider discretion in allocating legal costs in civil cases, which

is expected to make the justice system more accessible. In

Bulgaria,

new laws regarding

judicial mediation and legal assistance have been adopted to improve access to justice. In

Malta,

work on draft legislation regulating the lawyers’ profession is ongoing. In

Lithuania,

targeted changes to the legal aid system were introduced, although these do not address

concerns regarding the workload and remuneration of legal aid providers. In

Ireland,

while an

analysis of models to reduce litigation costs is pending publication, the high level of litigation

costs continue to be a cause of concern and no further steps were taken to reduce them. In

Denmark,

the review of the legal aid system that commenced in 2020 has been put on hold.

Similarly, in

Luxembourg

the reform aiming to make legal aid more accessible remains

pending. In

Hungary,

access to justice for vulnerable groups could be improved.

One essential element of the freedom of exercise of legal professions is respect for the

confidentiality of the relationship with clients, as confirmed in the Council of Europe

standards

. In

Slovakia,

the Bar Association has warned of repeated breaches of confidentiality

between lawyer and client by law enforcement services during searches of law firms’ premises.

Lithuania,

concerns are still present regarding the respect for lawyers' professional

confidentiality, and questions in this respect remain pending before the European Court of

Human Rights. In

Latvia,

new rules reinforced the protection of professional secrecy for

lawyers

2.2 Anti-corruption framework

The fight against corruption is essential to maintain the rule of law and preserve citizens’ and

companies’ trust in public institutions. A comprehensive approach to fighting corruption must

rely on a combination of preventive and punitive measures. This requires a robust legal and

institutional framework, sufficient administrative and judicial capacity, effective investigations

and prosecutions and the clear political will to enforce the anti-corruption framework. It also

needs reliable and effective integrity measures to minimimise the space for corruption.

Recommendations concern FR, IT, MT, NL and PT.

Recommendation No. R(2000)21 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the freedom of

exercise of the profession of lawyer.

Recommendations concern LT, LU, IE.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Corruption perceptions across the EU

The results of the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI)

show that nine Member States are in

the top 20 of the countries perceived as least corrupt in the world

. Differences remain across

Member States, with some having improved their score compared to previous years, while

others still score significantly lower than the average

The 2023 Eurobarometer survey on corruption

show that corruption remains a serious

concern for citizens and businesses in the EU. 7 in 10 Europeans (70%) believe that corruption

is widespread in their country and over 4 in 10 Europeans (45%) consider that the level of

corruption has increased in their country. More than half of citizens (60%) think that their

government’s efforts to combat corruption are not effective. In addition, most European

companies (65%) consider that the problem of corruption is widespread in their country and

half (50%) think that it is unlikely that corrupt people or businesses in their country would be

caught, or reported to the police or prosecutors.

National anti-corruption strategies and their implementation

The importance of maintaining effective and coordinated anti-corruption policies is recognised

in international law

. National anti-corruption strategies can ensure that countries follow a

comprehensive, coherent and integrated approach, allowing anti-corruption provisions to be

mainstreamed in all relevant policy sectors. Almost all Member States currently have national

anti-corruption strategies in place. Since July 2022,

Czechia, Italy

and

Latvia

have updated

their national strategies and/or action plans

Hungary, Slovenia

and

France

have started the

process of revising their existing strategies, and preparatory revision processes are also ongoing

Slovakia

and

Germany

Strengthening the capacity of institutions and the legal framework to combat corruption

An effective response to corruption depends on a robust legal and administrative anti-

corruption framework

and on strong and independent institutions to enforce the rules. Since

the last Rule of Law report, and also following its recommendations, several Member States

have taken forward criminal law reforms to strengthen the fight against corruption.

Hungary

Transparency International (2023)

https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022

Four Member States (Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and the Netherlands,) score 80/100 or above on the index,

and a further five (Germany, Ireland, Estonia, Belgium and France) score above 72/100. The EU average is

64/100.

Scores below 50 can be seen in Romania (46), Bulgaria (43), and Hungary (42).

Special

Eurobarometer 534

on Corruption (2023) & Flash

Eurobarometer 524

on Businesses’ attitudes towards

corruption in the EU (2023). The previous data sets are the Special Eurobarometer 523 (2022) and the Flash

Eurobarometer 507 (2022).

The United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) asks State Parties, in accordance with the

fundamental principles of their legal systems, to develop and implement or maintain effective, coordinated

anti-corruption policies that promote the participation of society and reflect the principles of the rule of law,

proper management of public affairs and public property, integrity, transparency and accountability. All

Member States and the EU are parties to the Convention. See also The Kuala Lumpur

Statement on Anti-

Corruption Strategies.

Currently 20 Member States have dedicated anti-corruption strategies or programmes; almost all others have

anti-corruption components in other national strategies and action plans.

A recommendation concerns SI.

International standards are primarily the UNCAC; the Council of Europe’s Criminal Law Convention on

Corruption and its Civil Law Convention on Corruption; and the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of

Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. At EU level, on 3 May 2023, the Commission

proposed a Directive on combating corruption, COM (2023) 234 final which aims to update and strengthen

the EU criminal justice framework.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

adopted legislation to introduce the possibility for prosecutorial decisions not to investigate

and prosecute corruption crimes to be subject to judicial review. In

Bulgaria,

as per the

commitments under its Recovery and Resilience Plan, the Parliament adopted a law

establishing a mechanism to ensure the effective accountability and criminal liability of the

Prosecutor General and their deputies, as well as providing for judicial review of prosecutorial

decisions not to open an investigation. Reforms of substantive or procedural criminal law are

under discussion in other Member States.

Austria

tabled draft legislation to extend bribery

offences to cover candidates for public office, and included additional sanctions, such as

prohibition to hold public office.

Although some progress has been made, specific gaps remain in criminal law in other Member

States, and many related 2022 report recommendations remain to be fully implemented. In

Finland,

work is ongoing on a draft proposal on trading in influence to further strengthen the

criminal legal framework on corruption, while a proposal to revise the criminal offence of

foreign bribery is pending. In

Sweden,

efforts have been made to prosecute foreign bribery

cases, but so far, the limited legal definitions of foreign bribery remain unchanged

The capacity of law enforcement services, prosecution authorities, and the judiciary more

generally, to enforce anti-corruption criminal law provisions is essential to effectively combat

corruption.

Slovenia

and

Luxembourg

took steps to increase the capacity of the prosecution

authorities responsible for the fight against corruption by allocating additional resources.

Resource limitations are cited by prosecution services in many Member States as a challenge,

sometimes exacerbated by additional shortcomings. In

Belgium,

law enforcement and

prosecution continue to fight corruption with generally limited resources. For

Slovakia,

the

level of human and financial resources to tackle corruption cases within the police and the

prosecution service are not considered fully adequate to carry out their tasks, particularly for

complex high-level corruption cases, and coordination among the different law enforcement

entities still requires improvement. In

Portugal,

stakeholders report serious resource-related

issues for preventing, investigating and prosecuting corruption. In

Cyprus,

efforts are being

made to address limitations in human, financial and technical resources to the Office of the

Attorney General, as they continue to affect investigations

Specialisation is another key element for boosting anti-corruption capacity, as is access to

relevant information, the interconnection of registries and good cooperation between law

enforcement authorities and other agencies, such as financial intelligence units and tax, audit

and competition authorities. Responding to the 2022 report recommendations,

Slovenia

reinstated the operational autonomy of its National Bureau of Investigation, restoring the State

Prosecutor’s power to direct pre-trial and criminal proceedings without direction from the

Ministry of Interior.

Romania

has made significant progress in addressing operational

challenges relating to anti-corruption prosecution in the National Anti-Corruption Directorate

(DNA), although recruitment remains to be further improved. In

Bulgaria,

the institutional

restructuring of the Anti-Corruption Commission is envisaged as part of Bulgaria’s

commitments under the Recovery and Resilience Plan, and draft legislation is being discussed

in Parliament

Recommendations concern FI and SE.

Recommendations concern SK and PT.

Recommendations concern BG and RO.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Removing obstacles to criminal investigations and prosecution and establishing dissuasive

sanctions for high-level corruption

Procedural shortcomings can obstruct the effective investigation and prosecution of corruption

cases. Examples include excessively cumbersome or unclear provisions on lifting immunities

and statutes of limitations that are too short. These obstacles can be particularly harmful for

complex corruption cases, in particular where lengthy proceedings are already an issue,

generating risks of impunity and depriving anti-corruption efforts of their deterrent effects.

According to the Special Eurobarometer on citizens’ attitudes towards corruption, around

seven in ten of Europeans (67%) think that high-level corruption cases are not pursued

sufficiently

In some Member States, reforms to reduce the length of criminal proceedings

are needed to improve the track record of final judgments, in particular in relation to high-level

corruption cases. Last year’s report issued recommendations in this regard to several Member

States. In

Croatia,

the length of proceedings to investigate, prosecute and adjudicate corruption

offences continues to undermine the effectiveness of the anti-corruption system; legislation to

shorten this has yet to be introduced.

