Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Extraordinary meeting Extraordinary LIBE meeting
Legende
Markierungen im Transkript
- Text Aktuell abgespielter Satz
- Text Suchergebnis
- Text Redebeitrag, auf den der geöffnete Link verweist
Klicken Sie auf einen Satz, um das Video ab dieser Stelle abzuspielen. Markieren Sie Text, um ihn mit Redner, Zeitstempel und Link zu zitieren.
Weitere Optionen
Versatz
Versatz des Transkripts
Exportieren
Aufzeichnung
Versionen dieses Videos
- Aufzeichnung Endgültige Version · 19. Oktober 2026Angezeigt
- Live aufgezeichnet Live übertragen am 19. Oktober 2026
Die Transkripte können sich von Version zu Version leicht unterscheiden.
LIBE European Parliament
Ihren Sitzungen folgenMichael McGrath
As regards the scope of the report, the single market dimension again features prominently. This underscores the importance of the rule of law for the EU's competitiveness and for maintaining a level playing field in the single market, fostering a stable and a reliable business environment. In line with the request of the European Parliament, this year the Commission has further consolidated the report's recommendations to Member States, making them more targeted and operational. And the Commission fully agrees with the Parliament on the importance of ensuring a continuous dialogue with a variety of actors, including civil society. Based on the shared priority, I had the pleasure to co-host the inaugural Civil Dialogue Forum earlier in June, alongside European Parliament Vice-Presidents Barley and Stefanuta, to foster structured dialogue, cooperation and to promote civic engagement.
Let me also also underline in this context that the Commission adopted the EU's first ever civil society strategy at the end of last year, reflecting the importance of civil society actors for the rule of law and democracy in the EU. Turning now to its main findings, this year's report confirms that developments in the EU point to a broadly positive trajectory with marked improvements and important reforms completed or underway. Nonetheless, the picture remains uneven across Member States and policy areas, with challenges persisting in some cases. And the same can be said indeed about the four enlargement countries covered by the report: Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia. Let me turn to the main findings briefly of the report, looking at the four pillars.
And I'll begin with justice systems. The report shows that many Member States have advanced on justice reforms over the last year. Reforms include measures to strengthen judicial independence, such as reinforcing the independence of councils for the judiciary, to provide additional safeguards for judges' appointments, and reforms also include strengthening the autonomy of prosecution services. Nevertheless, reforms are progressing at a varying pace and in some Member States serious concerns remain. Turning now to anti-corruption, regarding the anti-corruption framework, the report shows that almost all Member States currently have national anti-corruption strategies in place.
One important effort in this regard is the transposition of the anti-corruption directive adopted in April this year, which provides Member States with a further opportunity to strengthen their legal frameworks against corruption. A number of Member States have also strengthened efforts to ensure a more effective investigation and prosecution of corruption offenses with additional resources or with new legislation. However, there are still some obstacles and several Member States need to increase the investigative capacity and their preventive frameworks, such as those governing lobbying, conflicts of interest and asset declarations. Turning to media freedom and pluralism, as you know, on the 8th of August last year, the vast majority of provisions of the European Media Freedom Act, or EMFA, became applicable. Many of these provisions overlap with the media freedom related topics in the rule of law report.
The past year has therefore seen intense activity between the Commission and the Member States' authorities to ensure alignment with these new legally binding rules. And where gaps were detected, the Commission launched the first wave of actions to enforce the EMFA last December and a second one in August of this year.
The Commission continues to support Member States in applying and enforcing the EMFA. The Rule of Law Report will continue to monitor significant developments also in these areas and report on their impact while further follow-up will be ensured as part of the Commission's support to Member States and enforcement of the EMFA. The report will also monitor progress relating to the safety of journalists and access to information as well as other aspects relating to the enabling environment for media freedom and pluralism. Finally, let me address the pillar on institutional issues related to checks and balances. The report notes that reforms to improve legal certainty and legislative quality have been taken forward.
At the same time, in some Member States, shortcomings persist regarding the excessive use of emergency legislative procedures and the lack of stakeholder involvement. Finally, the report notes that many Member States continue to ensure an enabling and a supportive framework for civil society and sustain efforts to further improve the environment in which they operate. However, in a number of Member States, civil society actors continue to report challenges including limitations to funding and to peaceful assembly. So, dear Chair, honorable members, as in previous years, the Commission continues to be ready to discuss the findings of the report and its recommendations in all the Member States, notably in national parliaments and of course here in the European Parliament. In the EU, dialogue will always come first, but we have to match dialogue with decisive actions.
And in critical situations, the Commission continues to be ready to use all the tools at its disposal, including infringement procedures and budgetary action where we believe it is relevant to ensure that the rule of law is upheld across our Union. So thank you, Chair, and I look forward now to the debate that will follow.
Javier Zarzalejos
Thanks, Commissioner, thank you for your presentation and now we start the round of political groups. There will be two minutes for your questions and remarks and then the Commissioner will have also two minutes to answer. We start with EPP, Mr. Michał Wawrykiewicz, floor is yours.
