On Wednesday 24 July, the European Commission presented its fifth annual Rule of Law Report which examines developments among the EU27 and, while it drew up a generally positive assessment compared to the 2023 report, it also confirmed that there are still grounds for concern in a handful of countries, particularly Hungary and Slovakia.
This year, the Commission also published a report for four EU candidate countries, the most advanced in this case: Albania, Montenegro, Serbia and North Macedonia. However, its recommendations were only for the Member States.
This is the first positive point in the overall picture, explained the Vice-President for Values and Transparency and the European Commissioner for Justice, Věra Jourová and Didier Reynders: the rate of follow-up to the recommendations issued by the Commission has increased since the last edition, from 65% to 68%.
The two leaders also welcomed Poland’s exit from the so-called ‘Article 7’ procedure on the Rule of law launched in 2017, as well as the resolution of the Spanish dispute over the Council of the Judiciary. Two successes that the Commission had assisted, in particular by coordinating the intra-Spanish dialogue.
They also welcomed the fact that the annual report generally leads to reform processes everywhere.
But difficulties remain within the EU27, notably the use of accelerated legislative procedures, which can alter the quality of legislation, continuing worrying trends of attacks on civil society, and the level of remuneration of judges, which remains a problem, with the Commission calling on the Member States to invest more in this area.
The Commission’s report assesses four areas: the independence of the judiciary, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism and checks and balances, in particular respect for civil society organisations.
And its harshest observations are directed at Hungary and Slovakia.
When asked about the latter country, the Commission said that it was not considering freezing European funds at this stage.
In the case of Hungary, which obtained the unfreezing of 10 billion euros in December after committing to a series of judicial reforms, the Commission’s report notes that, since last yea,r there has been “no progress on improving the transparency of case allocation systems in lower-instance courts, taking into account European standards on case allocation; no progress on adopting comprehensive reforms on lobbying and revolving doors, and further improve the system of asset declarations, providing for effective oversight and enforcement”.
Furthermore, there has been “no progress yet on establishing a robust track record of investigations, prosecutions and final judgments for high-level corruption cases; no progress on introducing mechanisms to enhance the functional independence of the media regulator taking into account European standards on the independence of media regulators”.
There has also been “no progress on fostering a safe and enabling civic space and remove obstacles affecting civil society organisations”.
Commissioner Didier Reynders acknowledged on Tuesday “a real systemic problem with Hungary”, which received eight new recommendations on Tuesday, compared with seven in 2023.
Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA, German) said that there is an anomaly. “The state of the Rule of law in Hungary remains appalling. Despite financial sanctions worth tens of billions, the Orbán government has made no progress on reform. On the contrary, things are at a standstill. Ursula von der Leyen must ask herself whether her approach to Hungary is still the right one”.
Concerning Slovakia, the country has made: “no progress on introducing measures to ensure that the members of the Judicial Council, notably those not elected by judges, are subject to sufficient guarantees of independence as regards their dismissal, taking into account European standards on independence of Judicial Councils”.
In addition, there has been “no progress on ensuring that sufficient safeguards are in place and duly observed when subjecting judges to criminal liability for the crime of “abuse of law” as regards their judicial decisions”.
Furthermore, no progress has been made “on taking measures to improve the coordination among the different law enforcement entities and ensure the objectivity of prosecutorial decisions, and no legislative amendments were advanced to restrict the power of the Prosecutor-General to annul prosecutorial decisions with a view to promoting a robust track record of high-level corruption cases”.
And, no progress has been made in strengthening the independent governance and editorial independence of public service media.
However, the Commission notes some progress in putting in place legislative and other safeguards to improve the physical safety and working environment of journalists, including the reform of the law on defamation.
Italy. While the Commission was suspected of delaying publication of its report by 3 weeks in order to preserve the goodwill of the Italian Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni, towards Ursula von der Leyen, whom the Italian ultimately did not support in her re-election, the 2024 report devoted to Rome does not give a particularly negative overall assessment, but does highlight concerns about the protection of journalists.
There has been “no further progress on continuing the legislative process to reform and introduce safeguards for the regime on defamation, the protection of professional secrecy and journalistic sources”.
“We have been expressing the need for guarantees for years. But with new incidents reported by stakeholders and budget cuts, this is becoming very urgent”, commented Věra Jourová, as journalists from RAI, the main public media, have reported intimidation campaigns.
While Greece had been criticised for its protection of journalists and use of spyware, the 2024 report is rather good.
If the safety of journalists remains a concern, with physical attacks and SLAPP procedures, the Commission notes some progress in improving the environment for journalists.
Candidate countries. The Commission notes similar challenges, particularly with regard to the judicial system, for the four candidate countries.
In Albania, there are still shortcomings regarding appointments to the High Council of the Judiciary and the High Council of Public Prosecutors. In North Macedonia, there are concerns about the functioning and independence of the Judicial Council.
In Montenegro, “significant delays in judicial appointments have had serious repercussions on the judicial system”, although only the President of the Supreme Court remains to be appointed. And in Serbia, a considerable number of posts for judges and prosecutors remain to be filled.
Link to the report: https://aeur.eu/f/d45
Link to country reports: https://aeur.eu/f/d46 (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)