Spain

also still needs to address challenges related to the

length of investigations and prosecutions, to increase efficiency in handling high-level

corruption cases. In

Czechia,

high-level corruption cases remain a point of attention due to

delays in some proceedings

In some Member States, immunity for corruption offences for members of the Government has

been an issue of concern. Some countries have taken action to address this. In

Luxembourg,

constitutional reform abolished the Parliament’s exclusive right to bring charges against

members of Government. The Prosecutor’s Office became competent to carry out criminal

investigations into members of Government, who can now be held criminally liable for

corruption offences commited in the exercise of their duties. In

Romania,

the Senate adopted

rules with objective criteria to decide on requests for lifting parliamentary immunities,

mirroring the rules already adopted in 2019 by the Chamber of Deputies. However, in

Poland,

concerns regarding the broad scope of immunities for persons exercising top executive

functions who are also Members of Parliament have not yet been addressed and new impunity

provisions were adopted, creating exemptions from criminal responsibility and increasing the

risk of corruption

Some Member States continue to consolidate their track record of investigating, prosecuting

and sanctioning high-level corruption

, in line with recommendations in the 2022 report. In

Croatia,

the effective investigation of high-level corruption continued, and the overall number

of indictments and judgments increased. Efforts to fight high-level corruption also continued

Slovakia,

with several former high-ranking officials charged with bribery offences, and in

Austria,

where prosecutors continue to experience high scrutiny on individual cases. Results

have been achieved in prosecuting and sanctioning high-level corruption offences in

France,

despite structural and resource challenges.

Romania

has continued to maintain a positive track

record in combating corruption, including on high-level cases.

In other Member States, a solid track record in the investigation and prosecution of high-level

corruption cases, leading to dissuasive sanctions by final convictions, remains to be established.

Bulgaria,

a robust track record of final convictions in high-level cases of corruption is still

Special

Eurobarometer 534

on Citizens’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023).

Recommendations concern CZ, ES and HR.

A recommendation concerns PL.

As noted in the 2020 Rule of Law report, the lack of uniform, up to date and consolidated statistics across all

Member States makes it difficult to track the comparative success of the investigation and prosecution of

corruption offences. The assessment is based on the data provided by Member States.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

lacking. In

Malta,

prosecution was launched by the Attorney General’s office in relation to

some cases, challenges relating to the length of investigations of high-level corruption cases

remain and further measures are needed to establish a robust track record of final judgments.

Although some high-level cases reached the indictment and conviction stage in

Hungary,

the

lack of a robust track record of investigations of corruption allegations concerning high-level

officials and their immediate circle remains a serious concern. The Hungarian Recovery and

Resilience Plan includes commitments aimed at improving prosecution in corruption cases. In

Greece,

while some progress has been made on the rate of prosecutions and convictions for

bribery offences, the relatively high number of acquittals and suspended sentences may raise

doubts as to the deterrent effect of the criminal justice response. In

Slovenia,

criminal

investigations, indictments and judgments in corruption cases remain limited, including for

high-level corruption

Strengthening corruption prevention measures and fostering integrity in public life

A political and institutional system based on integrity, transparency and accountability in

public life is the best guarantee against corruption. This is why effective anti-corruption

approaches often build on measures to enhance transparency, ethics and integrity, as well as

regulating areas such as conflict of interest, lobbying and ‘revolving doors’

Conflicts of interest arise when a public official has a private or professional interest that could

interfere with the impartial and objective performance of their duties

. To prevent such

conflicts of interest, most Member States have measures in place covering a wide range of

elected and appointed public officials. In the

Netherlands,

the Government adopted a

comprehensive policy on integrity in public office, covering civil servants and holders of

political office.

Lithuania

also took further measures to implement its existing integrity rules.

Czechia,

legislation to revise the system of declaration of conflicts of interest is progressing

through Parliament.

Challenges remain in other Member States. In

Italy,

where no comprehensive rules on conflicts

of interest exist, new draft legislation is under discussion in Parliament. In

Slovenia,

the rules

on conflicts of interest and incompatibility of office indicate certain gaps in monitoring,

particularly at the municipal level.

Senior government officials and Members of Parliament are often subject to specific integrity

rules. Many Member States have in place codes of conduct and rules on preventing conflicts

of interest and incompatibilities with other activities. It is important that the practical

implementation of these rules is subject to regular verification and evaluation. Some Member

States have taken steps in this area, including in the light of the 2022 recommendations. In

Estonia,

new procedures were introduced to ensure more effective implementation of the

guidelines on conflicts of interest for ministers and their political advisers, although

enforcement mechanisms are still lacking. In

Belgium,

the ministerial Code of Conduct for

federal public office holders is to be extended to cover all members of ministerial private

offices and a Code of Conduct for ministers was put in place, which includes guidance on

conflicts of interest, revolving doors and gifts and benefits. In

Croatia,

codes of conduct were

adopted for Members of Parliament and almost all local and regional administrations have

followed. The

Netherlands

adopted a Code of Conduct for ministers and state secretaries.

Recommendations concern BG, EL, HU, MT and SI.

JOIN (2023) 12 final, p. 4.

Conflicts of interest arise when a public official has a private or professional interest that could interfere with

the impartial and objective performance of their duties. See Council of Europe, Recommendation Rec(2000)10

on codes of conduct for public officials.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Finland,

while civil servants and persons entrusted with top executive functions are covered

by the Code of Conduct, ministers are still excluded. In

Bulgaria,

serious gaps remain on

integrity measures for top-level functions. In

Portugal,

concerns remain regarding the

application and monitoring of rules on conflicts of interest for high-level officials in Parliament

and in the Government. In

Spain,

rules on conflicts of interest of top executive officials are not

adequately implemented. In

France,

not all Members of Parliament seem to declare their

interests in line with the applicable integrity rules

Ensuring transparent lobbying and regulating ‘revolving doors’

To be a legitimate act of political participation

, lobbying needs to be accompanied by strong

requirements for transparency and integrity to ensure accountability and inclusiveness in

decision-making

. Developments in these areas continued in 2023, as some Member States

revised their lobbying transparency rules, in line with 2022 recommendations. In

Latvia,

a new

lobbying law was adopted, which provides for the creation of a lobbying register. In

Estonia,

the authorities have continued efforts to effectively implement the guidelines on lobbying.

Cyprus

adopted an implementing regulation on lobbying, which clarifies the procedure for

declaring, recording, and publishing lobbying activities. In

Lithuania,

current rules on lobbying

gave positive results in terms of submitted declarations. In

Belgium, Czechia, Croatia, Spain,

Ireland,

and

Portugal,

discussions on new lobbying legislation are ongoing. Dedicated

regulation on lobbying is still missing in

Slovakia,

and existing legislation could be improved

Austria, Germany, France, Luxembourg,

the

Netherlands, Poland,

Romania

and

Hungary

The regulation and enforcement of rules on ‘revolving doors’ between public and private

functions is increasingly an area of attention in many Member States, including to prevent

foreign interference . In

Sweden,

an evaluation of the post-employment rules for top executive

functions in the Government is ongoing. Discussions on introducing or revising existing rules

on revolving doors are progressing in

Finland

and the

Netherlands.

In other Member States,

progress has been slower. In

Hungary,

post-employment restrictions and cooling-off periods

are fragmented and apply only to a small group of public officials, but there are plans to provide

further guidance on post-employment restrictions. In

Denmark,

no steps have been taken to

introduce rules on revolving doors for ministers

Asset and interest disclosure

Asset and interest declarations by public officials support public sector transparency and

accountability and are important tools to promote integrity and prevent corruption. Rules are

in place in most Member States to ensure that public sector officials are subject to asset and

interest disclosure obligations. However, there are wide variations in the scope, transparency

and accessibility of disclosed information, as well as in the level and effectiveness of

verification and enforcement measures.

Several Member States saw reforms in 2023 to address issues covered in the 2022

recommendations. In

Czechia,

the asset declarations system was revised, bringing it into

compliance with a Constitutional Court ruling, and declarations are again being made publicly

available, albeit upon request. In

Greece,

a new law to strengthen the system and procedure for

Recommendations concern BE, BG, CZ, EE, IT, SK and FI .

OECD (2021) Lobbying in the 21

century.

OECD (2010), Recommendation of the Council on Principles for Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying;

Council of Europe standards on lobbying transparency, Recommendation CM/Rec(2017)2.

Recommendations concern BE, CZ, DK, DE, IE, ES, FR, HR, IT, LV, LU, HU, NL, AT, PL, RO and SK..

Recommendations concern BE, CZ, DK, DE, HU, NL, and SE […].

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

verifications entered into force.

Latvia

and

Romania

continue to successfully implement their

electronic system for asset declarations.