Michał Wawrykiewicz
Thank you, Chair, thank you, Commissioner, for joining us today despite the late hour and thank you for your presentation. And as a European Parliament rapporteur for this year report on the Commission's report, I would like to raise three questions that are particularly relevant to our ongoing work. First, concerning the Commission's recommendations, because the Rule of Law Report addresses challenges of varying degrees of seriousness, ranging them from relatively minor institutional shortcomings to systemic threats to judicial independence and democratic checks and balances. So, would you consider in the future introducing a clearer distinction between serious and systemic rule of law violations and other institutional deficiencies and giving greater priority to, of course, serious and systemic violations in country-specific recommendations? That's first.
Second, concerning the implementation of judicial decisions and rulings, because persistent failures to implement judgments of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights remains a serious concern in several Member States. So my question is, would you as a Commission consider in the future introducing a dedicated section in each country's chapter assessing compliance with judgment of both European courts?
And finally, regarding the European Parliament's role in the annual rule of law cycle, we welcome the Commission's proposal for a more integrated annual cycle, but we believe that Parliament should have a stronger role in this process. So the question is, would you support establishing a structured consultation with the Parliament, including its Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group, before the publication of the annual report, as well as a clearer mechanism for following up on Parliament's recommendation? Thank you very much, Commissioner, and I would very much appreciate your views on these three topics.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much, honorable member, for those questions and congratulations on your appointment as the committee rapporteur for the next report. And can I thank you for raising those three important issues. On point number one, relating to a form of differentiating as such between what you termed serious issues and serious recommendations and those that might be of a systemic nature, and whether we should consider presenting them in a different way or perhaps making clear that there is a hierarchy in the form of the seriousness of the different issues that have led to the recommendations. It is very much a matter of the national context and we have to take account of the national systems that apply and the national legal framework. Of course, our focus under the four pillars is in relation to the European context and European standards and EU law.
But we can give consideration to any views that the Parliament continues to have or may wish to express again in relation to how the recommendations can be presented. If you believe that we can improve on the clarity of the presentation of the recommendations, I'm not sure that we need to go into ranking them, but you haven't suggested that either. But you have highlighted the importance of perhaps identifying those that are of a most serious or a most systemic nature, and I would be happy to engage with the committee in relation to your thoughts on that. On the Court of Justice and the question of there being a dedicated section for each member state on perhaps the judgments of the court or indeed the Court of Human Rights that have not been followed up on, there are hard tools, as you know, within our legal framework for following up on non-compliance with judgments of the Court of Justice in particular. Whether there is a need to present that or package that in a coherent way within the rule of law report is a matter that we can consider.
But I think the most important action we can take in that area is to ensure that there is enforcement action because judgments of the Court of Justice are not voluntary in nature, they are legally binding and they must be fully upheld and implemented by the member states. And finally, in terms of the role of the European Parliament, I'm always happy to engage with this committee, indeed with the DRFMG, and as the chair said, I engaged with the DRFMG last month. And if you believe that there is a better way to structure the engagement at different points of the cycle, and I do want to move to a more integrated cycle, and that is in part why we are looking to try and bring the report forward. It has been a consistent call, as you have echoed there again, chair, of this committee, and I think that would help to improve the overall rule of law process and our engagement.
So happy to engage further on those points.
Cecilia Strada
Grazie Presidente and thank you very much Commissioner McGrath for your presentation. The annual rule of law report has come a long way, the seventh since the first publication, the fifth to include recommendations for Member States and the second under your leadership. The added value of this exercise is clearly to identify emerging issues before they deteriorate and to document developments in rule of law and fundamental rights. So the actual implementation of the recommendation holds the greatest importance and according to the report nearly one in two of the recommendations made in 2025 have since addressed either fully or partially. Yet on the ground assessment of national civil society organization show the implementation gap remains persistent.
96% of the recommendation issued this year are repetitions from previous years with 65% dating back to 2022. I think there's some work to be done from the Member State side. As it appears a failure in follow up, question is would the Commission agree on clear timelines and benchmarks to accompany the recommendation? My second concern is for media freedom and pluralism that are under threat in the world and in Europe. Example the Slovenian Ministry of Culture has proposed amendments to the Media Act affecting funding of media institutions.
In Italy in violation of the European Media Freedom Act the proposed reform of the Italian public broadcaster would not guarantee the independence rather the contrary would strengthen even more political control. So my question is what concrete steps do you want to take on this issue? Thirdly the space for civil society, right to peaceful assembly and freedom of association are rapidly shrinking and moreover national human rights institution where in place are continuing to face structural barriers including a lack of funding. What action the Commission intend to take to ensure Member States do not impede on constitutionally guaranteed rights while helping human rights entities to deliver on their mandate? And lastly the political environment is becoming very hostile to people on the move, migrant and refugees Commissioner also due to the Commission initiatives.
Pushbacks are realities both in Poland and Greece. Even more worryingly the upcoming emergency framework will likely allow temporary suspension of the right to asylum which is enshrined as we know in the Charter and other international human rights conventions. Could you please commit that this will not be the case? Thank you Commissioner.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much honorable member on the follow up to the recommendations as you have highlighted in 2026 47% of recommendations from the previous year's report have been fully or partially addressed and a further 23% where at least limited progress has been made. Of course we want those figures to be as high as possible and there remains an implementation gap as you call it in respect of certain recommendations and that's why it is necessary sometimes to restate those recommendations even if they have featured in previous iterations of the report. That said I think we should also acknowledge as you have done that we are seven years into the annual rule of law reports, five years into the recommendations.
