The European Commission’s annual Rule of Law Report aims to identify emerging threats and prompt governments to address them before they escalate. But the failure to implement its recommendations raises questions about its ability to bring about meaningful change, according to the latest analysis by the Civil Liberties Union for Europe.
Liberties’ 2026 Rule of Law Gap Analysis, published on Monday, examines where the European Commission’s report falls short, assessing the implementation of country-specific recommendations while exploring its potential to prevent democratic decline and support the restoration of the rule of law.
According to the NGO’s analysis, at least 96 per cent of the European Commission’s recommendations have not been fully implemented, and 54 per cent show no or only limited progress, meaning the implementation gap “remains persistent and significant”. The lack of implementation means that 96 per cent of the recommendations issued in 2026 were repeated from previous years, with 65 per cent dating back to 2022.
“Now in its seventh year, the European Commission’s annual Rule of Law Report is an important assessment of the state of the rule of law across the Union,” notes Liberties. “This year’s Gap Analysis again points to a significant implementation gap and a failure to surface and address critical issues, whether at the national level or cross-cutting issues that impact the rule of law across the [European] Union.”
Liberties also addresses what it calls the European Commission’s “overly optimistic assessment” in this year’s report, where it claimed that “nearly 1 in 2 (47%) of the recommendations made in 2025 have since been addressed by Member States – either fully or partially”. In reality, the NGO says, this disguises a wide range of partial implementation and fails to unpack why some problems remain so entrenched.
Liberties criticises what it calls the EU’s “fragmented toolbox” for fighting democratic backsliding. The EU has various rule-of-law instruments at its disposal – infringement proceedings, Article 7, etc. – but what is missing is “an overarching framework that ties these instruments together”.
“The Rule of Law Report has the potential to provide that comprehensive overview, but risks instead becoming a ‘leftover tool’ – one that only picks up issues if unaddressed by the EU’s other mechanisms. As things stand, it fails to offer a comprehensive picture of the problems at hand nor a clear pathway to recovery, as illustrated by [our] case study on Hungary,” it says.
Liberties also cites the decision to remove recommendations related to the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), because most of its provisions became legally binding for member states in August 2025, requiring all countries to effectively implement its provisions. “Consequently, the share of recommendations on ‘Media freedom and pluralism’ declined significantly, now accounting for only 6% of all recommendations, compared with 16-22% in previous years,” it notes.
“However, it is unclear at this stage,” it says, “whether removing these recommendations best serves the defence of media freedom and pluralism.”
For example, Liberties’ partners in Bulgaria, Croatia and Spain report continued political interference in the public service media, while they highlight in Croatia, Italy, Malta and Romania continued opaque media ownership structures, often with no legislative steps planned to address the issues.
“In Slovakia, actions by the government appear to be deepening existing EMFA violations rather than constructively addressing them,” it says.