In some other Member States, the pace of reform has been slower and challenges remain. In

Portugal,

the start of operations of a new entity that will be in charge of monitoring and

verification of asset declarations remains delayed. In

Slovakia,

a body intended to oversee the

majority of asset declarations and deal with conflicts of interest, violations of codes of conduct

and lobbying has not yet been set up. In

Belgium,

shortcomings remain regarding the

verification and transparency of asset declarations, as these declarations are only accessible in

the context of criminal investigations. In

Denmark,

no progress has been made on asset

declarations submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions, and there continues

to be no verification and monitoring system in place for integrity risks. In

Poland,

a uniform,

centralised submission and monitoring system for asset declarations is still lacking, and the

level of digitalisation of politicians’ asset declarations continues to be low. In

Austria,

working group has been created to follow up on asset and interest disclosure rules for Members

of Parliament, but no concrete results have been reported so far. Similarly, in

Cyprus,

the asset

declaration system remains incomplete, as the relevant act is still in Parliament. In

Ireland,

some steps were taken to strengthen the asset disclosure rules

Whistleblower protection

The protection of whistleblowers plays an essential role in the detection and prevention of

corruption. The transposition of the EU Directive on whistleblower protection

has resulted in

revised or new legislation in many Member States, as noted in last year’s report. Since July

2022, laws to transpose the Directive or to otherwise strenghen the protection of whistleblowers

have been adopted and/or entered into force

However, there are still major obstacles to reporting corruption cases in practice with less than

half of Europeans (45%) knowing where to report a case of corruption and 30% of Europeans

believing that cases of corruption are not reported because reporting would be pointless

becauses those responsible will not be punished

. Legislative steps are being complemented

by other efforts to implement the new laws and encourage whistleblowers to use the new

channels for reporting.

Slovakia’s

dedicated Whistleblower Protection Office is investing in

public awareness campaigns to address the persistently low levels of reporting. In

Cyprus,

with

no whistleblowing complaints received so far, awareness-raising actions have been launched.

Denmark

and

Malta

have produced new guidelines and information tools.

Addressing areas of high risk

No sector or area of activity is safe from corruption risks, but common high-risk areas deserve

particular attention – usually those involving management of significant public funds or access

to permits or to a critical service. Sectors such as healthcare, construction or urban planning

are therefore vulnerable, and public investments need to take account of new corruption-related

risks. Areas with a risk of serious criminality such as ports, which are pressure points for

Recommendations concern DK, IE, ES, CY, HU, AT, PL, PT and SK.

Directive 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law (OJ L 305, 26.11.2019).

Austria, Bulgaria, Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, the

Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, Spain. The Commission is currently assessing the compliance of the

transposition measures notified with regard to Directive (EU) 2019/1937.

Special

Eurobarometer 534

on Citizens’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023).

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

organised crime groups trafficking drugs, also need constant monitoring. Other areas of risk

relate to political party financing and investor citizenship and residence schemes

Political party financing

is an important risk area for corruption raised in a number of 2022

recommendations and several Member States have adopted or are considering reforms to

increase transparency and oversight. In

Austria,

a significant reform of the political party

financing framework has been finalised, strengthening the role of the Court of Audit. Revised

rules on political party financing entered into force in the

Netherlands,

prohibiting foreign

donations and increasing transparency and reporting obligations, with further legislative

reforms on the way. In

Belgium,

reform of political party financing continues to be extensively

discussed, albeit without concrete results yet. In

Poland,

new measures have entered into force

increasing the transparency of political party finances, though concerns remain regarding party

donations and election campaigns. In

Spain,

despite a formal request by the Court of Auditors,

the law governing financing of political parties remains unchanged. In

Czechia,

some steps

were taken towards reforming the political party financing framework. In

Denmark,

a new law

on public financing of political parties was adopted and discussions on a legislative initiative

on the private financing of political parties have started.

Challenges continue to exist in other Member States. In

Italy,

the practice of channelling

donations through political foundations and associations remains unchanged although

discussions on a draft law have begun in Parliament. The verification of party financing in

Slovenia

is not systematic, and the Court of Audit is reflecting on ways to improve the

effectiveness of political party audits. In

Germany,

a number of reforms set out in the

Government’s coalition agreement are still outstanding, including the revision of political party

financing rules

Investor citizenship and investor residence schemes

create corruption risks. They also raise

concerns about security, money laundering and tax evasion,

as well as the use of such

schemes toavoid extradition, evade sanctions and launder illicit proceeds. The schemes may

also encourage bribery of public officials and private intermediaries. Moreover, he

Commission considers that the granting of EU citizenship in return for pre-determined

payments or investments, without any genuine link to the relevant Member State, undermines

the essence of EU citizenship and is in breach of EU law, and has taken steps to ensure that all

investor citizenship schemes in the EU are abolished

Bulgaria

has begun a process of

revoking Bulgarian citizenship previously granted under its (now abolished) investor

citizenship scheme due to investors’ failure to comply with the national legal framework.

Cyprus

has stopped applying its investor citizenship scheme in practice, although the scheme’s

legal framework remains in force.

Malta

continues to operate its scheme, although it has ceased

naturalising Russian and Belarusian investors

. Both

Cyprus

and

Malta

have also withdrawn

nationality from investors previously naturalised under their investor residence schemes,

implementing the Commission’s Recommendation on investor schemes issued in the context

of the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine

. Investor residence schemes remain highly

Joint Communication on the fight against corruption on the fight against corruption, JOIN(2023) 12 final

Brussels, 3.5.2023, p. 7.

A recommendation concerns IT.

Commission report on ‘Investor Citizenship and Residence Schemes in the EU’ adopted on 23 January 2019,

COM(2019) 12.

The Commission launched infringement procedures regarding the schemes operated by Cyprus and Malta.

The Commission referred Malta to the Court of Justice of the European Union on 21 March 2023, (case C-

181/23 pending).

Recommendation in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in relation to CBI and RBI schemes

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

susceptible to corruption-related risks and continue to require careful risk screening. The 2019

Commission report on Investor Citizenship and Residence Schemes identified 19 Member

States as having an investor residence scheme

. Recently some Member States have

terminated their schemes or are in the process of terminating them

, and work is ongoing in

other Member States to assess specific risks and/or take mitigating measures

In many Member States,

public procurement

and the

health sector

remain the main areas at

high risk of corruption. Other areas highlighted for their corruption risk include environmental

protection, the protection of cultural heritage, and the energy sector. Further work is required

to map common high-risk areas, as corruption activities are constantly developing and adapting

to new opportunities. The Commission has committed to work with Member States in this

respect. One of the first tasks of the new EU network against corruption that the Commission

will set up will be to map common risk areas by 2024

. Some Member States are making

efforts to mitigate corruption risks in specific areas, in particular in relation to public

procurement. The Flash Eurobarometer on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU

shows that 26% of companies in the EU think that corruption has prevented them from winning

a public tender or a public procurement contract in practice in the last three years

Finland

organising tailored training to address risks in public procurement. In

Slovenia,

efforts have

continued to increase transparency by upgrading the public procurement registry to include

more detailed information about the entire lifecycle of public contracts. In

Lithuania,

the launch

of a new e-procurement system is being finalised, with the intention to create links with other

state registries for ease of use.

2.3 Media pluralism and media freedom

A free and pluralistic media environment is key for safeguarding the rule of law, as independent

and free media hold power and institutions to account when they carry out their role as

watchdogs of democracy. Political and state pressure or control over the media undermines

media freedom, as well as the freedom to seek, receive and impart information. A highly

concentrated market dominated by only a few players may also undermine media pluralism, in

particular in the absence of strong safeguards for editorial independence. In the EU, Member

States have an obligation to guarantee an enabling environment for journalists, protect their

safety and promote media pluralism and freedom.

The Media Pluralism Monitor

assesses the risks to media freedom and pluralism in all

Member States, focusing on four areas – fundamental protection of media freedom, market

adopted on 28 March 2022, C(2022) 2028.

Residence by investment schemes were in use in a total of 19 Member States: Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia,

Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands,

Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia.

Ireland, Portugal and the Netherlands.

Spain and Lithuania.

The Commission will lead this work in close consultation with Member States. This will form an important

component in developing future initiatives on fighting corruption. See Joint Communication on the fight

against corruption, JOIN(2023) 12.

Flash

Eurobarometer 524

on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023).

The Media Pluralism Monitor is an important source of information for the Commission’s Rule of Law reports.

It is a scientific holistic tool that documents the health of media frameworks, detailing threats to media

pluralism and freedom in Member States and in certain candidate countries. It is co-financed by the EU and

has been carried out, in an independent manner and on a regular basis, by the Centre for Media Pluralism and

Media Freedom, since 2013-14. The Commission has also used other sources, such as Reporters Without

Borders’ World Press Freedom Index and the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of

journalism and safety of journalists, as referenced in the country chapters.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

plurality, political independence, and the social inclusiveness of media. The Monitor’s latest

results (MPM 2023) reveal that there has been no major change across these areas since the

last MPM report, though there has been some variance in specific indicators within those

general areas. The indicators relating to the journalistic profession and the protection of

journalists and relating to access to information remain overall unchanged, both registering the

same medium risk scores. There has been some further improvement in the indicator relating

to transparency of media ownership due also to the implementation of EU legislation by several

Member States. News media concentration

retains its ‘high risk’ level across the EU, while

the area of political independence, remains largely unchanged at medium risk. This year’s

overall ranking classifies media pluralism to be at ‘high risk’ in five Member States and at

‘very high risk’ in four Member States

Strengthening the independent functioning of media regulators

The functional and effective independence of media regulators is essential for upholding media

pluralism. Media regulators also require sufficient resources and must be able to exercise their

powers in an impartial and transparent way. All Member States have legislation in place setting

out the competences and independence of media regulators, as the Audiovisual Media Services

Directive (AVMSD) includes a clear list of requirements which Member States must ensure

with regard to their media regulators: independence from government, impartiality,

transparency, accountability, adequate resources, appointment and dismissal procedures and

effective appeal mechanisms

. The Commission is currently assessing in detail the

transposition of the AVMSD by Member States, including in relation to the independence of

media regulators.

