Changes from plenary report to adopted text

46. Calls on EU agencies, offices, and institutions, such as Europol, Eurojust, the European Court of Auditors, the EPPO and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to improve their cooperation, in particular through a review and strengthening of the EU anti-fraud architecture, including ensuring that OLAF has adequate resources, so as to ensure more effective detection, prevention and prosecution of violations of the rule of law where these have direct or indirect repercussions on the financial interests of the Union;

47. Calls for the reinforcement of preventive measures against revolving-door practices in judicial systems, in particular in candidate and potential candidate countries, to prevent judges and prosecutors from taking up governmental and political positions that could lead to conflicts of interest and harm the integrity and impartiality of the judicial system;

48. Expresses deep concern about the situation in some Member States where specialised anti-corruption bodies have been dismantled, absorbed into less independent structures, or had their competences reallocated in ways that reduce their independence or allow prosecutorial or police powers to be used for political purposes; notes that these developments have led to sharp declines in investigations and prosecutions of corruption cases, including high-level cases, and undermine the effectiveness of national anti-corruption frameworks, as evidenced by recent expert analyses; points out that the prosecution service is a key element in the capacity of a Member State to fight crime and corruption; regrets any governmental or political interference in criminal investigations, including corruption and related offences;

49. Calls on the Member States to guarantee the independence, impartiality, specialisation and adequate resourcing of disciplinary boards, prosecution services, anti-corruption agencies and the judiciary, in accordance with the recommendations of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and GRECO;

50. Welcomes the new Directive on combating corruption, which updates and strengthens the EU's legal framework in line with the UNCAC; welcomes in particular the harmonisation at EU level of the definition of core corruption offences, including bribery in the public and private sectors, misappropriation, trading in influence, obstruction of justice, illicit enrichment, concealment and serious abuses of public function; recalls that the offence of abuse of office and other similar offences fall within the scope of the Directive, form an integral part of the regulatory framework on anti-corruption and transparency, and are at odds with international conventions on tackling corruption; welcomes the strengthening of criminal sanctions for both natural and legal persons, including custodial sentences of at least three to five years, disqualification from public office and exclusion from access to public funds, as well as turnover-based fines for companies; notes the reinforced rules on jurisdiction, enabling Member States to prosecute certain offences committed abroad; welcomes the enhanced preventive framework, including the obligation to have specialised anti-corruption bodies or organisational units in place, carrying out regular risk assessments and ensuring protection for whistleblowers and cooperating persons; stresses that the Directive on combating corruption emphasises that while fully respecting all relevant rules in national constitutions, constitutional principles and laws, unduly shielding individuals, in particular holders of public office, from accountability for corruption offences might undermine public trust in a way incompatible with the objectives of this Directive; further stresses that Member States should have a system in place for the recording, production and provision of anonymised statistical data on the number of pardons related to convictions regarding Articles 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Directive; urges all Member States to swiftly and fully implement the Combating Corruption Directive;

51. Stresses that the rule of law requires public officials, in both the EU institutions and the Member States, to act transparently and in the public interest, without abuse of power or arbitrary decision-making; calls on the Member States, candidate and potential candidate countries to promote a culture of integrity through regular anti-corruption training for public officials, law enforcement and judiciary, and by actively engaging civil society;

52. Underlines that freedom of information and access to information of public interest is a fundamental right and an essential component of transparency, democratic accountability and the fight against corruption; notes that the Commission’s rule of law report systematically covers this area, including unjustified restrictions, delays or obstacles to accessing public information; calls on Member States to guarantee timely, effective and non-discriminatory access to information held by public authorities, and to refrain from legislative or administrative measures limiting transparency or hindering public scrutiny, where they are incompatible with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;

53. Expresses concern that recent criminal law reforms reducing sanctions and limitation periods for anti-corruption offences resulted in the discontinuation of hundreds of corruption-related cases, including those involving serious offences, weakening deterrence, fostering a climate of impunity and eroding trust in public institutions;