Some of the easier recommendations to implement have already been implemented. Other recommendations take quite complex and deep structural reforms to fully implement. And the pace has varied in truth. We are also subject to electoral cycles of course within member states. There is the need for ongoing political and stakeholder consultation.
So some reforms will I think by their very nature take a number of years to fully implement. But we need to keep the pressure up and make sure that there's a continued focus on implementing these recommendations. When it comes to the question of timelines and so on, I would point to the context that we have set out in relation to the national governing regional partnership national regional partnership plans rather under the proposed next MFF where we are proposing that there would be a closer link between rule of law recommendations and indeed a respect for the charter on the one hand with access to EU funding on the other. In relation to media, can I just provide you with an assurance of our full determination to enforce the European Media Freedom Act? As I outlined in my opening remarks, we are in the enforcement phase at this stage.
I believe having a free, plural and independent media sector is a crucial foundation of our democracy. We do see it under pressure to varying degrees around the European Union and for different reasons, some of them commercial in nature too. And that's why a review of the AVMSD for example, of the law in relation to copyright, the new context of AI, all of these are very important issues that we need to consider. And in relation to civil society and the work of human rights institutions, as commissioner I will robustly defend the need for their voice to be heard as part of this process every year. I think it's crucially important that yes, of course we engage with the government, members of parliament, the public authorities, but we do need to hear also from voices from outside of the core political system in the member states.
And the Agora EU program that we have proposed in the MFF will I think be crucially important and hopefully we can preserve the ambition in the negotiations of the commission's proposal for Agora EU.
András László
Mr. Commissioner, you often use the words closely monitoring the situation, that the commission is closely monitoring the situation. Yet last time you surprised me because when I asked you about recent developments in Hungary, you seemed to be completely out of touch with the context. So I didn't get any answers to my questions. And these questions are very severe about the anti-democratic measures implemented by the Tisza government in Hungary. So if I'm not mistaken, you were TD in Ireland since 2007 to 2024.
That's 17 years. Imagine if the same rules applied in Ireland as in Hungary, your political career would have been terminated latest in 2019. And you would have only learned about it in the last mandate where you took your office because the ban on half of the Hungarian opposition was enacted retroactively. Do you think this is democratic? Because if I think about your situation, imagine if you would have ended your political career, I mean others would have ended your political career in 2019, you would have not become minister twice if I believe.
You would have not become commissioner. You wouldn't be here.
About 160 members of the European Parliament also wouldn't be here today. And in Hungary, as I said, half of the opposition members of parliament can no longer run because of a brand new law applied retroactively. The leader of the largest opposition party is banned from running and is banned from becoming prime minister ever again. And unlike the far left and many people in this house, I do not wish any kind of punishment from Brussels against my country. I don't want money suspended, in fact, I want the EU funds to be paid out to Hungary as soon as possible.
But I do have one question. With your silent support, do you understand the precedent you are setting for every new election from now on, not only in Hungary, but elsewhere in Europe? And we have elections coming up in France, in Italy, in Poland, in Spain. If this were to happen in any other country, would you also be silent? Thank you.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much, honorable member, and thank you for doing so much homework on my political career before becoming a European Commissioner. And I would point to the fact that there's a difference between not getting an answer and not getting an answer that you like. Your question was answered, and I'm happy to answer your question again this evening. And as you know, when it comes to electoral processes, when it comes to the rules at member state level concerning the conduct of elections, it is a national competence. The European Commission does not become involved in these matters in respect of different member states of the European Union.
In fact, I think you would be among the first people to call us out were we to do so. And of course, we have monitored, to use the word that you have highlighted again, and we have remained very much abreast of the 17th amendments to the fundamental law in Hungary. They are a matter for the national political system to determine and to decide upon. The question of term limits is not one that is unique to Hungary, but there are of course differences across the member states of the European Union in relation to what offices... If I may finish, there are of course differences in the nature of the offices in the political system of the member states that are subject to such term limits.
And I'm also aware that there is an upcoming opinion from the Venice Commission, which I understand will be brought forward and adopted in the coming weeks, perhaps in December. And of course, the European Commission will take the views of the Venice Commission into consideration in that regard. But it is the case that these are matters for decision at a national level in line with the allocation of competences between the European Commission and the member states. As you know, under the democracy shield, we do bring together all of the member state electoral authorities. We do encourage more coordination, support for each other.
We do provide central support as a European Commission, but all of it has to be done on an entirely voluntary basis by the member states because they will quite rightly assert their autonomy and their competence in relation to the conduct of elections in their jurisdiction.
Mariusz Kamiński
I will speak Polish. Szanowny panie komisarzu, sprawozdania na temat praworządności z punktu widzenia Komisji Europejskiej są dokumentem ważnym. Dają bowiem Komisji pretekst do recenzowania rządów krajowych, a nawet bezpośredniej ingerencji w politykę wewnętrzną państw członkowskich w tak istotnych sprawach jak funkcjonowanie wymiaru sprawiedliwości, przeciwdziałanie korupcji, przestrzeganie praw człowieka i wolność mediów.
