This transcript was automatically generated and may contain errors.

Good afternoon everyone and welcome to the readout of today's college meeting as well as the press conference on the 2026 rule of law report,

and we have the pleasure of having with us today EVP Henna Virkkunen and Commissioner Michael McGrath.

Thank you very much and good afternoon everybody and welcome to our college readout.

This morning, the College adopted the rule of law report that Commissioner McGrath and I here are to present,

but earlier we also adopted the review of our emissions trading system and the electrification action plan that my colleagues Teresa Ribera,

Wopke Hoekstra, and Dan Jørgensen already presented to you.

Furthermore, the College adopted a report on the competitiveness of the EU's banking sector,

and Commissioner Albu Gerge will come to the press room later to give you the details.

We also decided to register two European citizens' initiatives on the topics of education and housing.

Let me recall that at this stage, the Commission has not analyzed the substance of these initiatives.

This registration means that the organizers can begin the 12 month period for collecting signatures now.

If they collect at least 1 million signatures from at least 7 Member States, the Commission will analyze it in detail.

The spokesperson Service is publishing a press release as we speak, where you can find further details on this.

So now on to the topic at hand, the 7th edition of the Rule of Law Report.

The rule of law lies at the heart of our Union.

The EU's prosperity,

security and democratic resilience depend on respect for the rule of law and the Union's common values.

In the world with rising political polarization, pressures on democratic institutions, on our economy and growing external threats,

defending the rule of law is more than ever essential.

Independent justice systems, effective anti-corruption frameworks, free and pluralistic media,

and strong checks and balances are key in this effort.

They protect citizens' rights and ensure trust in public institutions and democracy,

and provide the legal certainty that supports our investments, competitiveness and economic growth.

Like the previous editions,

this year's report is based on a very close partnership with the Member States and a strong engagement with civil society organizers.

Dialogue is at the core of this exercise. I will start with the positive news.

Overall, in the last year we saw the positive effects of the rule of law cycle and the intense dialogue with our Member States.

We continued progress in many Member States, with significant reforms completed or under way across all areas.

However, work must continue, the progress is uneven and reforms often slower than expected.

Before Michael will guide you in more detail through the report, let me highlight a few elements.

Media freedom is central to the rule of law.

It ensures accountability, allows free expression,

and their erosion often also signals broader democratic backsliding.

Thanks to the rule of law report, we see that many Member States are taking measures in this area,

making their media regulators more independent, make state advertising more transparent and protecting journalists.

But it is also a result of the European Media Freedom Act, which started to apply last August.

EMFFA includes specific provisions on the transparent and fair allocation of state advertising,

the transparency of media ownership and the independent functioning of public service media.

It also introduces measures to protect journalists' sources and confidential communications.

These obligations under the EFA replace now the recommendations of our rule of law report.

That is why we have adjusted our approach.

The rule of law report will, however, continue to monitor developments in these areas and consider their broader impact.

Looking ahead, the Commission intends to strengthen the media pillar of the rule of law report.

We will systematically monitor and report on how recent trends,

such as rapid digitalization and the rise of local news deserts, impacts media freedom and pluralism.

Another very important aspect was to strengthen the link between the rule of law and access to EU funds,

building on existing instruments.

This is precisely what we have done in our MFF proposal.

We have strengthened the links between the rule of law reports, recommendations and EU financial support.

The rule of law report will be an important element when assessing compliance of Member States with the rule of law and fundamental rights safeguards international and regional partnerships plans,

and we have also made the recommendations as targeted and operational as possible to help our Member States identify rule of law reforms and investments to fund via the national and regional plans. But let me be clear.

There will not be automaticy between the rule of law recommendation and access to EU funds.

This rule of law report was a joint effort, and I want to thank everybody involved.

The Commission will continue working with the European Parliament and Council to further improve the rule of law cycle,

strengthening dialogue and follow up so that recommendations lead to meaningful reforms.

Now I will pass the floor to Michael.

Good afternoon everyone, and thank you all so much for being here.

For 7 editions now, the Rule of Law report examines rule of law developments across all member states. Since 2022, the report also includes recommendations.

These serve as drivers of reform and lead to close cooperation between the Commission,

member states, and other EU institutions.

In 2024, 4 enlargement countries were included in the report.

Because as we know, the rule of law is fundamental to EU accession.

And in 2025, the single market dimension was enhanced because the rule of law ensures stability and certainty for businesses,

which is essential for Europe's competitiveness.