54. Notes that in Hungary the concentration of executive influence over prosecutors, combined with legislative reforms enabling the closure of corruption cases or the weakening of penalties, mirrors patterns of systemic backsliding previously identified by Parliament in the context of Article 7 TEU proceedings;

55. Urges the Member States, candidate and potential candidate countries to ensure prompt, thorough and impartial investigations of corruption cases, with particular priority given to cases involving high-level officials, in order to safeguard the rule of law, uphold public trust and ensure accountability at all levels of government; calls, furthermore on the Member States to follow up on such cases within a reasonable time frame so as not to foster a sense of impunity among citizens;

56. Calls on the Member States to align their legal provisions on the criminal liability of high-level officials, as defined in the Directive on combating corruption, and to reduce legal and procedural barriers that hinder judicial authorities from swiftly examining relevant cases;

57. Calls on the Commission to systematically report on, and differentiate between, the track record of investigations, indictments and final convictions in high-level corruption cases in each Member State; further calls on the Commission to identify situations of persistent impunity as structural vulnerabilities with significant implications for the protection of the EU budget, and to include these findings in the anti-corruption chapter of the rule of law report;

58. Recognises the crucial role that whistleblowers play in exposing corruption and promoting transparency across both the public and private sectors; stresses the need to ensure they are effectively protected against retaliation and harassment; calls for the further strengthening of independent and autonomous whistleblower protection authorities and for their integration into broader national anti-corruption frameworks; urges the Member States and candidate countries to protect and further strengthen protection for whistleblowers and journalists reporting on corruption or mismanagement of EU funds, by ensuring confidential reporting channels, effective remedies against retaliation, and the protection of investigative journalism and freedom of expression; calls for the introduction of specific aggravating circumstances in criminal law for offences committed against journalists when such acts are motivated by or connected to their professional activities;

The protection of journalists, and media pluralism and freedom

59. States that the assassination of investigative journalists constitutes a direct attack on the rule of law, as it not only undermines the capacity of citizens and institutions to hold those in power accountable, but also represents one of the most extreme forms of censorship, posing a direct threat to freedom of expression and the functioning of democratic institutions; stresses that threats, harassment and campaigns against journalists, including those that are politically motivated, create a chilling effect on investigative reporting and must trigger prompt, thorough, independent and effective investigations;

60. Strongly condemns the surveillance of journalists, in particular by means of spyware, including the Paragon Graphite case, as well as the targeting of journalists and civil-society actors in several Member States, which constitutes a breach of freedom of expression and media freedom, and undermines the principles of democracy; highlights the importance of protecting journalists and the confidentiality of their communications from any form of unlawful or arbitrary surveillance; welcomes efforts aimed at strengthening safeguards against such practices; stresses the need to strengthen existing safeguards, including judicial review, necessity and proportionality assessments and effective redress mechanisms, as well as the enforcement of EU law;

61. Remains concerned about the limited follow-up given by the Commission to the recommendations of Parliament’s Committee of Inquiry into the use of Pegasus and equivalent spyware, considers that their full and timely implementation would significantly strengthen the EU’s capacity to prevent abuses and uphold fundamental rights; calls on the Commission to report regularly to Parliament, in particular to its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), on the state of implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Commission to address the use of spyware against journalists in its future rule of law report, as it has a direct impact on media freedom, media pluralism and the safety of journalists; recognises that, following concerns raised at EU level, certain Member States have introduced reforms intended to improve oversight, transparency and accountability in the use of surveillance technologies;

62. Notes with concern the use of increasingly intrusive surveillance technologies, including AI-based tools, notably where their deployment may disproportionately interfere with fundamental rights, such as privacy, freedom of assembly or media freedom; stresses that surveillance technologies based on AI, including biometric systems such as facial recognition, pose a high risk to the respect of fundamental rights, and that, where used, they must be subject to prior judicial authorisation and transparent oversight; calls on the Commission to assess whether national practices involving biometric surveillance or large-scale data collection pose systemic risks to the rule of law;

63. Expresses deep concern at the increasingly well-documented allegations of unlawful surveillance and espionage targeting EU institutions; stresses that such practices, if confirmed, would constitute a grave threat to the rule of law, the separation of powers, democratic oversight and the integrity of the EU’s decision-making processes:

64. Recalls that the deployment of spyware, given its highly intrusive nature, constitutes a serious interference with fundamental rights, undermines mutual trust among Member States and may distort the functioning of the single market and EU policies; calls for full transparency, effective and independent scrutiny over such practices, and concrete corrective measures, including at EU level, to ensure accountability; reiterates that surveillance must be carried out in accordance with the law, serve a legitimate aim and be strictly necessary and proportionate, and subject to robust safeguards; underlines that any misuse of surveillance tools that is duly established following due process must have tangible consequences under the EU’s legal and budgetary instruments;

65. Remains deeply concerned that media ownership, whether in public or private hands, remains highly concentrated in many Member States, candidate and potential candidate countries posing a risk to diversity of information and viewpoints; expresses concern at increasing political interference in the governance, management and staffing of public service media, undermining their independence; stresses the democratic importance of independent and well-funded public service media; calls on the Member States, candidate and potential candidate countries to adopt legislative frameworks to prevent horizontal concentration, ensure transparency of ownership and management, including through public ownership registries, guarantee transparent allocation of public funds, and establish independent oversight and compliance mechanisms to safeguard editorial and journalistic independence and the media’s role as a public watchdog;

66. Condemns any undue political interference in the management of public media and notes with concern structural reforms in certain Member States that increase political influence over appointment and dismissal procedures, as well as the use of state-controlled advertising, politically influenced regulatory bodies and media consolidation into pro-government conglomerates, which together erode media pluralism and restrict access to independent information; calls on the Member States to ensure transparent, open, effective and non-discriminatory appointment procedures for governing bodies, based on objective and proportionate criteria laid down in advance, in accordance with Article 5 of the European Media Freedom Act and urges the Commission to closely monitor national reforms that may undermine media pluralism and the independence of public service media; stresses that independent and trustworthy media, including public service media free from political control, are indispensable for democratic accountability, as they enable citizens to scrutinise those in power and to detect corruption and abuse of office;

67. Recalls that online platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and X are major sources of news, particularly for younger audiences; expresses concern that recommender systems may amplify polarising content and create information 'echo chambers', posing serious risks to democratic debate and media pluralism; calls on the Commission to ensure effective enforcement of the Digital Services Act, in particular regarding platforms’ obligations to mitigate systemic risks to media pluralism and civic discourse;

68. Welcomes initiatives to promote free, independent and pluralistic media, such as the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA); regrets, however, that in most Member States the EMFA remains far from being effectively implemented; calls on the Member States to immediately fulfil their obligations to ensure its swift and full implementation, including transparency in the allocation of state advertising online and offline, and the safeguarding of media pluralism and editorial independence; calls on the Commission to provide support to Member States in transposing the EMFA into national law, monitor its implementation, and consider infringement proceedings where obligations are not met; calls on the Commission to actively assist Member States in the application of the EMFA, including through the adoption of interpretative guidelines where necessary, and to closely monitor its effective enforcement, in particular in Member States where independent sources have raised media freedom concerns; stresses that, given the direct applicability of the Regulation, journalists and stakeholders are already entitled to invoke it before national and EU courts;

70. Condemns hate speech, both online and offline, including in the mainstream media, on social media and in public spaces, as it constitutes a serious threat to democracy and the rule of law; calls for stronger enforcement of media regulations to safeguard a diverse and inclusive media landscape; underlines that public figures must lead by example in ensuring respectful debate; recalls that freedom of expression is a fundamental right and should not be unjustifiably restricted; stresses that freedom of expression must not be used to justify hate speech or hate crimes; calls on the Member States to repeal or amend legislation that is not in line with European and international standards regarding freedom of expression and public debate;

71. Recalls that freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democratic societies and an essential element of the rule of law; notes with concern the increase in administrative and criminal measures targeting academics, journalists and human rights defenders;

72. Calls on the Member States to fully and timely implement the Anti-SLAPP Directive; and Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/758; urges the Member States to go beyond minimum transposition and adopt comprehensive domestic anti-SLAPP measures to protect journalists and other targets from intimidation, defamation or restrictions on the exercise of their profession;