Tradycja publikowania sprawozdań jest stosunkowo krótka. Rozpoczął ją sześć lat temu komisarz do spraw sprawiedliwości Didier Reynders, dziś oskarżony przez prokuraturę o udział w praniu brudnych pieniędzy, do czego miało dochodzić również w okresie pełnienia przez niego funkcji komisarza. To właśnie ten kompletnie niewiarygodny polityk za pomocą sprawozdań atakował rządy z różnych względów niewygodne dla Komisji. Sprawozdania na temat praworządności nigdy nie miały waloru obiektywizmu, zawsze były elementem gry politycznej. Tak jest i tym razem.
Przykład Polski pokazuje, że także tegoroczne sprawozdanie jest tak naprawdę dezinformacją. Panie komisarzu, demokracja w Polsce pogrążona jest w najgłębszym od upadku komunizmu kryzysie. Na waszych oczach powstaje autorytarny reżim. Rząd zawłaszcza kluczowe, konstytucyjnie od niego niezależne instytucje demokratycznego państwa. Trwa atak na Trybunał Konstytucyjny, Sąd Najwyższy, Narodowy Bank Polski.
Trwają represje wobec działaczy opozycji demokratycznej. Media publiczne są tubą propagandową partii rządzącej, a niezależni dziennikarze są publicznie znieważani i utrudnia im się wykonywanie zawodu. Tusk podjął próbę likwidacji Centralnego Biura Antykorupcyjnego, a śledztwa wobec jego skorum powanych współpracowników są masowo umarzane przez całkowicie podległą rządowi prokuraturę. O tych sprawach w sprawozdaniu nie przeczytamy nawet jednego zdania. Panie komisarzu, moje pytanie do pana brzmi: czy rząd Tuska ma przyzwolenie Komisji Europejskiej na systematyczne łamanie polskiej konstytucji, obowiązujących ustaw, praw człowieka, aby spacyfikować, zniszczyć demokratyczną prawicową opozycję w naszym kraju?
Michael McGrath
Thank you, honorable member, for those comments and questions. And as you well know, I cannot comment on any ongoing criminal investigation in any member state of the European Union, irrespective of the identity of the person who is the subject of that investigation. It's important that all investigations be allowed to take their course and that the authorities be given the space and that their independence would be fully respected in that regard. I would strongly defend the content of the rule of law reports because they do represent, and I've been involved very closely, obviously, as commissioner for the last two reports, they do involve a very serious consideration and evaluation of the facts and of the evidence as we find it and based on extensive consultations that we have as European Commission with a wide variety of voices. And very often the Commission will get conflicting information.
You could go from one meeting where you're told that the environment for civil society in a member state is free and open and fair, and then you could go to the next meeting and be told by many of the same civil society organizations that the environment is anything but as it has been described in the previous meeting. And that's the reality of what we face when we go about preparing the rule of law report every year. So we have to follow the evidence. We provide, as you know, detailed references in the notes to the report setting out the basis of the content of the report itself. And of course, it's there to be criticized.
So it should be no surprise to anyone that when the report is published there will be different views often based on where people are on the on the political spectrum. I think the rule of law report for for Poland speaks for itself. As you know we noted in the 2026 report that some further steps have been taken to advance on the implementation of the action plan on the rule of law and we go into all of the different issues that are relevant and yes we continue to monitor the situation and we have now begun the process of preparing the rule of law report for 2027 including in respect of Poland.
People will have different views. We hear different views when we prepare the report itself.
Javier Zarzalejos
Thank you Commissioner. Now for Renew I see that Mrs Wilmès is not in the room. So who will be taking the floor? Yes please.
Ana Vasconcelos
Ana Vasconcelos. Commissioner McGrath thank you thank you for this report and for your commitment to monitoring the rule of law. This work is of growing significance given the decreasing levels of institutional trust and growing threats to our democracies. We see progress and we must also be more demanding so this work leads to measurable results. First the report does not make clear how serious each threat to the rule of law is.
Slow court digitalisation although concerning should not receive the same treatment as political pressure on judges or the capture of political media. And some recommendations are dropped before the reforms are implemented. Citizens need reforms in practice and not in paper. Second Hungary. We recognise the effort underway.
Hungary is joining the European Public Prosecutor's Office and a new government has signalled change. We must we want that change to succeed. But your own report warns of a risk of political interference in prosecution service without a recommendation to match. And moving media recommendations to the European Media Freedom Act looks like improvement on paper but it isn't in practice. So we need clear benchmarks to recognise genuine progress.
Third funds. Your report states there is no automatic link between its recommendations and national and regional spending plans of the next budget. This is a missed opportunity. The report the report must say which reforms are essential and when persistent failure will put funding at risk. Citizens expect the highest standards in how their taxes are used.
Finally EU institutions. Parliament asked for a dedicated chapter and when the institutions open themselves to scrutiny trust in EU level grows. So I have three questions. Will the next report rank recommendations by gravity and flag those essential to EU funding? Will it include a chapter on the rule of law within EU institutions?
Michael McGrath
And will you publish the next report earlier as Parliament has requested so that it can shape budget decisions and Parliament's response in time? Thank you.
Javier Zarzalejos
Thank you Mrs Vasconcelos. Now Commissioner McGrath the floor is yours.
Michael McGrath
Yeah thank you very much honourable member for those comments and indeed the questions at the end as well. I would like to have the report in 2027 published earlier in line with the recommendations of this committee and we are working towards that goal. I need to make sure that all of the practical arrangements are in place to fulfil that and to ensure that we can achieve it. As I say the fact that we have started some weeks earlier now with the engagement with member states is a good start but we need to have a flight path as such through to the earlier date next year perhaps even in June which I would like to do if the in line with the wishes of the committee.
Can I say that in relation to the rule of law in the institutions themselves, it's a very important issue. We are subject to a lot of oversight, as should be the case given the very serious and trusted positions of authority that we hold. At the apex of that, of course, sits the Court of Justice and the interpretation and the enforcement of EU law. We have the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which as you know, we have been conducting an evaluation of, and I look forward to further engagement with this committee and Parliament on that issue. We have, as you know, the review of the anti-fraud architecture, including the work of OLAF, which performs a very important role in safeguarding the interests of the Union.
We have, of course, the Ombudsperson doing excellent work. We have the Court of Auditors. Many of you will have seen the recent annual report from the President, Tony Murphy, and his team at the Court of Auditors. So we will continue to be responsible and accountable to all of the bodies that have oversight over the work of the institutions and indeed all of us as individual office holders. In relation to the reforms that have a direct link to money, I think it's important to highlight that certain reforms are based on hard law where we have the power to actually take action and we have the option of infringement proceedings, there's the option of Article 7, we have the RRP at the moment, we have the conditionality regulation, we have the charter horizontal enabling condition, and we are trying to build that closer link in the next rule of law report.
Yes, there will be dialogue with Member States. The Council will have an important role, and I believe the voice of Parliament needs to be heard very much in these issues too. So it's yet to be finalized because it is based on negotiations with the co-legislators, Chair, but I know that the views of Parliament are very clear on this matter.
Javier Zarzalejos
Thank you, Commissioner. We expect that report early, earlier next year. Then Mr. Freund, Greens.
Daniel Freund
Thanks, Chair, and thanks, Commissioner, for for this presentation. I heard you in your introduction that dialogue is important, but then we need action. I couldn't agree more. I'd say that, for example, those recommendations that have been there since the inception of of recommendations in the rule of law report, now five years later, we we should take action if if there's still no movement. And I have to say as well, sorry, you you have mentioned, you know, the the figures, the way you see them and and the partial implementation.
You know, when I speak to some of those civil society groups that provide the input for your report, they tell me that some of the partial implementation is indeed very partial. You know, and I walk out of this room, I have done partial implementation of my goal to run a marathon. But, you know, we we need to get Member States, you know, because sometimes it is very partial. We need to get them to to comply with these recommendations. You've outlined the toolbox.
You've said everything that's at your disposal, but I also have to say, I mean, the number of infringement procedures has is historically low. You're doing less and less of those. Where you're still doing them and where Member States have been condemned for non-implementing EU law, particularly in in the area of of rule of law, you don't systematically follow that up with requests for for payment sanctions. And, you know, even there where we have in in those cases where we have those sanctions, sometimes now for years, you know, there is a Member State still paying a million euros a day. It doesn't seem to get them to implementation quite yet.
We have to do more. I think the time was not with the beginning of my speech. So why don't we push this more? This Parliament has requested twice that the conditionality be launched on Slovakia, for example, for dismantling the special prosecutor and anti-corruption, the National Crime Agency. EPPO has actually requested this as well.
Still today, there is no movement from the Commission. So we would really like to see some more of that action.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much, honorable member. And you know, as you know, when it comes to commenting or grading the progress or lack thereof in respect of the recommendations in the Rule of Law Report, we do break it down into five categories. And of course, there is an element of judgment involved here as to whether there has been, you know, some progress or significant progress. There will be different views on that, including among the stakeholders that we engage with in the preparation of the report. But I think it is important that we would provide a category for every recommendation as a follow-up.
Some of the recommendations are more in the territory of being based on hard law. Others are more in the form of European standards and best practice, where it is still open to us, of course, to take action where it has been established based on the Article 2 of the Treaty that these are indeed foundational and these are values that have been interpreted and supported fully by the Court of Justice. When it comes to taking next steps, I and my team in DG JUST have a particular role. We have an important role. We do work with other services, as you know, in relation to some of those different response tools that I outlined earlier on.
And in certain instances, our role is to feed in our analysis and our assessment of the situation. And then, of course, as a Commissioner, I am one of those around the table to make involved in making the very final decisions. But from my part, I can assure you of a full willingness and determination to use all the tools that we have at our disposal to ensure that the rule of law is upheld across the member states of the European Union. And in relation to Slovakia, perhaps we'll have time later to go into the different steps that we are taking, including infringement proceedings, as you know, to ensure that the rule of law is fully complied with.
Konstantinos Arvanitis
Ευχαριστώ. Κύριε Επίτροπε, σας ευχαριστούμε πάρα πολύ για την παρουσίαση. Και θα ήθελα να ευχηθώ και κάθε επιτυχία στον συνάδελφό μου, τον εισηγητή του ΕΛΚ, και να του δηλώσω ότι από τη δική μας την πλευρά, όπως έγινε και στην προηγούμενη έκθεση, θα έχει την πολύ σωστή συνεργασία για να έχουμε ένα καλό αποτέλεσμα. Κύριε McGrath, ήθελα να σας θέσω δύο τρία ζητήματα. Είπατε ότι σε γενικές γραμμές ότι στο 60% πήγαμε καλά, στο 40% δεν πήγαμε καλά.
Μπορείτε να μου πείτε πού δεν υπήρχε πρόοδος στα κράτη μέλη; Δηλαδή αυτό το 37% που είπατε που δεν έχει συμμορφωθεί προς τις συστάσεις, σε ποια θέματα δεν έχουν τα κράτη μέλη συμμορφωθεί; Σε κατηγορίες. Το δεύτερο, θα ήθελα να σημειώσω καταρχήν ότι η συμβολή μας είναι να βελτιώσουμε τη δημοκρατία στα κράτη μέλη και όχι να τιμωρήσουμε σε καμία περίπτωση. Θα ήθελα να μάθω, επειδή θα πάμε στην Ουγγαρία τη Δευτέρα, θα ήθελα να μάθω έχουν διαπιστωθεί στην Ουγγαρία κατά τη γνώμη σας σημαντικές αλλαγές σε ό,τι αφορά στο κράτος δικαίου;
Και θα ήθελα και μια γνώμη και για την Αλβανία που έχουμε ιδιαίτερες ταραχές και θέματα διαφθοράς σύμφωνα με τους πολίτες. Τέλος ήθελα να σας πω ότι ένα από τα μεγάλα θέματα που είχε η έκθεσή μας στο του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου ήταν τα συστήματα παρακολούθησης και οι παρακολουθήσεις συστημάτων μέσω Predator, Pegasus και Paragon, συγγνώμη. Από τότε από την έκθεση μέχρι σήμερα είχαμε ένα συμβάν πολύ σημαντικό. Το μέλος του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου ο κύριος Στέλιος Κούλογλου μέλος της επιτροπής PEGA αποκαλύφθηκε ότι παρακολουθούνταν από το Predator από αγνώστους. Σε αυτά τα ζητήματα επειδή είχαμε και άλλη ιστορία με τον κύριο Ανδρουλάκη συμπεριλαμβάνεται η παρούσα στάση προς τα κράτη μέλη για τον περιορισμό και την προστασία καταρχήν των ανθρώπων του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και ιδιαιτέρως της επιτροπής που είχε αναλάβει το θέμα των παρακολουθήσεων.
Σας ευχαριστώ πάρα πολύ.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much honorable member and thank you for your work as rapporteur of the committee on this file up to now and for all of your work in that regard. In relation to the points that you have made I would say that across the four pillars we see varying degrees of progress and where we see no progress we have indeed highlighted that in the relevant country chapter across the report. There are examples where we see no progress across all four pillars but equally there are examples where we have seen full implementation or at least some progress. So I think it would be unfair to just pick one area and say in the anti-corruption or in media that this is performing worse than the other. I think the report speaks for itself.
We see examples of good practice in each area but also we have had to call out a lack of progress completely in certain cases across member states. In relation to Hungary the new government has engaged as you know in intense reform efforts to remedy previously identified systemic breaches to the principles of the rule of law which we have discussed on many occasions and which have been well documented in previous reports from the Commission. And following continued dialogue with the Commission under the recovery and resilience plan and the general regime of conditionality several legislative reforms were already advanced and further constitutional amendments have been adopted regarding the justice system, the anti-corruption framework and institutional issues related to checks and balances. We will continue to monitor the situation in Hungary. As you know certain decisions have been made in relation to unblocking funding but other funding streams still remain blocked because of certain reforms that still need to be completed.
In relation to Albania as you know we have brought forward the pre-enlargement policy review and we look forward shortly to the enlargement report which will cover the candidate countries and that will set out the latest assessment. I was there recently only in the last couple of weeks had a good opportunity to meet with the Prime Minister with others in the political system and indeed outside of it to try and get a full understanding of the environment. We look forward to fully reflecting that in the context of the the enlargement report that is to come. And I know I'm over time chair but can I just reassure the honorable member and all colleagues of the Commission's position on spyware. Any attempts to illegally access the data of citizens including journalists and politicians including political opponents is completely unacceptable and the Commission has been working to address the illegal use of spyware from various angles of EU law and indeed that work is continuing.
It is a complex issue, but it must be addressed comprehensively, and that is the intention of the Commission. Some of the issues have already been addressed through legislation, but others are addressed through non-legislative tools. And I'm happy to follow up further, or indeed in writing if you wish, to set out what we are doing in that regard.
Javier Zarzalejos
Thank you, Commissioner. Now I give the floor to three members in the catch-the-eye. I will group the three interventions, and starting with Don Juan Ignacio Zoido, EPP. Floor is yours.
Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez
Gracias, presidente, y muchas gracias, señor comisario, por su comparecencia en el día de hoy aquí con nosotros. Hoy le voy a hablar como un magistrado de carrera que comenzó poco después de la transición española. La justicia y la independencia judicial jamás habían estado tan amenazadas en mi país en cincuenta años de democracia como ahora. Tras incontables atropellos, hemos llegado a un extremo de violencia sin precedentes. Este mes hemos conocido que el Partido Socialista contactó con un grupo de sicarios para eliminar a una jueza que investigaba la corrupción de la familia de Sánchez.
Le invito, señor comisario, a escuchar el relato de la jueza: cómo la perseguían por la calle, cómo hacían fotos a su domicilio o cómo trataron de secuestrar a sus hijas al salir del colegio. Jamás pensé que mi país llegaría a este punto, pero tristemente aquí nos encontramos. Y mi pregunta es: ¿está usted al corriente de ello? ¿Qué opinión le merecen a usted estas conductas? Creo que a Pedro Sánchez le queda poco.