The rule of law report is an annual exercise, but one that is always evolving to reflect new priorities.

This year I visited Budapest following the elections,

where I saw with my own eyes what restoring the rule of law means to the people of Hungary.

They were convinced that the law cannot be a tool of but must be a check on power,

and like many things in life, we appreciate the rule of law most once it's gone.

And it was a cause of celebration in Hungary to be able to work to restore it.

So the rule of law may sound abstract at times, something that concerns only lawyers and courts,

but its presence and absence is really tangible for the citizens of the European Union.

It means that everyone is equally held to the same rules and standards that have been agreed democratically and that are upheld with transparency and accountability.

Corruption can be brought to light and punished, meaning public money serves citizens, not private interests,

and it means that journalists can speak truth to power and inform citizens, meaning that those in power are scrutinized.

The annual rule of law report is in a way for Europe what a regular health check is for people.

It helps prevent problems from emerging in the first place or from deepening. Prevention is better than cure.

The report is based on a solid,

transparent and objective methodology that ensures equal treatment of all member states.

It was developed over the years in cooperation with the member states and is published transparently on the commission's website.

Every year, the Commission carries out hundreds of meetings with national authorities, judicial institutions, civil society organizations,

and other stakeholders in each and every member state and in the 4 enlargement countries included in the report.

For example, this year, about 6 100 meetings were held with all of these stakeholders in the preparation of the report,

and I visited the 27 member states of the European Union and engaged on rule of law issues and appeared before many of the national parliaments to discuss the national rule of law situation.

And the report presents its findings across 4 key pillars covering justice systems,

anti-corruption frameworks, media pluralism and freedom, and other institutional checks and balances.

The report promotes an open dialogue with Member States.

It forms the basis of the rule of law dialogue in the General Affairs Council.

It informs debates in the European Parliament,

and it serves as a basis of transparency and accountability for our citizens.

This year's report confirms a broadly positive trajectory with some important reforms completed or in progress.

Nearly 1 in two of the recommendations made in 2025 have since been addressed by member states either fully or partially.

Of course, some recommendations might take longer to address.

Due to legislative or electoral cycles, and some of them are indeed complex.

So the picture remains uneven across the Member states and pillars with some challenges persisting in places.

But there are important positive examples from across our Union, just to cite a few.

In Bulgaria, a reform preventing political influence in the Supreme Judicial Council was adopted last year.

In Hungary, new laws increase transparency and create tools to fight corruption.

In Romania, a new law on lobbying obliges members of Parliament to register meetings on laws with third parties.

Free, open, and pluralistic media has also been strengthened more broadly, with many member states acting to ensure compliance with the European Media Freedom Act,

otherwise known as EMFA, and the EVP has also touched on this issue.

Some issues previously addressed through rule of law recommendations are now covered by the legally binding provisions of EMFA.

Our approach is therefore evolved, where EMFA now provides the framework, we will no longer have recommendations in the rule of law report,

but we will follow up on those issues through the enforcement of EMA.

I'm determined to make EMFA not just groundbreaking legislation.

But indeed to make it a reality on the ground,

and I'll continue working with member states and stakeholders to ensure its effective application because free and independent media are not a luxury of democracy,

they are one of its very foundations.

The results in this 7th edition of the Rule of Law report demonstrate the importance of Europe having an early warning system.

As a preventative tool, it leads to transparent dialogue and to consistent cooperation.

Looking ahead, President von der Leyen has long said that the rule of law is a must for EU funds.

This is why the Commission's proposal for the next EU long term budget, the Multiannual Financial Framework,

strengthens the link between the rule of law report's recommendations and EU financial support.

And to strengthen the rule of law further before the end of this year, the Commission will present a series of anti-corruption initiatives in the coming months, including a review of the EU's anti-fraud architecture,

and EU anti-corruption strategy, and the strengthening of the EPPO following its evaluation and the third report on the PIF Directive,

which is the directive on the protection of the Union's. Financial interests.

So to conclude, with our union facing growing political polarization, pressure on democratic institutions, economic uncertainty,

and increasing external threats, the rule of law is not simply a principle to defend. It is part of the solution.

And finally, can I just take the opportunity to thank all of the colleagues across the services in the Commission.

Who contributed to the completion of the rule of law report for 2026.

It was once again a great team effort, a huge undertaking.