73. Recommends that, when transposing the directive, the Member States extend its application to also include national cases, given that the majority of SLAPPs occur at the national level; encourages the adoption of early dismissal mechanisms, effective cost-shifting rules, dissuasive sanctions against abusive litigants, and robust support measures for affected journalists and other targets;

74. Calls on the Commission to urgently consider proposals or complementary instruments to address SLAPPs not covered under the current EU framework, and to explore amendments expanding the directive’s scope beyond cross-border cases, ensuring a high and uniform level of protection across the EU;

75. Invites the Commission to assess whether EU sanctions to combat disinformation comply with the proportionality requirement under EU law and with Article 11 of the Charter, while fully acknowledging the legitimate objective of adopting policies to address disinformation and information manipulation; considers that the right to be heard and adequate legal safeguards must be guaranteed before such measures are applied by the Council, especially where the rights of EU citizens, in particular journalists, risk being undermined;

76. Encourages the Member States to ensure that minorities can effectively participate in and access media and to ensure that audiovisual media services do not contain incitement to violence or hatred against minorities;

77. Calls on the Member States to establish frameworks that guarantee people’s freedom to seek, receive and impart information, and to ensure that national coordinators under the Digital Services Act (DSA) can fully perform their role in facilitating information exchange and cooperation at EU level; underlines the importance of timely and effective implementation of the DSA to ensure a safe, transparent, and accountable online environment; calls on the Member States to ensure that the transposition of Directive (EU) 2016/343 on the presumption of innocence fully respects freedom of expression and information as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and does not introduce restrictions on reporting on matters of public interest;

78. Recalls the importance of monitoring large online platforms and enforcing the DSA, including investigations into algorithmic manipulation, amplification of hate speech, political propaganda, or lack of oversight; stresses the importance of transparency in platform algorithms, of independent audits and of fact-checking mechanisms to combat disinformation, and underlines that these measures should be complemented by guaranteed access to information and the promotion of media literacy among all citizens;

79. Stresses that large-scale disinformation and information manipulation, increasingly amplified by advanced AI systems, pose serious risks to the rule of law and democratic processes; calls on the Commission and Member States to fully enforce the DSA and AI Act to ensure transparency, accountability and effective mitigation of AI-driven systemic risks to the rule of law, particularly in electoral contexts;

Civil society space

80. Emphasises the crucial role played by a strong and unhindered civil society, including grassroots and community organisations, trade unions, activist groups, human rights defenders and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), as well as by independent authorities and ombudspersons, in promoting and upholding democracy, equality, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and in ensuring accountability for both state and private actors through their watchdog role; recalls that, in this context, the Commission acknowledges that obstacles persist in some Member States to creating an environment conducive to the work of civil society actors, as well as the need for additional measures for them, such as dedicated training, awareness-raising and protection mechanisms; urges the Commission to step up efforts to strengthen the protection of all these actors and to guarantee the conditions necessary for the effective pursuit of their activities; recalls the need for a safe, supportive and enabling environment for them; encourages civic engagement and participation in democratic processes;

81. Recognises the role of civil society and non-governmental organisations in protecting minorities and combating discrimination, calling for fair and equitable access to support;

82. Reiterates the importance of broad consultation when drafting the rule of law report; calls on the Commission to prioritise on-site visits to the Member States, as they allow for a more comprehensive and contextual assessment of the situation;

83. Highlights the importance of a vibrant civic space and of the rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of association across the EU, stressing that these rights, protected by international law and the Charter, are essential for democracy and government accountability; notes that these freedoms require further strengthening in some Member States; calls on Member States to ensure the protection of freedom of assembly for all and to guarantee a safe, enabling and legally secure environment for its exercise, in line with EU law and European and international human rights standards; notes with concern the increasing restrictions affecting civic space in several Member States, including excessive administrative burdens, smear campaigns and limitations on access to resources, which create a chilling effect and undermine the watchdog role of civil society;

