Introduction

The rule of law is recognised as one of the founding values of the EU under Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). These values also include human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. According to Article 49 TEU, any state which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may become a member of the EU, while Article 7 establishes a mechanism for addressing breaches of those values by existing Member States. It encompasses both a preventive mechanism under Article 7(1) and a sanctions mechanism under Article 7(2) and (3). In practice, however, Article 7 has proven difficult to advance due to its political nature and the 'strict conditions and procedures' on which it rests.¹ In that context, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has assumed a more central role in protecting Article 2 values, notably through its case law on judicial independence since 2018, as well as its 2026 ruling in C-769/22 Commission v  Hungary , where the Court found a self-standing breach of Article 2 for the first time.

Although the rule of law is not defined in the EU Treaties, its content has been progressively elaborated in CJEU case law and in EU secondary law. As explained by Professor Laurent Pech, since its 1986 ruling in Les Verts, in which it primarily equated the rule of law with legality, judicial protection and judicial review, the CJEU has 'clarified both the meaning and extent to which additional principles can also be viewed as core components of the rule of law'.² This jurisprudential evolution is directly reflected in Article 2(a) of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation (Regulation 2020/2092). For the purposes of that regulation, Article 2(a) defines the rule of law as including the principles of legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic law-making process; legal certainty; the prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive powers; effective judicial protection, including access to justice, by independent and impartial courts, and as regards fundamental rights; separation of powers; and non-discrimination and equality before the law. Article 2(a) further provides that the rule of law shall be understood having regard to the other values and principles enshrined in Article 2 TEU.

On 17 July 2026, the Commission published its seventh annual rule of law report. As in previous editions, the 2026 rule of law report examines positive and negative developments in four key areas relevant to the rule of law in the states examined: the justice system, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism and freedom, and other institutional issues related to checks and balances. It continues the assessment of developments regarding the single market dimension initiated in the 2025 report and includes recommendations to all Member States, as well as a qualitative assessment of the progress made in implementing the recommendations of the previous edition.

Origins and methodology

The Commission's annual rule of law report is one of the EU's mechanisms for promoting and protecting the rule of law. It forms part of the EU's broader 'rule of law toolbox', which encompasses a range of preventive, corrective, monitoring and support measures. These include, among other things, the preventative and sanction mechanisms under Article 7, infringement procedures, the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, the Council's annual rule of law dialogue as well as rule of law measures under the European Semester. The annual rule of law report is adopted as part of the annual rule of law cycle, a dialogue between the Commission, the Council, the European Parliament, the Member States, national parliaments, civil society and other stakeholders on developments concerning the rule of law. The Commission's annual report provides an overview of the rule of law situation in all 27 EU Member States as well as general trends across the EU. Since 2024, it also reports on rule of law developments in four EU enlargement candidate countries: Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia.

The annual rule of law report emerged against a backdrop of long‑standing calls from the European Parliament for a comprehensive, interinstitutional monitoring mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights. Although the Commission did not take up Parliament's proposal in its entirety, in 2019 European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen committed to setting up a comprehensive European rule of law mechanism with an EU-wide scope and objective annual reporting by the European Commission. The Commission published a communication on strengthening the rule of law in the EU which set out some of the features of the mechanism, and in 2020, the first annual rule of law report was published.

From the outset, the reports covered four subject areas: justice systems, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism and freedom and other institutional issues related to checks and balances. The Commission evaluates developments in these areas against EU law, including CJEU case law; European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law; and Council of Europe recommendations and resolutions. In compiling the reports, the Commission draws on a wide range of sources, including written input received from Member States, written contributions received during targeted stakeholder consultations, and information produced by international organisations or received from national authorities and stakeholders during country visits. The reports also builds on information available from existing reporting mechanisms, such as the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the Venice Commission. A list of the main sources relied on under each pillar of the report is included in the methodology.

Although the reports have always followed the same general methodology, in 2022 the methodology was updated to include information on (a) making country-specific recommendations and (b) taking Member States' national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs) into account with regard to the topics covered by the report. In 2024, the scope of the report was expanded to cover Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia. In line with von der Leyen's 2024 political guidelines, the 2025 report introduced a new focus on the single market aspects of the rule of law, particularly in relation to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This focus is continued in the 2026 report. According to the Commission, it 'reflects the central role of the rule of law for ensuring legal certainty, and a predictable environment where businesses can benefit from the single market on an equal footing across the Union'.

2026 rule of law report

In its communication on the 2026 rule of law report, the Commission first considered EU-level action and enforcement regarding the rule of law. It recalled Commission President von der Leyen's call, in her 2025 State of the Union address, for the development of 'an integrated annual cycle on the rule of law' and noted that, as part of the 2026 rule of law cycle, it had sought to deepen its engagement with the European Parliament and the Member States by strengthening outreach and coordination. The report also examined EU budgetary support for the rule of law, the role of EU policies and legislation in promoting and safeguarding the rule of law, and EU-level action in response to breaches of the rule of law. In her 2026 State of the Union address, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen specially mentioned the rule of law reports, noting that they allow issues to be 'detected early and addressed through dialogue'.

In relation to EU funding, the Commission highlighted its proposal to strengthen the link between the rule of law report and EU financial support under the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework; in particular, through the proposed national and regional partnership plans which regroup initiatives currently managed under separate budgetary instruments into a single framework. The Commission has proposed that the plans 'address challenges identified in the EU policy reference framework, including those identified in the rule of law report as well as the European Semester and its country-specific recommendations'. This means that Member States would be expected to include investment and reform aimed at strengthening the rule of law in their plans. Under the Commission's proposal, compliance with horizontal conditions on the rule of law and fundamental rights would be a prerequisite for receiving support under the plans. If the horizontal conditions are not met or cease to be met, payments to a Member State for the specific affected measures may be suspended at any point following consultation with the Member State concerned. However, while information from the rule of law report would serve as one source for the Commission's assessment of compliance with those conditions, there would be no automatic link between the recommendations made in the report and the approval of the plans, nor the assessment of compliance with the horizontal conditions.

Regarding the situation at national level, the Commission separately addressed developments concerning justice systems, anti-corruption, media pluralism and freedom and other institutional checks and balances. In each of the areas examined, it highlighted the reforms and improvements introduced, while pointing out remaining issues, risks and areas of deterioration. It also separately considered the impact of the rule of law on the single market dimension across the four pillars. Summarising its findings, the Commission concluded that 'overall developments point to a broadly positive trajectory, with marked improvements and important reforms completed or underway in all the four areas monitored.' It noted that although the picture remains uneven across Member States and policy areas, with challenges persisting, engagement with the process remains strong as reflected in the substantial number of recommendations issued in the 2025 report which have seen progress. According to the Commission, 47 % of the recommendations made in 2025 had been followed up by Member States, either fully or partially, with at least limited progress recorded on a further 23 %.This is down from 57 % the year before and 68 % two years previously.

In relation to justice systems, some recurring themes can be identified in the Commission's recommendations to Member States. These include the digitalisation of justice,³ resources and staffing,⁴ efficiency and the length of proceedings,⁵ and judicial and prosecutorial independence.⁶ In the area of anti-corruption, common themes can also be identified, including the regulation of lobbying,⁷ rules on issues such as 'revolving doors'⁸ and asset declarations,⁹ and the development of a (robust) track record of investigations, prosecutions and final judgments in high-level corruption cases.¹⁰

On media pluralism and freedom, the Commission pointed out that the vast majority of the provisions of the European Media Freedom Act have been applicable since August 2025. As a result, while it continues to monitor issues related to media freedom in the rule of law report, follow-up to issues covered by the EMFA will 'be ensured as part of the Commission's support to Member States and enforcement of the EMFA'. Nonetheless, the Commission made recommendations to several Member States on issues including access to documents¹¹ and the safety and protection of journalists at work.¹² The Commission also made a number of recommendations concerning other institutional issues related to checks and balances, such as the quality of the legislative process,¹³ the establishment of national human rights institutions,¹⁴ and the work of civil society organisations.¹⁵

As in previous years, the Commission did not issue recommendations to the enlargement candidate countries examined.