En cincuenta días, Alberto Núñez Feijóo comenzará la reconstrucción nacional e institucional de España. Y espero que entonces los jueces y las instituciones españolas puedan contar de una vez con la Comisión Europea como aliado.
Elena Yoncheva
Yes, thank you for giving me the floor, and dear Commissioner McGrath, thank you for being with us today. And I have very concrete questions regarding police violence in Bulgaria. In its 2020 rule of law report on Bulgaria, the European Commission noted continued efforts to strengthen police integrity. However, recent reports raise serious doubt about the effectiveness of these measures. Citizens have reported severe police abuse, including beating, electric shocks, unlawful detention, and intimidation.
In some cases, Commissioner McGrath, courts have already ruled the detention as unlawful. And these allegations raise questions not only about the individual's misconduct, but also about institutional accountability. So responsibility for these actions lies both on police structures concerned and the current Minister of Interior, Mr. Ivan Demerdzhiev. So my question: how does the Commission explain these reports of police violence, and will the Commission assess whether the Bulgarian authorities ensure independent investigation and effective accountability, and whether these cases should be reflected in the future rule of law report?
Birgit Sippel
Oh, thank you, Chair.
I have two small points. The one is, Commissioner, you mentioned the CSO strategy, and my question is, what are your concrete ideas how this strategy in practice will support civil society organizations? And coming from my home region, I can tell you they are highly important but are under threat. So what precisely will it help? Just coming back to my colleague Zoido Álvarez, I think it's nearly ridiculous.
I'm sorry, I will start a Spain bingo to find out how often we can mention Spain in any debate. And I think so many dangerous things are happening in Europe, in the world, and to tell that one of our member states is the most awful ones that we have never seen, it's so ridiculous. I hope we can come back to more facts. Thank you.
Michael McGrath
Yes, thank you very much, honorable members, for raising those questions. In relation to Spain, I have to, of course, be particularly conscious that we are in an election period in Spain with the national parliamentary elections upcoming. And I also understand that all draft laws that were under parliamentary consideration automatically lapse once parliament is dissolved. Of course, election notwithstanding, we do continue to monitor the rule of law situation in every member state of the European Union. In relation to the 2026 report for Spain, as you know, it recommends to Spain to take forward the process of adapting the appointment procedure of the Council for the Judiciary's judges' members, taking into account European standards on councils for the judiciary.
So we remain available to support every member state in relation to the different reforms that have been recommended in the annual rule of law report. In relation to Bulgaria and the question of police violence, first of all, we have set out our overall assessment of the rule of law environment in Bulgaria in the rule of law report. It reflects developments, both positive and negative, in all member states over the past year. This year's report includes several positive developments in Bulgaria, such as the progress made with the inclusion of magistrates in the process for selection of the Inspector General and inspectors at the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council. Nonetheless, challenges remain, in particular regarding the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council and the extensive use of secondment of magistrates to higher positions.
Similarly, low progress was made on establishing a solid track record of prosecutions and final convictions in high-level corruption cases. Gaps remain also in the framework for integrity of top executive functions. I don't have any specific comment on the question that you raised concerning police violence, but I will ask my officials for their observations and their assessment of that because I'm not familiar with the detail in relation to that matter. Concerning the civil society strategy, as you know, we are now in the implementation phase of the civil society strategy, in particular the setting up of the stakeholder platform. It recognizes the important role that civil society organizations play in national and indeed local communities throughout the member states.
It highlights that access to sustainable, flexible and long-term funding is essential for civil society organizations to be able to carry out their work independently. The Commission is supporting civil society by ensuring access to funds, including through programs such as the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values. We also support national efforts to foster an enabling environment for donors, donations and philanthropy. And as you know, in the context of Agora EU, we have made what we think is warranted but an ambitious proposal for the CERV+ strand of Agora EU. So I would say dialogue and the open-door approach of the European Commission in relation to engagement with civil society is the most important thing that we can do, in addition to ensuring that in a very difficult funding environment that we continue to stand with them and we continue to support their efforts for open, pluralistic societies throughout the European Union.
Javier Zarzalejos
Now the last three speakers would be Mr. Ozdoba, Mrs. García Hermida-Van Der Walle and Mrs. Strik. Mr. Ozdoba.
Jacek Ozdoba
Thank you very much, I speak in Polish. Szanowny panie komisarzu, pragnę zwrócić uwagę na jedno słowo, to słowo to hipokryzja. I nie oczekuję żadnej reakcji wobec Polski, dlatego że do tej pory praktyka była taka, że państwo oceniali sytuację w Polsce, ale ona nie miała nic wspólnego z prawdą. I tak się składa, że zwracaliście państwo uwagę na ministra i prokuratora generalnego w jednej osobie. A tak się składa, że obecna koalicja rządowa dalej nie rozdzieliła tej funkcji, nawet nie trafiło to do Sejmu.