84. Expresses deep concern over repeated restrictions on freedom of assembly; highlights criticisms expressed by the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the United Nations and civil society organisations regarding certain laws, including relevant legislation in the area of security, which do not meet the requirement of proportionality, which may weaken legal safeguards and may conflict with international human rights obligations; calls on the Member States to refrain from adopting laws or practices that preventively restrict the right to peaceful assembly, including imposing sanctions or penalties on participants in peaceful demonstrations without judicial oversight; reminds Member States that laws and practices concerning assemblies and protests must always comply with international human rights standards, including through adequate human-rights and crowd-management training for law enforcement officials; encourages Member States to introduce appropriate procedures or mechanisms for recording identity checks, and calls on the Member States to publish data on injuries and deaths during protests in order to enhance transparency and accountability of law enforcement authorities;

85. Acknowledges the EU Strategy for Civil Society and measures to strengthen protection, participation and sustainable funding, including the Civil Society Platform, the Knowledge Hub on Civic Space and further protection tools;

86. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to continue to improve the legal and regulatory environment for civil society, while ensuring that any restrictions on the funding and activities of associations are clearly justified, proportionate, pursue legitimate public-interest goals and fully comply with EU law and European and international human rights standards, including the ECHR;

87. Expresses deep concern about shrinking civic space and increasing persecution of civil society organisations (CSOs) and human rights defenders in the EU, particularly those working on anti-racism, climate justice, LGBTIQ+ rights, women’s rights, migration, including humanitarian assistance and aid to persons in distress at sea, as well as anti-corruption; urges the Commission to systematically monitor the situation of these organisations in its rule of law reports, as a shrinking civic space constitutes a structural rule-of-law concern; calls on the Member States to provide effective protection for human rights defenders, including rapid response mechanisms to threats;

88. Expresses concern over constitutional amendments undermining legal certainty and the primacy of EU law;

89. Denounces the excessive and routine use of accelerated legislative procedures in Hungary, with a significant proportion of laws being adopted without adequate consultation, undermining principles of better law-making, transparency, inclusiveness and democratic oversight;

90. Encourages the Member States to ensure a balanced framework that supports accountability and transparency for all entities seeking to influence public policy, while allowing civil society to operate freely, safely and effectively; is concerned by the growing legal and financial restrictions, smear campaigns, and criminalisation of civil society organisations and human rights defenders, including the unwarranted criminalisation of civil society activities; calls on the Member States to refrain from disproportionate restrictions on freedom of assembly and association; reiterates the importance of fully implementing the Anti-SLAPP Directive and Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/758 to protect CSOs; stresses that reporting requirements for NGOs must not exceed those strictly necessary and proportionate to the specific aims pursued;

91. Stresses that transparency and accountability in the use of EU funds are vital components of the rule of law; stresses that reporting obligations and transparency should be in place to ensure that EU money is well spent, while avoiding unnecessary burdens on organisations; considers that the current EU legislation on scrutiny, due diligence and transparency constitutes a solid basis, and underlines that the EU should remain ready to review and reinforce the framework should shortcomings be identified; calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure the allocation of adequate and sustainable financial resources for civil society organisations and human rights defenders, in accordance with clear eligibility criteria and oversight mechanisms that would fully comply with existing transparency, accountability and spending rules, particularly in the context of shrinking civic space and increasing administrative burdens; in this regard, considers that the Commission and the Member States should provide adequate and consistent funding, matched to its objectives, for actors working to promote fundamental rights, democracy and the rule of law, and underlines that access to EU funding must be fair, transparent and non-discriminatory; recalls that funding decisions must be based on objective, transparent and non-discriminatory criteria, in accordance with the Treaties and the Financial Regulation, ensuring sound financial management and the protection of the EU’s financial interests;

92. Stresses the importance of academic freedom as an integral aspect of the rule of law and urges the Member States to protect universities from undue political influence or control over academic governance, and to ensure institutional autonomy; encourages the Member States to foster a culture of the rule of law through awareness campaigns, outreach initiatives and action promoting democratic values and principles;