Parliament's position

Parliament has not yet issued a response to the Commission's 2026 report. However, it has adopted a resolution responding to every edition of the Commission's rule of law report between 2020 and 2025. While welcoming the annual report as a valuable monitoring tool, Parliament has consistently pressed the Commission to expand its scope and issued concrete recommendations as to how it could be improved. In its resolution on the Commission's 2025 rule of law report, adopted in April 2026, Parliament acknowledged that the annual reports have become more comprehensive since 2020, but regretted that 'essential elements' of its resolutions, 'including recommendations addressed to the Commission and the Council in the context of rule of law reporting', have 'not been fully taken into account' and called on both institutions to address these recommendations.

In its resolution, Parliament criticised the 2025 rule of law report for failing to reflect the seriousness of pressure on civic space and for not adequately addressing persistent concerns over judicial independence, media freedom, corruption and checks and balances in certain Member States. Citing analysis from the Civil Liberties Union for Europe (Liberties), it noted that 93 % of the Commission's 2025 recommendations repeated earlier ones, that only 6 % could be considered fully implemented, and that only two Member States received an additional recommendation compared with the previous cycle. Parliament highlighted that 'verifiable adherence by Member States to both the rule of law and the Charter must be regarded as an essential precondition to receiving any EU funds' and welcomed proposals to make nearly half of funds conditional upon compliance with the rule of law and the CFR under the next multiannual financial framework (MFF).

In addition, Parliament reiterated its calls for improvements to the Commission's reporting process. Among other things, it called for greater methodological clarity, more operational country-specific recommendations, and a clearer distinction between isolated shortcomings and serious, systemic rule of law deficiencies. It pressed for action on the non-implementation of CJEU and ECtHR judgments and called, once again, for enforcement action to be strengthened and for the scope of the report to be widened to include all Article 2 values, a dedicated chapter on the EU institutions, new pillars on civil society and combating hatred and discrimination, as well as an examination of other critical issues such as the use of spyware against journalists and the targeting of minorities.

Parliament's resolution on the 2025 report was welcomed by the European Implementation Network. However, while the Commission further consolidated its single market focus in the 2026 report and sought to make its recommendations more structured and operational, many of Parliament's core, structural recommendations in its resolution on the 2025 report are not addressed in the 2026 edition.

Stakeholder views on the 2026 report

In its contribution to the 2026 annual rule of law report, Civil Society Europe, reported a 'further shrinking of civic space across Europe in 2025, with particularly concerning developments in several countries and a broader pattern of regression affecting the enabling environment for civil society across the Union'. Among other things, it called on the European Commission to include a stand-alone chapter on civic space in the rule of law reports, strengthen the involvement of civil society in the rule of law cycle, provide clearer, more specific and time-bound recommendations and strengthen the rule of law conditionality mechanism in the next MFF. Separately, the International Commission of Jurists and 36 civil society, human rights, journalism and media support organisations called on the Commission to 'take more direct and verifiable measures to uphold, protect and restore the rule of law within the European Union and in the candidate countries'. They argued that the rule of law reports appear to be drafted in a routine manner, in isolation from other EU instruments seeking to protect democratic pillars and as a mere stock-taking exercise without meaningful follow-up or conditionality imposed on Member State or candidate country governments.

Since the release of the Commission's 2026 report in July 2026, it has been addressed in statements from several stakeholders. In an initial gap analysis of the 2026 report, Liberties argued that, while an important tool, the report's assessment of the seriousness and gradual nature of rule of law backsliding and in signalling the need for urgent or preventive action remains insufficient. It also argued that some of the trends undermining the rule of law in Member States are mirrored within EU institutions themselves, including through fast-track lawmaking and the rollback of fundamental rights protections. According to Liberties, the findings presented in its own rule of law report provide a 'starker view' of the situation in Europe. While the Commission had claimed that 47 % of its recommendations were fully or partially implemented, Liberties concluded that no more than 2 % of them were fully implemented and 'most remain in a stagnant state of partial implementation'. Liberties identified a serious and deliberate erosion of the rule of law in Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Italy and Slovakia; regression in Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Malta and Sweden and stagnation in a further 11 Member States, with Latvia characterised as the sole 'hard worker.'¹⁶

Writing in August 2026, Professor Laurent Pech was similarly critical of the Commission's report. He argues that the tool is no longer 'merely toothless' but 'has become harmful as its main impact has been to help disguise or minimise backsliding and normalise the most serious threats to/violations of the rule of law.' Pech argues that the Commission's report paints an overly positive picture of the rule of law situation in Europe, which is inconsistent with evidence from sources such as the World Justice Project and V-Dem that show deterioration in a substantial number of EU countries. He suggests that the Commission selects sources to 'avoid engaging with findings contradicting its (rose-tinted glasses) assessments', criticises its broad approach to measuring progress on the implementation of country-specific recommendations and argues that some country reports omit serious issues or identifies them without making them subject to a recommendation. He further argues that the report's short-term focus and euphemistic language obscure serious and long-term rule of law backsliding, while its failure to address key issues limits its value as an enforcement and early-warning mechanism.

In the context of press freedom, further criticism has come from the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), who suggest that the Commission's report 'underestimates the seriousness of the attacks on press freedom and media pluralism'. While acknowledging the entry into force of positive EU legislation, including the European Media Freedom Act and the Anti-SLAPP Directive, the EFJ argues that the report pays insufficient attention to their delayed implementation and the lack of willingness on the part of many governments. It disputes what it describes as the report's 'sugar-coated view of reality', pointing to findings from bodies such as the Media Freedom Rapid Response and the Council of Europe, as well as the media pluralism monitor report and the European Economic and Social Committee report on journalists' working conditions, which demonstrate that media freedom is 'seriously deteriorating across the European Union'. The European Broadcasting Union's response to the 2026 report was more neutral, endorsing 'the Commission's identified need to strengthen the media pillar of the rule of law report' by monitoring and reporting on how recent trends affect media freedom and pluralism and noting its support for the Commission's proposal to establish a stronger link between the rule of law and access to EU funds under the upcoming MFF.

Outlook

While initially conceived as a soft law tool to examine measures aimed at combating corruption within Member States, Professor Franco Peirone notes that both the 'scope and the bindingness of the Commission's analysis has expanded' over time. According to Peirone, from the outset, the rule of law reports have reflected a more comprehensive approach than that of earlier monitoring mechanisms, which focused on anti-corruption. Since 2020, their scope has expanded further and they have 'gained a (quasi-)conditional nature when conjoined with the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the Budget Conditionality Regulations'.

In the 2026 report, the Commission expressed its belief that the 'report and its recommendations should play an important role under the next long-term EU budget'. It said it would 'continue to stay closely engaged with the European Parliament and the Council in the annual cycle' and invited them to continue general and country-specific debates based on the report. Its 2026 work programme notes the need for an integrated annual rule-of-law cycle with a common rhythm, clear milestones and an opportunity for all institutions to contribute, and emphasises that 'respect for rule of law is a must for all funds'.

When delivering the 2026 report, Michael McGrath, the European Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, announced that, in addition to linking the rule of law report's recommendations and EU financial support, the Commission will present a series of anti-corruption initiatives to strengthen rule of law further. These initiatives will include a review of the EU's anti-fraud architecture, an EU anti-corruption strategy, and measures to strengthen the European Public Prosecutor's Office following its evaluation, and the third report on the Directive on the Protection of the Union's financial interests (PIF directive).