Nielegalne przejęcie mediów publicznych, prokuratura krajowa nielegalnie przejęta, siłowe przejmowane Trybunał Konstytucyjny, wszechobecna korupcja. Co więcej, nierespektowanie europejskiego nakazu aresztowania w pierwszym podejściu sąd nie chciał tego, znaczy większość sejmowa nie chciała tego zaakceptować, dlatego że po prostu istnieje doktryna, która mówi o tym, że rządzący mogą się chronić. A chciałbym panu zwrócić uwagę jeszcze na jeden fakt dotyczący sędziego sądu apelacyjnego, którego zachowanie wobec któregoś z prokuratora generalnego i ministra sprawiedliwości było skandaliczne. Po decyzji sądowej on na niego naciskał, atakował go i co więcej ta sprawa ma być wyjaśniona przez Krajową Radę Sądownictwa, a w skład której ma wejść również poseł większości rządzącej. To pokazuje hipokryzję i chciałbym na to zwrócić uwagę.
Dziękuję bardzo.
Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle
Thank you, Chair, thank you, Commissioner. I'm speaking on behalf of Mrs. Wilmès, who had to be in debate. The European Rule of Law cycle is something I initially championed out of personal conviction. In April, it became an official position of this Parliament. As early as 2025, in her State of the Union address, President von der Leyen called for an integrated cycle, a common rhythm, clear milestones and contributions from all institutions.
But positions and declarations are not enough. We need results. This year's report was published on the 17th of July, even later than last year, and here we are debating it in October, a missed political opportunity. We need actionable recommendations, better identification of systemic shortcomings and genuine inter-institutional follow-up. This report will inform the national plans under the next EU budget.
It must be ambitious. Citizens will judge us not on how well we coordinate, but on how effectively we protect their rights. Commissioner, my question is, what concrete commitments are you prepared to make to turn this cycle into reality, particularly regarding the timeline, recommendations and Parliament's role? Thank you.
Tineke Strik
Thank you, Chair, thank you, Commissioner, for your presentation. The chapter on Hungary was of course a bit difficult to get a clear overview because of the transitional stage it was in at that moment.
So I have a few questions about the state of play at the moment and how you look at it. You are very happy of course that recently Hungary repealed the homophobic and transphobic provisions of the Child Protection Act. This is an important step forward, but we also know that there are also still stigmatizing and discriminatory provisions in other domestic laws as well, in the constitution but also in other laws. Are you taking these also into account when you assess the compliance with the CJEU judgment of April and also the horizontal enabling condition related to the Fundamental Rights Charter? And also regarding Hungary, the government is at the moment also reviewing its asylum and border management and there is a proposal due to be presented the first of November.
I would like to know to what extent you are also engaged in the drafting of the proposals that will come on asylum and migration because also UNHCR and NGOs on the ground are not involved at all at the moment still. And this is just a week or so to go.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you, honorable members, for those questions. In relation to Poland, as I said earlier on, the report in 2026 acknowledged that some further steps have been taken on the action plan on the rule of law. The report notes in particular that attempts are being made to strengthen the role of judges in the election of the judges members of the National Council. Moreover, a revised draft of the law on addressing the situation of judges appointed at the behest of the National Council for the Judiciary in its post-2017 composition, I know is under discussion presently in parliament. Judges continue to be protected from unjustified disciplinary proceedings.
The European Commission will continue to monitor progress in the context of the annual rule of law report and if the honorable member wishes to write to me concerning the particular case that he has highlighted regarding an individual judge, I will certainly examine that and come back to him in writing. In relation to the timing of the report, which has been referenced a number of times this evening, I think it would be better if we could bring forward the report earlier so that it's not on the eve of the holiday period as such of the institutions. And I've indicated that I'm willing to work with the committee in that regard and to bring forward the report by a number of weeks if we can. And so we have already taken first steps in that regard and I look forward to working with the committee members here of LIBE and indeed the members of DRFMG so that we can continue to advance what I think is a shared agenda in that regard. In relation to Hungary, can I reaffirm the Commission's determination to continue to follow up on all outstanding judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
It remains the case, as colleagues will know, that notwithstanding the decision to unblock a significant amount of funding, further funding remains blocked for a number of reasons.
Around 800 million euro remains blocked due to the unfulfillment of thematic enabling conditions under the Common Provisions Regulation related to social inclusion, poverty reduction and Roma inclusion, for example. Funding also is suspended from the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund because of Hungary's non-fulfillment of horizontal enabling condition on the Charter related to human rights and asylum management. And so on that issue, I continue to engage with my colleagues across the services in the Commission. We are of course committed to working closely with the Hungarian authorities on migration matters. We're ready to support Hungary to make progress on the implementation of the Pact on Asylum and Migration, which is EU law and which should be fully complied with.
And as we all know, the Pact foresees a flexible solidarity mechanism with three possible measures of support: relocations, financial contributions and operational support. Member states have full discretion to choose from any of these solidarity measures, and this has indeed been conveyed by the Prime Minister recently. So we continue to follow up with services, but EU law and judgments of the Court of Justice must be complied with in full across the board.
Javier Zarzalejos
Thank you, Commissioner, thank you for your presentation and answering the questions of the members. As I'm sure you're aware, many relevant points have been raised by the members regarding the structure, the content and how to improve the report, and also a better and deeper involvement of the Parliament in this discussion. So I'm sure that we will have the opportunity to discuss that in the course of our deliberation on the report. And we hope to see these points, which are widely shared in the Parliament, to be taken on board by you in the next report. So thank you very much and good evening to you.
The next meeting of the committee will be held on the 4th and 5th of November. Okay.