Fundamental rights, equality and non-discrimination

93. Stresses that the protection and promotion of fundamental rights constitute an essential pillar of the rule of law and a core obligation for all Member States under Article 2 TEU; underlines that these rights must be safeguarded equally for all individuals without discrimination through transparent legislative processes, effective judicial remedies and independent oversight mechanisms; highlights that the rule of law and fundamental rights are mutually reinforcing, and that breaches of the rule of law directly undermine the enjoyment of fundamental rights;

94. Stresses that any restriction on fundamental rights and freedoms must comply with Article 52(1) of the Charter and condemns legislative practices that result in excessive complexity, legal uncertainty or a lack of intelligibility for citizens;

95. Underlines that Member States’ legal frameworks must guarantee equality before the law and the right not to be discriminated against, including in judicial proceedings; calls on the Commission to act decisively in cases of non-compliance; stresses that any measures affecting the free movement of persons, residence rights or family reunification must comply with applicable EU law and the Charter, including the principle of non-discrimination laid down in Article 21 thereof;

96. Recalls that effective access to social protection, adequate minimum income and non-discriminatory public services is crucial for the equal exercise of rights; calls on the Commission to consider how social exclusion, extreme poverty and lack of housing hinder effective access to justice and the practical enjoyment of rights;

97. Welcomes the LGBTIQ+ equality strategy 2026-2030 as a key framework for advancing equality and non-discrimination across the EU, in particular through improved implementation of EU equality law, protection and safety of LGBTIQ+ persons and activists, strengthening monitoring and accountability mechanisms, awareness-raising and training of key professionals; urges the Commission to present a proposal for a binding EU ban on conversion practices in all Member States;

98. Is deeply concerned about the discriminatory measures introduced in some Member States under the pretext of fighting the so-called ‘LGBTIQ propaganda’ and ‘gender ideology’; recalls the Opinion of the Advocate General in Case C-769/22 finding that such legislation, where not objectively, scientifically and proportionately justified, is incompatible with EU law and the Charter; underlines that these measures reinforce stigmatisation, interfere with the prohibition of discrimination, with freedom of expression and information, and violate private and family life and human dignity, and cannot be justified by the reasons put forward by the Member State; stresses that systematic discrimination against LGBTIQ+ persons calls into question the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU and affects the EU’s legal order as a whole; stresses that the Commission must act swiftly and decisively when Member States circumvent EU law, in particular the Charter of fundamental rights, including via accelerated infringement procedures and interim measures; condemns discriminatory constitutional reforms affecting gender equality and LGBTIQ+ rights;

99. Deplores the lack of progress in equality and non-discrimination policies in some Member States and persistent gaps in the implementation of existing EU anti-discrimination legislation; highlights that intersectional discrimination against individuals belonging to multiple vulnerable groups remains a problem in several Member States, with varying degrees of legal recognition and protection, and is insufficiently addressed under current EU equality and non-discrimination frameworks; urges the Council to reach agreement on the horizontal anti-discrimination directive without delay; calls for continued EU action to combat discrimination and hate crimes targeting LGBTIQ+ persons, women, minors, persons with disabilities, elderly people, migrants, and persons belonging to minorities so as to ensure effective access to justice and legal remedies for victims;

100. Calls on all Member States to protect LGBTIQ+ rights in full compliance with EU law, the Charter, and relevant CJEU and ECtHR case-law; recalls that legal barriers to recognising same-sex partnerships or parenthood across borders persist in several Member States, violating the principles of free movement and non-discrimination; calls on the Commission to closely monitor Member States’ compliance with CJEU case-law, in particular the judgments in Cases C-673/16 and C-713/23, and to launch infringement procedures where necessary; welcomes the Commission's proposal on the recognition of parenthood and calls on the Council to adopt it swiftly, in the best interests of the child and with a view to ensuring legal certainty across the EU;

101. Calls on all Member States to introduce legal recognition of same-sex partnerships, in line with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights;

102. Stresses that the absence of accessible legal gender recognition procedures constitutes a violation of fundamental rights; calls on all Member States to guarantee legal recognition of gender identity based on self-determination, ensure mutual recognition across borders and protect personal data, in line with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights;