On 15 July 2026, the European Commission was supposed to publish its seventh annual Rule of Law Report. This exercise has become a familiar ritual aimed at providing a thorough stock-take of where judicial independence, media freedom, anti-corruption efforts and checks and balances stand across the Union and four candidate countries, followed by recommendations that too often disappear into the next reporting cycle without consequence. The undersigned 37 civil society, human rights, journalism and media support organisations, including the European Center for Research, Transparency and Accountability (EUCRTA), urgently call on the European 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.
The report is being published against a backdrop of continued democratic backsliding, shrinking civic space in several Member States, and a geopolitical climate in which rule of law debates risk being pushed to the margins by security and defence priorities. Yet the Rule of Law Reports appear to be drafted in a routine manner, in isolation from other EU instruments that seek 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.
As part of the ongoing negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028–2034, it will be essential to incorporate rule of law conditionality into all EU funds. The lack of follow-up on the recommendations made in previous Rule of Law Reports, as well as the full and effective implementation of the Digital Services Act, the European Media Freedom Act, and the Anti-SLAPP Directive, remains a cause for major concern.
A pivotal moment for the Rule of Law Report
- The MFF negotiations are live. Whatever conditionality framework is agreed for 2028-2034 will shape Member State and candidate country behaviour for the better part of a decade. If rule of law conditions are vague, optional, or politically negotiable, they will not work.
- Enforcement gaps are piling up. The Digital Services Act, the European Media Freedom Act and the Anti-SLAPP Directive all exist on paper. Whether they protect anyone in practice depends on the implementation, which the Commission has been slow to enforce.
- The report still applies a double standard to candidate countries. Enlargement will only be credible if rule of law conditionality is consistent, measurable, and backed by funding decisions, not diluted through a parallel, lighter-touch approach.
What needs to change
Together with 36 other civil society, human rights, journalism and media support organisations, we are calling on the European Commission to treat this year’s report as a turning point rather than a formality. Concretely, that means:
- Making rule of law conditionality central to the next MFF, with clear, public benchmarks Member States must meet before funds are released – not a mechanism that can be watered down through political bargaining.
- Tightening the link between the report and the rule of law toolbox, so recommendations name a responsible authority, a concrete objective and a deadline, and so the status of past recommendations is tracked cycle after cycle.
- Expanding civic space monitoring, including a dedicated chapter on the operating space for civil society and a structured channel for civil society and journalists to flag emerging restrictions before they escalate.
- Acting systematically on court rulings that go unimplemented, including faster use of financial sanctions and infringement proceedings when Member States ignore judgments from the EU’s and Europe’s top courts.
- Enforcing the EU’s media freedom toolkit, from full implementation of the DSA and EMFA to closing the domestic-case gap in the Anti-SLAPP Directive and pushing Member States to decriminalise defamation.
- Building a real roadmap for democratic recovery, drawing on Poland’s experience to support Member States working to reverse backsliding, while keeping pressure on those, including Hungary, still moving in the wrong direction.
- Bringing all candidate countries fully into the report, with recommendations as measurable as those for Member States, and a genuine link between progress on the rule of law and access to pre-accession funds.
A report that leads to action
Our demand is that when the Rule of Law Report documents a problem, something actually follows from it – whether that is a withheld payment, an infringement procedure, or a targeted support package for a government trying to reverse course. The rule of law must become the foundation of the EU’s other commitments: to democracy, to fundamental rights, to a credible enlargement process.
Read the full statement here.
Signatories:
ALDA — European Association for Local Democracy
Amnesty International
ARTICLE 19 Europe
Association for International Affairs (AMO)
Avocats Sans Frontières Belgium
CaraDem
Center for Reproductive Rights
Committee to Protect Journalists
CRTA (Centre for Research, Transparency and Accountability – Belgrade, Serbia)
Democracy International
Democracy Reporting International (DRI)
European Centre for Research, Transparency and Accountability (EUCRTA)
European Federation of Journalists
European Implementation Network (EIN)
European Partnership for Democracy
European Policy Institute- Skopje
FIACAT : Fédération internationale des ACAT / International Federation of ACAT
FIDH (International Federation for Human Rights)
Free Press Unlimited
Glopolis
Human Rights House Foundation
Human Rights House Zagreb
Humanists International
Hungarian Helsinki Committee
Ifex
ILGA-Europe
International Commission of Jurists
International Planned Parenthood Federation – European Network (IPPF EN)
Lobbio
Netherlands Helsinki Committee
Open Society Fund Czechia
Our Rule of Law
Political Parties of Finland for Democracy – Demo Finland
Reporters Without Borders (RSF)
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
The Good Lobby
The Good Lobby Profs