Since the 2022 Rule of Law report,

Czechia, Lithuania

and

Ireland

have followed other

Member States and adopted provisions to increase the independence of media authorities or

extend the authorities’ powers to cover new areas. A restructuring process is ongoing or under

preparation in

Estonia, Spain,

and

Sweden.

Concerns persist with regard to the effectiveness or the functional independence of regulators

in practice in several Member States. Some of these concerns relate to insufficient safeguards

against undue political influence over the nomination process or in the functioning of

regulators, as is the case in

Hungary, Slovenia,

and

Poland.

Greece

and

Romania,

resources

continue to be insufficient for the authorities to fully carry out their tasks

Increasing the transparency of media ownership

Media ownership can result in direct or indirect control of or significant influence over the

editorial decisions and the news content provided. Transparency of media ownership therefore

allows users to make better informed judgements. European standards

encourage Member

This indicator has been renamed “Plurality of media providers” in MPM 2023.

In ascending order of risk, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia and Malta are considered ‘high risk’ while

Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, and Hungary are considered to be ‘very high risk’ countries. The Media Pluralism

Monitor calls for caution in any comparison between its rankings and those published by other indexes (such

as the Reporters without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index), given the different methodologies used,

indicators and scope.

Directive (EU) 2018/1808 of 14 November 2018.

A recommendation concerns HU.

Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)11 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on media pluralism and

transparency of media ownership.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

States to adopt specific measures in this area

. Since the last report, new legislation increasing

the transparency of media ownership or improving public availability of media ownership

information has been adopted in

Greece, Luxembourg, Sweden

and strengthened in

Cyprus.

Reflections have continued in

Bulgaria

with a view to ensure a more effective enforcement of

media ownership obligations. Following the 2022 report recommendations, the media regulator

Czechia

has been given additional rights to access data on media ownership held by the

Ministry of Justice, but legislation clarifying the definition of ownership remains pending.

Discussions on revising the rules on the transparency of media ownership have started in

France,

where transparency concerns had been raised as regards complex shareholding

structures

Safeguarding media from political pressure and influence

Undue political pressure and political influence on the media, notably from state authorities

and ruling parties, undermines media independence and can thereby negatively impact the rule

of law. Transparent rules for the fair allocation of state advertising and strong safeguards to

prevent the politicisation of public service media are particularly important in this regard.

State advertising

includes all use of the state budget, at all levels, or of state-controlled

companies for the purposes of advertising and campaigns. It is important that allocations are

transparent and take place based on fair criteria, to prevent the risk that state advertising is used

as a means of political influence and to leverage funds to favour certain media outlets. There

have been developments in several Member States in line with the 2022 report

recommendations, but challenges remain. In

Austria,

Parliament adopted a law improving the

transparency of state advertising, while the fairness of its allocation remains unaddressed. In

Bulgaria,

an expert group was set up to examine the issue, as the lack of a clear framework to

ensure transparency in the allocations of state advertising remains a concern. In

Lithuania,

new law requires public institutions and bodies to publish online information about the funds

they have allocated for state advertising.

In other Member States, measures are needed to increase the transparency and fairness of state

advertising. In

Hungary,

no measures have been adopted or planned to regulate and thereby

increase the fairness of the channelling of the significant volumes of state advertising to media

outlets. In

Croatia,

no further steps have been taken since the last legislative reform in 2021 to

further strengthen the framework for the public tender procedure for state advertising in local

and regional media

A regulatory framework and safeguards that ensure the

independent governance and editorial

independence of public service media

is key to preventing political interference. The funding

granted to broadcasting organisations to fulfil this public service is the responsibility of each

Member State, as long as EU trade and competition rules are respected

. However, all Member

States have agreed to a set of European standards and guiding principles relating to

EU legislation also contains relevant provisions: Directive 2010/13/EU of 10 March 2010, as amended by

Directive 2018/1808 of 14 November 2018; General (non-sectoral) obligations of transparency of beneficial

ownership in the Anti-Money Laundering Directives (Directive 2018/843 of 30 May 2018 and Directive

2015/849 of 20 May 2015); transparency of media ownership provisions are also included in the

European

Media Freedom Act - Proposal for a Regulation and Recommendation.

Recommendations concern CZ and FR.

Recommendations concern BG, HR, CY, HU and AT.

Protocol (No 29) on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on

European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

independence, the regulatory and policy framework, funding, appointments, accountability,

management, transparency, and openness in this domain

Reforms aimed at strengthening the independence of national public service broadcasters are

under way in several Member States. In

Luxembourg,

legislation has enshrined a new public

service media radio station, strengthening its independence, clarifying its mission, and

providing a stable financial framework. In

Slovenia,

a new law was adopted to reform the

governance structure of the public service media and introduced safeguards for their

independence. In

Germany,

amendments concerning the remit of the public service

broadcasters have been agreed and further changes to improve compliance and control

mechanisms are being prepared.

Estonia

increased the resources allocated to public service

media. In

Slovakia,

the independent governance of public service media has been improved,

but its sustainable financing remains a concern. In

Czechia,

a newly adopted law is expected

to strengthen the independence of the supervisory bodies of public service media. Reforms are

being discussed in

Cyprus, Ireland

and

Sweden.

However, no measures have been taken to

improve the independent governance and editorial independence of public service media in

Romania, Malta, Poland

and

Hungary

Access to information

The right to access information held by public authorities is one of the main transparency and

accountability tools available for civil society and citizens, and is fundamental for journalists

to do their work. The 2022 report contained a number of recommendations in this domain.

Since the publication of the report, several Member States have proposed or introduced

legislation, or established practices which are expected to facilitate the right to access public

information or which clarify one or more aspects of this right. In

Czechia,

amendments have

been made to the law regulating access to information held by public authorities. In

Lithuania,

measures were taken to improve journalists’ access to information held by public authorities.

Slovakia,

the Freedom of Information Act has undergone amendment to extend the list of

entities that are required to provide access to information. In

Spain,

the Government is working

on a draft law on access to classified information. In

Hungary,

a new reform aims to facilitate

access to public information including by making the charging of fees exceptional.

Luxembourg

has taken steps to reduce delays in processing requests from journalists for the

disclosure of official documents, although a clear fast-track option for journalists is not yet

available. In

Croatia,

the legislation on general access to information and public documents has

been revised, although in some cases delays remain an issue in practice.

Germany

has started

internal preparations to follow up on the plan to establish in law the right to information of the

press as regards federal authorities.

Issues highlighted in last year’s report remain unaddressed in some Member States. In

Malta,

where citizens and media houses continue to face obstacles when requesting access to

information, the review of the Freedom of Information Act remains pending. In

Austria,

while

consultation continued, no progress has been made with regard to planned amendments of the

freedom of information legislation. In

Finland,

a proposal was presented to reform the law,

clarifying exceptions to access relating to documents in criminal proceedings, but this has not

yet been adopted into law

Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2012)1 on public service media governance.

Recommendations concern CZ, CY, HU, MT, PL, RO and SK.

Recommendations concern BE, DK, DE, EE, ES, LU, MT, AT and FI.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

Improving the safety and protection of journalists and addressing legal threats and abusive

court proceedings against public participation

Threats to physical safety, online attacks, smear campaigns, legal threats and censorship

compromise the safety of journalists, although in 2022 the Council of Europe’s Platform

registered a decrease (25%) in alerts in EU Member States compared to 2021

. The 2021

Commission Recommendation on the safety of journalists

includes measures relating to:

effective and impartial investigation and prosecution of crimes; independent response and

support mechanisms; access to venues and information; safety during demonstrations; training

and online safety; and digital empowerment. In the coming months, Member States are

expected to report on actions taken to implement this recommendation

Several Member States have adopted measures to improve the safety of journalists, in line with

the 2022 report recommendations. In

Greece,

a specialised task force has been established,

whose work includes the setting up of an observatory to record threats and attacks against

journalists and a dedicated international training centre for the safety of journalists and media

professionals. In

Belgium,

measures such as training for journalists, ad hoc legal and non-legal

assistance, and a platform to report attacks have been launched. In

Sweden,

the Government

has taken steps to increase criminal law protection for journalists, as a growing number of

instances of hate speech, threats, and insults have been reported. In

Finland,

the Criminal Code

has been amended to address online threats directed towards female journalists by making

restraining orders against perpetrators more effective. In

Ireland,

the national journalists’ union

and other media organisations set up a ‘media engagement group’ with the national police to

discuss threats and violence against journalists and monitor their safety, with the intention to

serve as a direct reporting system to the police. In a number of other Member States, reforms

remain pending.

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are a particular form of harassment

used against journalists and rights defenders engaged in public participation on matters of

public interest. Effective safeguards are needed to prevent such harassment from silencing

journalists and create a chilling effect on media freedom and freedom of expression

Defamation is one of the most common grounds on which SLAPPs are brought against

journalists. To address the threat of SLAPPs and respond to the 2022 report recommendations,

several Member States envisage introducing specific procedural safeguards and/or revising

their defamation laws. Legislation geared towards allowing for the early dismissal of such cases

and revising criminal liability for defamation was adopted in

Lithuania.

Italy,

work has

begun to reform provisions on defamation and the protection of professional secrecy and

journalistic sources. In

Slovakia,

a bill aimed at strengthening the protection of journalists,

Alerts are registered by the Council of Europe Platform to Promote the Protection of Journalism and Safety of

Journalists and the Mapping Media Freedom (MFF) Platform. Between 2021-2022, the Mapping Media

Freedom Platform registered a 10% decrease in alerts in EU Member States.

2021 Recommendation on the safety of journalists (C(2021) 6650, 16 September 2021)

A structured dialogue on this topic is scheduled to take place at the November 2023 European Media News

Forum.

The 2022 Commission Recommendation on protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in

public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (C(2022) 2428, 27 April 2022)

includes measures related to applicable frameworks including defamation, training, awareness raising, support

mechanisms, data collection, reporting and monitoring. By the end of 2023, Member States are expected to

transmit to the Commission a report on the implementation of this Recommendation.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

including by modifying the criminal law provisions on defamation, is being discussed in

Parliament. Announced reforms are pending in

Malta

and

Ireland

2.4 Other institutional issues linked to checks and balances

A well-functioning system of institutional checks and balances ensures that the power

exercised by one state power is subject to the scrutiny of others. While national models may

vary between Member States, in view of their different constitutional traditions, they all need

to be subject to such a system to ensure the respect for the rule of law and democratic norms.

An important part of the system of checks and balances is a strong role for institutions and

organisations bringing an independent voice. A law empowering an administrative committee

to assess and decide whether individuals should be deprived for up to 10 years of the right to

hold public office involving the handling of public funds entered into force on 1 June 2023 in

Poland,

giving rise to serious concerns that it could be used to affect the possibility of

individuals to run for public office. Amendments are being considered

The inclusiveness, quality and transparency of law-making and the legislative process

Following the trend noted in the previous editions of the Rule of Law report, and the 2022

report recommendations, work to improve the quality of the legislative process and ensure

appropriate involvement of stakeholders and civil society continues to be carried out and there

is progress in several Member States. In

Estonia,

a new digital platform to further improve the

process of enacting laws is being launched, with additional features to better include

stakeholders to follow. In

Luxembourg,

a constitutional reform was adopted introducing a

possibility for legislative initiatives from citizens. In

Portugal,

impact assessment rules were

amended to further improve the quality of legislation and increase the transparency of the

legislative procedure. In

Latvia,

measures were taken to increase the participation of civil

society in decision-making at local level, through a new law on local government. In

Romania,

new instruments aim to improve the transparency and quality of decision-making and

legislation. In

Denmark,

the Government has committed to follow-up on a political agreement

to strengthen Parliament’s scrutiny of the Government.

Some Member States have introduced measures in this area that remain at an early stage, or

have not yet produced the expected results. In

Hungary,

amendments to the rules on public

consultations are expected to improve the legislative process, but their practical impact remains

to be assessed. In

Cyprus,

the creation of an electronic platform for public consultations aims

to increase accessibility and transparency in the law-making process, while further steps are

needed to ensure the effective and timely consultation of stakeholders. In

Bulgaria,

concerns

regarding the law-making process persist in relation to implementation in practice of the new

procedural rules.

Inclusive stakeholder participation based on formal rules helps to improve the transparency of

the legislative procedure and the quality of its outcomes. Challenges continue to be flagged in

a number of Member States, in relation to a lack of formal frameworks for consulting

stakeholders or the insufficient application of these in practice.

Malta

lacks a formalised

process for public participation in the legislative process, while in

Greece,

the time allocated

to public consultations is not always sufficient. In other Member States, concerns have been

Recommendations concern HR, EL, IE, IT, MT, SI and SK.

Statement by the European Commission of 30 May 2023 on the Polish law establishing a State Committee for

the Examination of Russian Impacts on Internal Security. On 2 June 2023, the President of the Republic tabled

amendments to the law, which are being considered by the Senate.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

raised regarding legislative practices. In

Spain,

while there are safeguards ensuring public

consultation on legal proposals prepared by the Government, there are concerns regarding

certain practices in Parliament that may have an impact on the quality of legislation. In

Slovakia,

the level of involvement of stakeholders in the law-making process remains a

concern, especially in connection with the use of fast-track procedures and parliamentary

proposals. In

Poland

the practice persists of adopting laws through procedures that require only

limited consultation. Under its Recovery and Resilience Plan, Poland has committed to amend

the Rules of Procedure of the Sejm, the Senate and the Council of Ministers to enhance the use

of public consultations and impact assessments in the law-making process. In

Romania,

there

remains room for progress in ensuring effective public consultation, and the Government has

committed to improve the process. In

Luxembourg,

the legislative process has not improved in

terms of the openness of the public consultations

Significant developments on Supreme and Constitutional Courts in relation to checks and

balances

Constitutional justice is a key component of checks and balances in a constitutional democracy.

Constitutional jurisdictions play a key role in the effective application of EU law and in

ensuring the integrity of the EU legal order. Therefore, while their establishment, composition

and functioning fall within the competence of Member States, when exercising that

competence, Member States are required to comply with their obligations deriving from EU

law and, in particular with the values on which the EU is founded

. In

Poland,

serious concerns

relating to the Constitutional Tribunal have led the Commission to refer Poland to the Court of

Justice for violations of EU law by the Constitutional Tribunal and its case-law

Relevant developments can be identified in other Member States. As of July 2023,

Cyprus

has

a new Supreme Constitutional Court, competent to assess the constitutionality of laws in the

context of specific cases brought before it. In

Portugal

and in

Spain,

new judges were appointed

to the respective Constitutional Courts, following delays. In

Hungary,

the Constitutional Court

can no longer be seized by public authorities, but can still review final decisions of the ordinary

courts .

In some Member States, Constitutional Courts have taken important decisions regarding the

organisation of national justice systems. In

Lithuania,

the Constitutional Court clarified the

principles regarding the dismissal of the judges of higher courts, reaffirming the role of the

Judicial Council. In

Portugal,

the Constitutional Court was called to rule on the impact of the

draft law on professional associations on the independence of lawyers, which it found

compatible with the Constitution.

Rule of law issues related to the declaration of states of emergency

As the emergency measures adopted in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic have been

gradually lifted, in some Member States, such as

Belgium

and

Lithuania,

Constitutional Courts

continue to be called to ensure that the action taken respected constitutional norms. The process

of learning lessons from the use of states of emergency during the COVID-19 pandemic to

initiate reforms has continued in some Member States. In

Portugal,

a new legal basis for

emergency measures is under discussion, including in the context of the ongoing constitutional

revision. In

Finland,

an amendment to the Emergency Powers Act was adopted, which sets

ground for a declaration of a state of emergency also in case of serious hybrid threats.

Recommendations concern EL, CY, LU, MT, PT, RO and SK.

CJEU, judgment of 22 February 2022,

RS (Effect of the decisions of a constitutional court),

C-430/21,

EU:C:2022:99, para. 38.

See

press release.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

The use of emergency powers has also continued in relation to other crises, giving rise to

concern in some cases. In

Latvia,

the state of emergency restricting access to the Latvian-

Belarusian border, including for the media and civil society organisations, was maintained. In

Hungary,

the Government has continued to use its emergency powers extensively since 2020,

undermining legal certainty and affecting the activities and the stability of businesses in the

single market.

The role of the Ombudspersons, national human rights institutions, equality bodies and other

independent authorities as core elements of the system of checks and balances

National human rights institutions (NHRIs)

, Ombudspersons

, equality bodies

and other

independent authorities have an important role in national systems of checks and balances. In

some Member States, the status of these bodies has been further strengthened and their

importance in sensitive situations has been highlighted. In

Cyprus,

following the strengthening

of its regulatory framework, the Ombudsperson was upgraded to an A-status NHRI. In

Slovakia,

a new Ombudsperson took office after a prolonged vacancy period, and a

constitutional amendment was adopted to prevent such a situation in the future. In

Luxembourg,

the Ombudsperson was inscribed in the Constitution, following the adoption of

a constitutional reform. In

Portugal,

the reorganisation of the Office of the Ombudsperson has

allowed more effective management of workload and improved focus on priority areas, and

has been assessed positively. In

Poland,

some progress has been made to improve the

framework in which the Ombudsperson operates in relation to funding. In

Slovenia,

legislative

safeguards for budgetary autonomy of the independent bodies have been introduced.