It's always complex, never easy,

but we came up with a report that I think is fair and balanced for all of the member states and the four enlargement countries.

Thank you very much, and it's College Day, so we have with us our excellent team of interpreters.

Feel free to ask your questions in any of the EU official languages, and let us start. Roland, please. Good afternoon. Thank you very much, Ron Papit Nemtsova. I have questions regarding Hungary.

Now, one, the, the report says that, Hungary still lacks legislation on lobbying and revolving doors.

And this week, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Péter Szijjártó announced that he will join BOID, the Chinese car manufacturers.

So I was wondering, do you see this, well, new job of, of, of Mr. Sartor a problem?

For the EU, especially given the sensitive natures of the EU, China relations and all the sensitive information he had access to.

And the second is about the checks and balances.

So now there's a procedure to remove the president of Hungary, Schwok, from his office.

Do you think that would improve the rule of law situation, the checks and balances in Hungary or would make it worse if this process succeeds? Thank you.

So, if I start, and then, Michael will continue.

So overall, of course, we see that now in Hungary there is a big reforms, going on in,

in several fields, and many years we have made recommendations under our rule of law report.

And we see that many of them are now addressed through these reforms.

So the Commission will continue to closely monitor the situation in Hungary as regards these legislation and other issues in the overall context of Hungary's reform efforts now to restore the rule of law.

Yeah, thank you very much for, for those questions, and obviously we don't comment on any individual case,

but you quite rightly highlight a recommendation that we have in the Hungary chapter on the rule of law where it is recommended to Hungary to strengthen the integrity framework by adopting comprehensive legislative reforms on lobbying and revolving doors. We have, similar recommendations in respect.

Of other member states, so we continue to work with every member state to ensure that they do have an appropriate system in place in line with European standards,

and that shouldn't be interpreted as a comment on the specific case of which I don't have all the details,

but it is overall at the level of principle an important issue that should be addressed by member states across the European Union.

Of course, in Hungary more generally we see some very positive trends, and I was pleased to attend a joint hearing of the Canton Budge Committees earlier on this week with EVP Fito and Commissioner Serafín,

where we spoke about the possible release of funds, to Hungary in line with the achievement of different, milestones.

And the implementation of certain reforms and so I think in the early weeks of the new government's life a lot has been done already and we welcome the progress so far and we will continue to work with the new Hungarian government on the completion of the various reforms that have already been initiated.

In relation to the 17th amendments to the fundamental law which I understand are the legal basis of the questions you have raised concerning the president,

I understand that the Venice Commission.

Is due to report and will cover that issue as well,

so we continue to monitor all relevant developments in Hungary and take note of the current situation and as I said,

the Venice Commission will report on that matter shortly. Thank you, Maria.

Thank you for the floor, Maria Psara with EI newspaper Greece, a question for both Vice President and the Commissioner,

members of the Greek government accused the EPPO and its chief of indicting politicians,

some of whom are ultimately innocent.

Yesterday, the Greek Prime Minister himself accused the EPPO of engaging in intraparty competition.

Do you share this view by the Greek Prime Minister,

do you support the BPO's work and especially the Chief, Laura Kövesi?

Have you included this in your report that you are presenting today for Greece? Thank you.

Thank you very much for the question and of course I think Michael McGrath will continue,

but when it comes to EPPO, it's a, it's an independent authority and it's carrying out its own investigations.

Yes, indeed, we support the EPO in their work.

They perform very important work on behalf of the European Union.

They are completely independent in respect of their operations. They act in accordance with EU law.

We have an EPO regulation, as you know, as part of the broader anti-fraud architecture review.

We have conducted an evaluation of the EPPO that will lead to a proposed revision of the EPO regulation that will be later this year and I'm working closely with Commissioner Serafín in particular because of his work on.

Olof and we will before the end of this year present a package in terms of the review of the anti-fraud architecture,

but to be clear, we support the EPO in its work. The EPO is independent.

They're governed by EU law,

and it is a requirement across the European Union to cooperate and support the work of EPO. Magnus. Thank you, Paula Marques with your directive. Thank you for the presentation, Commissioners.

I stumbled on one thing in a footnote, and as you also mentioned,

Commissioner McGrath, 47%, 1 in 2 of recommendations have been followed up on.

That is, as far as I can tell,

the lowest share of recommendations that have been followed up on for the time that we've been running these reports.

Last year, it was 68%, the year before that was 65%.

It is for more than 20%, the, the, the rate of, of the recommendations that have been followed up on.

Is this report, this whole exercise, is it losing value?

Why, why, why do you think, Then the reform pace is slowing down as it is. Thank you.

I, I, I wouldn't say that somehow it's it's losing its its value.

This process is based on dialogue and I think, 47% of the recommendations is addressed in one year time, so I think it has been quite a speedy process because the recommendations we are speaking about,

of course this means, legislative actions often from the,

from the governmental side and of course the parliamentary procedures, they are also taking time.

And often the recommendations which the Member States haven't managed to address yet,

they are so complicated and maybe the decision making process is lengthy,

and maybe also the electoral period is not making it always possible.

So we have to always look also a little bit with the longer period, with 3 year period, for example, and we see that 60% of the recommendations have been addressed when we look,

few years forward, so often it takes more than 1 year,

but I think that it is a very positive element that about half of the recommendations have been addressed already in 1 year's time.

But of course we are doing our utmost to support our Member States to tackle these challenges that we see in the rule of law environment,

and we are supporting them also via dialogue and with other institutions.

Yeah, I fully agree with the EVP's comments on this issue.

I think we do have to take a longer view when we are measuring the progress overall and bear in mind that this is the 7th annual rule of law report,

so it stands to reason that some of the perhaps easier recommendations have been implemented in recent years.

So many of the recommendations are quite complex. They do involve legislative reform.

They can involve the need for significant consultation with stakeholders within a member state.

So to expect full completion within a 12 month period is not always possible or realistic,

and certainly electoral cycles can come into play.

You have new governments coming into office, or you may have caretaker governments in place for a period of time.

So I think we have to look at it.

In the round overall we see good practice.

We see good progress achieved, but there's more work to do,

and that's why we have provided recommendations for member states.

I always make the point when I engage directly with ministers and prime ministers.

That the rule of law report should be seen as an opportunity because of the extent of the expertise and experience available within the European Commission,

because we do have that EU-wide view and even beyond the EU on rule of law issues.

And we are there to support and assist member states on their journey,

and very many of them avail of that opportunity and see the report through that lens. So we welcome overall the excellent cooperation.

That we receive from the member states,

we see some very notable progress and we are there to support the member states in the achievement of further progress.

So overall I'm satisfied, but there will always be more work to do.

We will never be able to say that on rule of law issues,

given the four different pillars that our work is done, it will continue to be a journey. And yes, you please.

I don't have, I don't know your name. Yes, yes. Mr. I'm going to speak French.

If you don't mind, I'm just making sure that,

just a second, we're just putting our headphones on.

OK, so if you don't mind starting again, thank you. OK. It's OK, OK. Can I pose my question? Yes, please. OK, thank you.

We,

we have a few questions about That we've had in place since 1950 45. Thank you for your patience. OK. You can start again.

Thank you, I'll continue in French and in that case.

Since 1918 in Slovakia, we've been seeing that there's been confiscation of citizens' goods on an ethnic basis,

and this is based on a law from, a law from 1945. What we're talking about. Is a flagrant violation of legislation.

In its report, has the Commission referred to this situation?

Which you are aware of for some years now because there are a number of citizens concerned who have addressed their concerns to the Commission.

OK, I'm not sure whether we'll be able to answer that question immediately because that is quite a specific point that you're raising that. That isn't the case.

We'll come back to it because you know that we're going to be following this press conference with a technical briefing.

And that will give us an opportunity to address these more detailed and technical questions. Thank you.

So we'll do that and we'll come back to your question forthwith later on. Thank you.

Mr President, Bogio Romania, it is for the Commissioner.

Recently, the Romanian Judicial Council, or Superior Council of Magistracy, sent to the European Commission a blacklist,

let's call it a blacklist with journalists who were investigating how the judicial system repeatedly postponed the trials of some politicians,

big corruption trials, until the cases were closed.

The Romanian Judicial Council accuses that those journalists are involved in a public campaign for destroying the image of the Romanian justice system.

Could you tell me if this is a common practice in the in the European Union,

sending to the European Commission?

Blacklists with journalists, and a second one, if I may, where these signals, these journalistic investigations,

were taken into account by the European Commission in creating this annual report for Romania.

Because in the last year, somehow, after Laura Kodrutakievici came to EPO,

there were no big corruption convictions in Romania. Thank you.

Yeah, what I would say in response is that it's important in all member states that we have a free, independent,

and pluralist media sector and that they are allowed to go about their work and to carry out the important public service that they do.

And in that regard we have brought forward important EU laws to make sure that media freedom is supported.

The EVP and I have already addressed the European Media Freedom Act,

which largely came into application in August of last year and which we are now working with all of the member states to make sure that it is fully implemented in terms of all of its provisions.

The protection and the safety of journalists is an important issue.

And we expect all member states to take the necessary steps to ensure that journalists are safe and that their work and their working environment is protected.

In addition, we have, as you know, brought forward the anti-slaps directive which is being transposed.

The deadline is now passed,

and again we work with all of the member states to make sure that the anti-slaps directive is fully in application.

And beyond that,

we also encourage the member states to apply the provisions of the anti-slaps directive which relate to cross-border instances of strategic lawsuits against public participation.

To apply that to domestic slaps because we believe that where a cross-border slap is inherently wrong and that is the view of the co-legislators and the Commission because we have collectively brought about legislation in that area,

then a domestic slap is also wrong, but we do not have the competence legally.

Under EU law to insist on legislation in that area,

but we are encouraging through the Commission recommendation that domestic slaps would also be addressed.

And then of course on the funding side we have the Media resilience program,

which is providing important support to media organizations and is acting as a bridge to the Agora EU program,

which is currently under negotiation in the context of the MFF.

What I would say more Broadly is that it's important that all stakeholders within member states, from the member state authorities to the judiciary, to the media, to civil society,

all exercise due respect for each other and for the role and responsibility that each other plays in the conduct of democracy in the member states.

I think it's important that that due respect is exercised, and I say that without commenting on any particular case. Thank you. Yes, please.

Hi, this is Laura Ferrara for the Spanish news agency FA.

I see that the Spanish amnesty law is briefly mentioned in the Spanish country report a year ago, the Commission argued,

in front of the European Court of Justice that this law did not appear to pursue an objective of of general interest but rather was part of a political agreement to secure,

parliamentary majority after yesterday's ruling by the by the ECJ.

I was wondering if the Commission still stands by, this assessment. Thank you.

The Commission always respects and adheres to the rulings of the Court of Justice, as you know, and so we take careful note of all the judgments of the Court of Justice,

including in relation to the Spanish amnesty law, and we will examine this and the other judgments that were issued.

Yesterday by the Court of Justice, other requests for a preliminary ruling, I understand, are pending before the Court of Justice,

and it's now for the referring court to implement the ruling of the Court of Justice,

and we will continue to follow these developments very closely. Yes, Gabriele. Mr Gabriela Rosana Venire, Italian newspaper.

When it comes to media freedom, in your report on Italy, you refer to the reform of the Italian public broadcast,

RI, which you say is under discussion, and You will assess that at the end of the process.

At the same time, we hear stakeholders, most recently the EFJ this week, saying that there is excessive, perhaps even increasing,

political interference in the public broadcast, and we recently saw in Parliament the opposition withdrawing,

which was the first time all the components from. The Surveillance Board.

While you are assessing the reform, the reform has not yet approved, so I'm not asking about that,

but could you remind us what are the principles that a public broadcaster such as RAI should abide when it comes to the rule of law and media freedom standards at EU level? Yes, thank you very much.

So, many of the recommendations what we earlier had in our rule of law report about media freedom, they are not recommendations anymore,

they are now binding obligations under our Media Freedom Act, and this Media Freedom Act came into.

Force last August and now we have been supporting our member states to implement all the reforms that are needed to comply with this European Media Freedom Act and we see that most of the member states still have to implement.

Batch of reforms to be able to comply with this act and when it comes to public TV,

public broadcasters, of course, always the editorial independence of these bodies has to be safeguarded.

It's, it's like the main principle under our Media Freedom Act,

always we are speaking about editorial independence and also when we speak about public broadcasters.

Yeah, just, just to add to that in full support of what the EPP has said,

I mean the key provisions here are now represented by EU law and our focus as a Commission is on.

Ensuring the full implementation of the European Media Freedom Act in all respects and of course that includes ensuring the independence of public service media and also ensuring that there is an adequate level of funding for them to carry out their important work and those are among the key principles within EMA that we will be seeking to ensure is implemented in all of the member states. Right. And here please.

Thank you, Montoro Romero for the German outlet Netspolitik.

So in Germany, there is, currently plans from the government to change the Freedom of Information Act,

and there has been a lot of backlash with critics saying that this could,

that the changes could really, harm the access of information and the transparency.

Since I didn't see anything about these planned reforms in the reports, also on the specific one for Germany, I wanted to ask if this is because it has been a very recent development and if you're still going to assess it,

and then also if you already have a comment on these plans that you could offer at this time. Thank you.

Yes, of course, our rule of law report, it's, it's focusing the current situation in different Member States and if there are new plans coming up,

so we are not able to address them yet in this year's rule of law report, but of course we all the time keep monitoring the situation in different Member States.

In all these fields, what we are covering in the rule of law report,

and of course we are expecting that all the Member States are respecting the needs for transparency and access for information,

for example, when they are reforming the rules.

Yeah, our focus is on existing laws and policies rather than giving a running analysis or commentary on draft laws or proposals that are,

partially through the system.

And I would highlight that we did address within the rule of law report for Hungary for Germany,

apologies the question of the legal basis of right of access to information by the press and so we have a recommendation to Germany to advance with creating a legal basis for a right to information.

Of the press as regards federal authorities taking into account European standards on access to official documents and in relation to freedom of information more generally.

Once we have settled law, we will of course provide a Commission view as appropriate.

Let me give an opportunity also to the colleagues online where we have a few questions. Monika Varbanova. Hello. Thank you. This is Monica from Weekly Bulgaria.

Despite a good example of Commissioner Ma for our country, we see another very critical report,

and the Commission is observing lack of solid resources in anti-corruption.

Monica, I'm, I'm sorry to interrupt, but, the audio is very,

weak, so we have, difficulty in understanding your question.

Do you mind starting again and let's see if it improves. Yes, the Commission is serving according.

Monica, I'm afraid it's very difficult to understand, so we won't be able to take your question. I'm sorry for that.

Let's go back to the room where we still have a few questions.

I'm not sure we will be able to cover them all. Go ahead. Thank you very much, Luis Guillermo with context.

In the report you also emphasize, the link with competitiveness, the respectives for, for competitiveness, and I was wondering if you think, this will make of a stronger argument for member states to implement, your recommendations,

or is it like an admission, of the Commission in a way that, you know, the economic benefits,

are make for stronger arguments and just, the, the moral imperative if you want of just respecting the rule of law. Thank you.

Thank, thank you very much and this is certainly an element of what we've in last year,

first time addressing in our rule of law report and now we will continue also to look more at the single market aspect in our rule of law report because of course this is very important for,

for our, businesses, for the investments, for our industries that they can trust for.

For example,

the public procurement processes of the Member States and also they can trust to competition authorities their decisions and their independence in different Member states.

So we think that this is really creating a good atmosphere for investments and for businesses when everybody can trust also the legal system,

the justice system, and anti-corruption framework of.

Each Member State,

so this is certainly an important aspect for us because we think that this is also one of the great strengths of the European Union.

Now when we look globally also the developments that in Europe, the investors and businesses, they can trust to our systems,

that everything is not like changing day by day and everybody is treated equally in before flow.

Yeah, if I can briefly add, Paula, I think the issue of legal certainty and having a predictable environment is a crucial one for businesses, as we know, where disputes arise,

it's important to know that Irrespective of the jurisdiction that you're operating within or where you have come from,

that you will get a fair hearing, that you will be treated as equal in the eyes of the law.

It's important to have confidence in the public procurement system.

It's important that contracts are enforced throughout the European Union.

And also that property rights can be protected.

So when it comes to investment decisions,

we know that these are critical issues that investors and businesses, need to have confidence in.

And so I think last year the inclusion of the single market dimension was an important innovation.

We are seeking to build on that, and I think it is very consistent with the commission's overall focus on competitiveness and aspects relevant to the single market are now covered in all country chapters under all four pillars,

and I think that's something that is to be welcomed.

Particular attention was paid to ensure consistency and complementarity with other tools such as the European Semester,

the annual Single.

Market and competitiveness report and the Single Market scoreboard and more broadly,

what we are doing through our digital justice strategy and the judicial training strategy is to ensure that there is appropriate investment in digitalization and judicial training so that EU law is applied consistently on a horizontal basis throughout the 27 member states.

And again, that Serves to give confidence to businesses as well as citizens that if an issue arises and it goes before a national court,

those national courts are also EU courts and that they will interpret and apply EU law in a consistent fashion.

And so that is an important part of ensuring that the general public and businesses can have confidence in the justice system of every member state and that the quality is the same.

Thank you, and we have more questions than time, so we'll take the two final questions. Yes.

Madam President for the Blas Mokorcic with the Slovenian Press Agency.

I have a question for Commissioner on the new law in Slovenia about the corruption,

the fight against corruption.

I would like to know how you see these plans,

these changes that were presented by the Prime Minister one month ago in Slovenia?

Are they in line with EU law,

and also how do you comment on the decision of the government that it wants to fast track this legislation without public consultation?

Yes, the Commission has been following recent developments in Slovenia closely.

Measures that would lead to lowered anti-corruption standards or the weakening of the anti-corruption preventive framework should be avoided.

The EU has recently reinforced its legal framework, as you know,

in the fight against corruption with the recent adoption of the directive on combating corruption.

Which requires member states to ensure that they have bodies tasked with the prevention of corruption and with the repression and investigation of corruption.

Member states can decide to assign these with both preventive and repressive functions.

We note that the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption already has extensive powers both on prevention and can issue fines under its repressive function as well.

As referred to in the directive,

member states ensure that these bodies can operate without undue influence and have sufficient resources and the necessary powers to effectively fulfill their tasks.

It's essential that any new entity is also able to perform its preventive tasks under the necessary conditions of independence and with sufficient material and human resources. Can we take a final question, Gerardo. Thanks Paulo Ferrão for talking from Politico.

It's just a question to commissioner, but also to, executive, executive vice president.

The Commission, the commissioner was presenting what the rule of law report is now, which is, a check,

but I'm more interested in what it could be in the future with the rule of law conditionality in the proposal of the MFF.

Do you think that this document could actually be, a tool?

That will decide how EU funds will be dispersed, so basically gonna have a, a more central role in giving you funds,

not just in checking how things are going in, in the countries, it's, it's for both.

Gerardo, Commissioner, if you want to address yes, of course,

this is of course a very important priority for us because we have made it clear that respecting the rule of law it's a must for EU funds and of course now we have made these recommendations.

It is also very clear and operational also that Member States see clearly what kind of reforms we are expecting from them,

and we can also support these reforms via EU funds, also via national plans in the future,

that they can really focus, for example, if they have to, for example.

Digitalisis justice systems and that kind of investments if they are needed, they can also ask EU funds to be allocated to this, or they can include them to their national plans, so there is a very strong link that also with the funds,

we are also supporting the reforms of the Member States, but at the same time, of course, rule of law report is is one document,

what we are also looking when we look if the Member States are in line when it comes to overall rule of law environment.

Yeah, so the, the rule of law report will, will continue and it will be an annual exercise that, that we will ensure continues because I think it does,

it does add real value, to the efforts of member states to improve, the rule of law environment, in their country.

We made our proposal a year ago in relation to the MFF and giving effect to President von der Leyen's call for a closer link to be built between the rule of law report recommendations and rule of law generally and indeed the Charter of Fundamental Rights with access to EU funds.

That said, there is no automatic link that a particular recommendation in the annual rule of law report will now become.

And the basis of a condition for access to EU funds.

As you know,

we have laid out in the proposal under the MFF that there will be national and regional partnership plans.

Member states will be required to include in their plans, investments and reforms that protect and strengthen the rule of law.

There will be engagement with the European Commission, of course, in that respect, and there will be a role for the Council in that regard as well and once submitted then the national regional partnership plans,

including their related milestones and targets will be discussed between the member states and the Commission.

In addition,

compliance with the horizontal conditions on the rule of law and fundamental rights will also be a prerequisite for receiving support under the national and regional partnership plans.

Of course, the negotiation on the MFF continues.

We have now adopted the 2026 rule of law report.

The approach has evolved over the years and has evolved again this year.

Because we have in certain respects I think sharpened the language and we have prepared the ground for the next step which will be that closer link that we can give effect in the context of the MFF,

but it will be on the basis of cooperation and mutual respect and engagement with the member states to make sure that we adopt a fair,

balanced, and a proportionate approach to these issues.

A very special thanks and a word of appreciation, because this means also going into the details of all the Member States,

and we had very varied questions, so thank you EP and Commissioner McGrath, thank you for the various questions.

I know we could not address all of them, but But the good news is that we will follow up immediately with a technical briefing with our experts,

and we are confident that your further questions will be then addressed there.

Thank you, and we will resume immediately after this.