In other Member States, however, NHRIs continue to face challenges. In

Lithuania,

concerns

remain regarding the adequacy of human and financial resources allocated to the Office of the

Parliamentary Ombudspersons. In

Hungary,

concerns persist regarding the independence and

effective functioning of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights. In

Croatia,

although the

follow-up to the People’s Ombudsperson’s recommendations has improved, some challenges

remain on guaranteeing access to information

In the four Member States that have so far not established an NHRI in line with the UN Paris

Principles, varying degrees of progress have been made and the 2022 report recommendations

have been only partly implemented. In

Italy,

draft laws were tabled to create an NHRI by

providing additional powers to the existing Data Protection Authority, as well as proposing to

create a separate entity through a constitutional change. In

Czechia,

an amendment to entrust

the Ombudsperson with the authority of an NHRI is in preparation. However, there was no

progress in

Malta

on establishing an NHRI, nor in

Romania

on obtaining accreditation for the

existing NHRI

100

Delays in appointments to various independent authorities have emerged as a challenge in

several Member States, including

Bulgaria, Spain,

and

Austria.

Poland,

no steps were taken

to ensure a more systematic follow-up to the findings of the Supreme Audit Office and the

100

The UN Paris Principles, endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 1993 (Resolution A/RES/48/134), set out

the main criteria that NHRIs are required to meet. NHRIs are periodically accredited before the Subcommittee

on Accreditation of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions.

Venice Commission Principles for Ombudspersons.

COM(2022) 688 final and COM(2022) 689 final.

Recommendations concern HR, LT and PL.

Recommendations concern CZ, IT, MT and RO.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

swift appointment of its College members, putting the Supreme Audit Office's effective

functioning at risk

101

Implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Included in the Rule of Law report for the first time last year, the track record of implementing

leading judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is an important indicator

for the functioning of the rule of law in a country. The country chapters therefore again include

systematic indicators on the implementation of ECtHR leading judgments by all Member

States, showing also the change compared to last year

102

. Performance continues to vary

between Member States. Overall, around 40% of the leading judgments of the ECtHR relating

to EU Member States from the last 10 years have not been implemented

103

, similar to last year’s

figure.

Enabling framework for civil society

Civil society organisations (CSOs) and human rights’ defenders are essential to bring life to

and protect the values and rights enshrined in the Treaty on European Union and the Charter

of Fundamental Rights. Recognising the essential role that civil society organisations play in

fostering the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights on the ground, the Commission

dedicated the 2022 Annual Report on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to

the topic of civic space

104

In the majority of Member States, there is an enabling and supportive environment for civil

society, and the civil society space continues to be considered as ‘open’

105

, with further efforts

under way to improve their situation. In

Malta,

the mapping of the voluntary sector, aimed to

establish an enabling regulatory framework for the civil society space, continues. In

Ireland,

work is ongoing to address legal obstacles to the funding of CSOs. In

Bulgaria,

the Council for

Civil Society Development has begun to function and is working on a national funding

mechanism for the sector. In

Lithuania,

non-governmental organisations are increasingly

recognised as partners in decision-making processes. In

Germany,

the Government intends to

come with a proposal for legislation to clarify the tax-exempt status of non-profit organisations,

although concrete steps have not yet been taken. In

Sweden,

the impact on civil society

engagement of reforms of the legal framework for the funding and operation of civil society

organisations remains to be ascertained.

However, as was the case in previous reports, CSOs and human rights defenders have

increasingly faced challenges linked to the narrowing of civic space, and some of the 2022

report recommendations have been only partly implemented. In

Cyprus,

CSOs face difficulties

due to financial and administrative burdens. In

Greece,

the situation of the civil society raises

concerns, in particular in relation to organisations working in specific areas. In

Spain,

negotiations in Parliament did not succeed on changes to the Citizen Security Law, which could

have addressed concerns regarding the law’s impact on the civic space. In

Italy,

improvements

were made to the rules of tax and financial concessions for CSOs, however several new decrees

were adopted that might negatively affect their work. In

France,

while the financial

environment for CSOs remains favourable, stakeholders are raising concerns on the

101

102

103

104

105

A recommendation concerns PL.

The adoption of measures required to carry out a judgment by the ECtHR is supervised by the Committee of

Ministers of the Council of Europe.

https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2023-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation_en

COM(2022) 716 final.

According to the rating given by CIVICUS (non-governmental organisation). Ratings use a five-category

scale: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed and closed. Compared to 2022, one Member State has been

downgraded from narrowed to ‘obstructed’.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

implementation of legislation subjecting access to public funding to compliance with the

fundamental values of the French Republic.

In certain Member States, civil society continues to face serious challenges or systematic

restrictions of their operating space. In

Hungary,

obstacles continue to affect CSOs, which

remain under pressure. Concerns continue regarding the State’s role in financing civil society.

Poland,

no progress has been made to improve the civic space and stakeholders have raised

concerns about continued attacks on NGOs by representatives of public authorities, notably on

organisations involved in providing humanitarian aid at the Polish-Belarussian border, abortion

activists, and representatives of the LGBTIQ community

106

National checks and balances in relation to the use of spyware

Even where the use of spyware is linked to national security, there is a need for national checks

and balances to ensure that safeguards are in place. Fundamental rights such as the protection

of personal data, the freedom to receive and impart information, the freedom of expression,

and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, should be respected in line with EU law,

including the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Building on last year's Report, new developments were identified in 2023 in relation to the

alleged illegal use of spyware (such as ‘Pegasus’, and equivalent surveillance spyware) against

journalists, lawyers, national politicians, MEPs and citizens in several Member States.

Although Member States have competence over guaranteeing their national security, they must

apply relevant EU law, including the case-law of the CJEU, when doing so. The rule of law

requires that recourse to such tools by Member States’ security services is subject to sufficient

control and fully respects EU law, including fundamental rights such as the protection of

personal data and freedom of expression, as well as the safety of journalists. In

Greece

the issue

of surveillance by means of wiretapping and spyware is subject to investigation in the national

Parliament as well as by judicial and independent authorities. In

Hungary,

the deployment of

spyware targeting certain investigative journalists and media professionals remained an issue

of serious concern and further concerns have been raised due to the absence of effective

oversight as regards the use of secret surveillance measures outside criminal proceedings. In

Poland,

a new case of the use of Pegasus software was detected, and the Ombudsperson and

the President of the Supreme Audit Office raised concerns in relation to this.

3. DEVELOPMENTS AND ACTIONS AT EU LEVEL ON THE RULE OF LAW

3.1 Dialogue and follow-up to the Rule of Law report

Interinstitutional dialogue

The Council continued its annual rule of law dialogue on the basis of the Rule of Law report.

The horizontal discussion on general rule of law developments took place in September 2022

in the General Affairs Council, and was followed by country-specific discussions in December

2022

107

and March 2023

108

. The first full cycle of 27 Member States country-specific

discussions was therefore concluded under the Swedish Presidency, with a second cycle

launched at the same time. The process in Council will be the subject of an evaluation during

the second semester of 2023, as set out in the 2019 Finnish Presidency conclusions

109

106

107

Recommendations concern DE, IE, EL, HU, PL and SE.

The discussion focused on key developments in Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden.

108

The discussion focused on key developments in Slovakia, Finland, Belgium, Bulgaria and Czechia.

109

Presidency conclusions - Evaluation of the annual rule of law dialogue, 19 November 2019.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

As in previous years, the Justice Council also held specific debates on topics related to the rule

of law, with ministers exchanging views on judicial training and its impact on access to justice

in October 2022, and on barriers to access to justice in March 2023. Member States stressed

the usefulness of the dialogue for sharing experiences and best practices in an open and

transparent manner.

The rule of law continued to be a priority for the European Parliament. In its Resolution on the

2022 Rule of Law report adopted on 30 March 2023

110

, the European Parliament welcomed

the inclusion of recommendations, while stressing the need for effective follow-up. The

Resolution also welcomed the addition of new topics and commended the Commission for its

efforts to engage with national stakeholders. Parliament reiterated its calls for the Commission

to involve civil society in a consistent and meaningful way.

The Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group of the European

Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) continued to

organise monitoring missions to Member States

111

. All in all, the Monitoring Group visited

Spain, Slovenia, Bulgaria, France, Greece, Malta and Slovakia and held follow-up discussions

on its findings. It has also organised a number of thematic debates, for example related to the

rule of law milestones in Recovery and Resilience Plans and the application of the general

regime of rule of law conditionality mechanism and other budget instruments to safeguard the

respect for EU values.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), through its Ad hoc Group on

Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law, and the Committee of Regions, through its

Commission for Citizenship, Governance, Institutional and External Affairs, have also

continued to debate the rule of law at EU level. In September 2022, the EESC organised a

conference on the 2022 Rule of Law report.

Dialogue with Member States

The Commission has continued outreach at national level in Member States. It invited Member

States, where interested, to hold technical follow-up meetings to discuss the recommendations

included for the first time in the 2022 report. Several Member States have responded positively

and engaged in a technical dialogue. In addition, regular bilateral meetings take place at

political level and Commissioners continued to discuss the Rule of Law report with

representatives in national Parliaments, whose role as lawmakers and in holding the executive

accountable means that they have a particularly important role in upholding the rule of law.

The network of rule of law contact points established in 2020 ahead of the first report continues

to provide an open channel for regular discussion between the Commission and the Member

States, meeting on a regular basis

112

. The network plays an active role in the annual Rule of

Law report cycle and exchanges of good practices, including with input from other

international organisations.

Dialogue with and support for civil society organisations (CSOs)

Civil society remains a key partner in the preparation of the annual Rule of Law report. The

Commission continues to receive a large number of written contributions from CSOs and

110

111

112

European Parliament resolution of 30 March 2023 on the Commission’s 2022 Rule of Law report

(P9_TA(2023)0094).

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/libe-democracy-rule-of-law-and-fundament/product-

details/20190103CDT02662.

More information on the network is available on the Commission’s website:

Network of national contact points

on the rule of law (europa.eu)

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

invites them to meetings as part of the country visits. The Commission has also organised cross-

cutting meetings with a number of key civic networks. These networks have also made valuable

recommendations on the process for the Rule of Law report

113

. The Commission has responded

by further extending the duration of the stakeholder consultation period and increasing

transparency, by publishing information in advance on the country visit process and dates on

its website

114

After the adoption of the 2022 Rule of Law report, the Commission, together with the

Fundamental Rights Agency and national stakeholders, has organised the first ‘national rule of

law dialogues’

115

. The aim is to encourage debates at national level on the basis of the Rule of

Law report. The Commission’s Representations in the relevant Member States brought together

national stakeholders and authorities in a roundtable setting, adapting the focus to suit the

national context. The Commission aims to involve further Member States in national rule of

law dialogues following the adoption of this report.

The Commission will continue to explore how to further increase the involvement of CSOs,

professional networks and other stakeholders in the Rule of Law cycle. Following up on the

Conference of the Future of Europe and calls from the European Parliament, the assessment of

developments related to the framework for civil society has deepened throughout successive

editions of the report. This year’s report covers issues related to funding, the legal framework,

civil society participation in policymaking and a free and safe operating environment for civil

society.

Finally, through the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) programme, the

Commission continues to support CSOs, in particular smaller, local organisations facing

particular constraints. Almost a third of the available budget of the programme (EUR 1.55

billion) is reserved specifically for CSOs, with at least 40% of this allocated to local and

regional level. As well as support for specific projects, there is also some provision for grants

to support capacity-building by and the development of CSOs.

3.2 EU action to uphold the rule of law

New initiatives to fight corruption, build a culture of integrity, support media freedom and

defend democracy

Challenges identified by the previous Rule of Law reports have led to several new EU

initiatives. These initiatives are raising standards and helping promote and protect the rule of

law in the EU.

In a package of measures adopted on 3 May 2023

116

, the Commission took decisive action to

strengthen the legal and institutional framework in the fight against corruption. A new proposal

aims to strengthen rules criminalising corruption offences and harmonising penalties across the

EU. Another proposal from the High Representative, supported by the Commission, would

create a dedicated Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) sanctions regime to target

serious acts of corruption worldwide. These new measures place a strong focus on prevention

and creating a culture of integrity. These steps were complemented with respect to the EU’s

institutions when in June 2023, the Commission proposed a joint agreement to establish an

113

114

See

https://epd.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/rule-of-law-2023-report-statement.pdf.

2023 Rule of law report (europa.eu).

115

In Belgium, Germany and Croatia.

116

Joint Communication on the fight against corruption, JOIN(2023) 12 final, 3 May 2023; and a Proposal for a

Directive on combating corruption, COM(2023)234 final, 3 May 2023.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

interinstitutional ethics body, to ensure trust in the EU and its institutions with regard to ethics,

transparency and integrity and adopted measures to further increase transparency. This body

will set strong common standards for all EU institutions

117

Protecting media freedom and pluralism in the EU remains a key priority

118

. In September

2022, the Commission broke new ground, proposing legislation setting out common EU

safeguards to guarantee media freedom and pluralism. The proposal for a European Media

Freedom Act

119

includes a set of rules to protect media pluralism and independence in the EU,

safeguards against political interference in editorial decisions and specific rules against the

deployment of spyware against journalists. It puts a focus on the independence and stable

funding of public service media, and on transparency regarding media ownership and the

allocation of state advertising. It also calls for measures to protect the independence of editors

and disclose conflicts of interest.

The European Parliament has set up an important strand of work on spyware with a Committee

of Inquiry to investigate the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (PEGA

Committee). Its final report was adopted in May 2023

120

and included strong condemnation of

the illegal use of spyware. Recommendations called on Member States to address concerns

relating to the alleged illegal use of spyware. It also included recommendations for action at

EU level, with proposals for conditional sale and use of spyware in the EU, the repeal of export

licences that do not comply with EU legislation, and common EU standards to regulate the use

of spyware

121

. The Commission is now carefully assessing the final position and

recommendations of the European Parliament.

To address the issues and challenges faced by many equality bodies and strengthen their role

and independence in all Member States, the European Commission adopted two legislative

proposals on setting standards for the effective functioning of the equality bodies in December

2022

122

Upholding the rule of law by using all tools available

The annual Rule of Law report complements a number of other mechanisms and instruments

at EU level, each with their own purpose.

The case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the rule of law continued

to consolidate and the CJEU has examined infringment procedures brought before it by

Commission and requests for preliminary rulings made by national courts. In a recent case, the

CJEU affirmed that the body in charge of disciplinary proceedings against judges must be

independent and impartial, and that the rules governing the review of the actions of its director

117

118

Proposal for an interinstitutional ethics body, COM(2023) 311 final, 8 June 2023.

Work continues on the 2021 Recommendation on the safety of journalists (C(2021) 6650, 16 September 2021)

and the proposals protecting journalists and human rights defenders who engage in public participation from

manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings (‘Strategic lawsuits against public participation’,

C(2022)2428 and COM(2022)177, 27 April 2022).

119

Proposal for a regulation establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market

(European Media Freedom Act), COM(2022)457, 16 September 2022.

120

Report of the of the investigation of alleged contraventions and maladministration in the application of Union

law in relation to the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (2022/2077(INI)).

121

Proposal for a recommendation of the European Parliament of the Investigation of alleged contraventions and

maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance

spyware PEGA/9/11041/2023/2500(RSP)

122

COM/2022/688 final and COM/2022/689 final.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

must be designed in such a way as to dispel any reasonable doubt

123

. Most recently, on 5 June

2023, the CJEU further clarified EU requirements on judicial independence and held that all

contested provisions of the law adopted by the Polish Parliament in December 2019 infringe

EU law, in particular the principles of judicial independence and effective judicial

protection

124

The Commission has continued to exercise its role as guardian of the EU treaties by proceeding

with infringement procedures to address specific breaches of the rule of law

125

. In its 2022

Communication ‘Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers’, the Commission underlined

that the EU is a community of law, based on common values shared by Member States, and so

applying and enforcing EU law and respect for the rule of law are at its core

126

The procedure for upholding the common values of the EU set out in Article 7 TEU, which

allows the Council to determine the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the EU’s

values and follow up on such risks, continues in relation to Poland

127

and Hungary

128

. The

Council held hearings for Poland in May 2023, and for Hungary in November 2022 and May

2023.

Respect for the rule of law remains a fundamental precondition for the proper management of

EU funds. Since 1 January 2021, the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the

Union budget (Conditionality Regulation) protects the sound financial management of the

Union budget and the EU's financial interests from breaches of the principles of the rule of law.

As an outcome of the procedure launched by the Commission

129

, on 15 December 2022, the

Council adopted an implementing decision

130

on measures for the protection of the EU budget

from breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary

131

A number of rule-of-law-related issues – notably in relation to the effectiveness of justice

systems, the fight against corruption, access to information and the quality and inclusiveness

of the law-making process – are also part of the European Semester where they have

macroeconomic relevance and an impact on the business environment, investment, growth and

jobs. To address a number of rule of law relevant country-specific recommendations under the

European Semester by concrete reforms and investment measures, the Commission agreed with

several Member States to include concrete milestones and targets in their Recovery and

Resilience Plans. These were subsequently formally approved by the Council and are now

being gradually implemented.

CJEU, Judgment of 11 May 2023,

Inspecţia Judiciară,

C-817/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:391.

CJEU, Judgment of 5 June 2023,

Commission v. Poland,

C-204/21, ECLI:EU:C:2023:442.

125

Notably, on 15 February 2023, the Commission decided to refer Poland to the Court of Justice for violations

of EU law because of serious concerns with respect to the Polish Constitutional Tribunal and its recent case-

law challenging the supremacy of EU law.

126

COM(2022) 518 final.

127

The procedure was initiated by the Commission in 2017.

128

The procedure was initiated by the European Parliament in 2018.

129

On 27 April 2022, the Commission launched for the first time the step of the procedure established under

Article 6(1) of the General Conditionality Regulation.

130

Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 of 15 December 2022 on measures for the protection of the

Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary, OJ L 325, 20.12.2022, p. 94–

109.

131

Under the Conditionality Regulation, Hungary may submit further remedial proposals by means of a written

notification. On this basis, if the Commission considers that the issues have been remedied partly or in full, it

submits to the Council a proposal for an implementing decision to adapt or lift the adopted measures.

123

124

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

In the 2023 European Semester Spring Package, the Commission has proposed to the Council

further recommendations for two Member States related to the rule of law

132

. The Commission

also provides technical support to Member States, notably through the Technical Support

Instrument, to improve the efficiency and quality of public administration and justice and to

address issues, including corruption. The Commission continues to promote judicial reform

through the annual EU Justice Scoreboard. The 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard

133

includes several

new indicators, for example on bodies involved in the fight against corruption or appointments

of Prosecutors General and Presidents of Supreme Courts. It also includes survey data on how

companies perceive the effectiveness of investment protection in the different Member

States

134

. The European Semester and the Justice Scoreboard complement the Rule of Law

report, and both feed into the report where relevant.

In 2007, the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) was set up to cover progress in

Bulgaria and Romania with regard to judicial reform, the fight against corruption and (for

Bulgaria) the fight against organised crime. The cooperation and reporting from the

Commission under the CVM has been instrumental in fostering reform in these areas in

Bulgaria and Romania since their accession to the EU.

Commission reporting concluded that both Member States have satisfactorily met the

obligations set out under the CVM at the time of accession

135

. Residual final steps have now

been taken. and the Commission is launching the final steps towards the definitive closure of

the CVM for the two Member States.

The cooperation with Bulgaria and Romania will now take place under the annual Rule of Law

Report cycle, and in the context of other parts of the rule of law toolbox, as for all Member

States.

3.3 Rule of law in EU external action and enlargement

The rule of law is a key guiding principle for EU action at home, as well as beyond its borders.

It is central to EU action at global level, where working with partners to uphold human rights

and strengthen democracies is a priority. The EU is committed to upholding the rule of law in

its bilateral relations and at multilateral level. This includes supporting the UN human rights

system

136

. The rule of law is also priority for cooperation between the EU and the Council of

Europe. International organisations, notably key bodies of the Council of Europe

137

and the

OECD, are important partners in the preparation of this report.

EU work on the rule of law has been put into even greater focus by the Russian war of

aggression against Ukraine. The EU and its Member States are the biggest global donor of

democracy support, and this is a key theme for work with our international partners, as for

132

133

2023 European Semester: Spring package.

2023 EU Justice Scoreboard | European Commission (europa.eu)

134

Figures 53 and 54, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard.

135

COM (2019) 498 for Bulgaria, COM (2022) 664 for Romania.

136

The EU supports implementation of SDG 16 of the 2030 Agenda, notably target 16.3 ‘to promote the rule of

law at the national and international levels, and ensure equal access to justice for all’. In the current process of

preparing the Summit for the Future, the EU backs the rule of law concept of the UN Secretary-General as

laid down in Our Common Agenda which “recognises that the rule of law and human rights are central to our

greatest challenges, and essential to resolving them”. Moreover, the EU is committed to strengthening

accountability for serious violations and abuses of international human rights law and violations of

international humanitarian law, ending impunity.

137

The Venice Commission, the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), the Parliamentary Assembly of

the Council of Europe (PACE), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

example in UN and Council of Europe forums. The rule of law was the focus of the second

Summit for Democracy held in March 2023, in which the Commission and a large number of

Member States were active participants

138

. The Reykjavík Summit of the Council of Europe,

prompted by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and its subsequent expulsion from the

Council of Europe, provided an opportunity to strengthen a European commitment to the rule

of law. Among the commitments made in the Summit Declaration was to explore how to

strengthen implementation of the recommendations by the Venice Commission

139

Under the enlargement process, the key requirements for EU membership set out in the

‘Copenhagen criteria’ include the stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy and the rule

of law. The October 2022 Enlargement package

140

assesses progress towards accession with

engagement on rule of law reforms continuing to be one of the fundamental aspects of this

process, together with the functioning of democratic institutions, and economic and public

administration reforms

141

Beyond the accession negotiations, the priority given to rule of law issues is a central feature

of overall engagement with all candidate countries and potential candidates, whether or not

negotiations have been launched. The historic decision of June 2022 to grant Ukraine and

Moldova the perspective of EU membership and the status of candidate country gave a further

boost to crucial reforms in these countries, with clear recommendation for further reform

priorities. Despite the catastrophic impact of Russia’s ongoing military aggression, both

Ukraine and Moldova have continued to push ahead with reforms. Rule of law reforms are also

a central theme of the work following the EU recognition of the European perspective of

Georgia, also expressing its readiness to grant the status of candidate country to Georgia once

the priorities specified in the June 2022 Commission’s opinion have been addressed.

At the informal General Affairs Council of June 2023, the Commission presented an oral

update on progress towards fulfilling the reform recommendations made in June 2022. It will

report comprehensively on these reforms in the Enlargement Package of autumn 2023.

The EU is a staunch defender of human rights, democracy and the rule of law throughout the

world, as demonstrated by the 2020-2024 EU action plan on human rights and democracy

142

in line with the Sustainable Development Goals

143

. On that basis, the EU is taking a strong and

consistent approach in all its external action – at bilateral, regional and international level – in

order to promote the rule of law around the world. Upholding the rule of law is at the core of

EU’s engagement with third countries and international and regional organisations, and is one

of the foundations of all EU agreements with international partners. An independent evaluation

of EU support to rule of law and anti-corruption in partner countries (2010-2021)

144

has

concluded that the EU has managed to advance the rule of law agenda, including in restrictive

contexts and in fragile and conflict-affected states. Rule of law-related issues, including the

right to a fair trial and to due process, the prevention and fight against corruption, and the

independence of the judiciary are regularly raised in human rights dialogues with partner

countries. The EU supports partner countries in strengthening judicial systems, tackling

138

139

Declaration of the Summit for Democracy - 29 March 2023.

See

here.

140

2022 Communication on EU Enlargement Policy COM(2022) 528, 12 October 2022.

141

Enhancing the accession process - A credible EU perspective for the Western Balkans, COM(2020) 57 final.

142

EU Action Plan for Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024.

143

Sustainable Development Goals.

144

The

evaluation

was published in December 2022. This strategic evaluation provides an independent and

evidence-based assessment of the performance of the European Union's support to rule of law in Partner

Countries.

EUU, Alm.del - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Bilag 624: Kommissionens årlige rapport om retsstatssituationen i EU (engelsk)

corruption and supporting civil society, human rights defenders and free media as crucial actors

in advancing the rule of law.

4. CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS

A founding value of the Union, the rule of law is fundamental to a stable, resilient, fair and

democratic political, economic and social environment across the EU. It is an integral part of

the very identity of the European Union

145

. The rule of law is essential to guarantee that EU

citizens and businesses can fully enjoy their rights. With the Russian war of aggression against

Ukraine continuing to rage on, the need to pro-actively defend and uphold democracy, human

rights and the rule of law in the EU and beyond is of vital priority.

This report brings an important contribution to promoting and safeguarding the rule of law in

the EU, in each Member State and the EU as a whole. This is also illustrated by the engagement

and cooperation that Member States have once again demonstrated in the preparation of this

year’s report. The report has become a true driver of positive reform – this year’s edition shows

that important efforts are ongoing in Member States to follow-up on the previous year’s

recommendations and address challenges identified. This is happening at various speeds and

levels of completeness, with some important concerns remaining in some Member States, but

overall, within this one year framework, almost two-thirds of the recommendations issued in

2022 related to important reforms in national justice systems, anti-corruption frameworks,

media pluralism and other institutional checks-and balances, have been followed-up, at least to

some extent. The 2023 recommendations aim to further assist and support Member States in

their efforts to take forward on-going reforms and to identify where other improvements may

be needed to to address particular concerns.

At its fourth edition, the Rule of Law report and the ensuing cycle of discussions with the

Member States, including national parliaments, the European Parliament, and the Council is a

well-established exercise. The Commission will also be looking forward to the evaluation of

the Council rule of law dialogue under Spanish Presidency. As in the past, the Commission has

prepared this report based on continued dialogue with the Member States, while fully

preserving political responsibility for its assessment and the recommendations issued. The next

edition will follow-up on the developments and assess the implementation of the 2023

recommendations.

At the start of a new annual cycle of dialogue on the rule of law, the Commission invites the

Council and the European Parliament to continue holding general and country-specific debates

on the basis of this report, also using the opportunity of the recommendations to look further

at concrete implementation. The Commission also welcomes further debate at national level,

involving national parliaments, civil society and other key actors, but also at European level,

with increased citizen’s engagement. The Commission invites Member States to effectively

take up the challenges identified in the report and stands ready to assist Member States in the

efforts to implement the report’s recommendations.

145

As recently highlighted by the CJEU, Judgment of 5 June 2023,

Commission v. Poland,

C-204/21,

ECLI:EU:C:2023:442.