JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the fight against corruption
Date: 2023-05-03
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: EU Member State, EU institution, EU policy, EU restrictive measure, corruption, fight against crime, international sanctions, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION HIGH REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNION FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND SECURITY POLICY Brussels, 3.5.2023  JOIN(2023) 12 final  JOINT COMMUNICATION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the fight against corruption   
 
 
1.  

INTRODUCTION 

Corruption  is  highly  damaging  to  society,  to  our  democracies,  to  the  economy  and  to 
individuals. It undermines the institutions on which we depend, diluting their credibility as well 
as their ability to deliver public policies and quality public services. It acts as an enabler for 
organised  crime  and  hostile  foreign  interference.  Successfully  preventing  and  fighting 
corruption is essential both to safeguard EU values and the effectiveness of EU policies, and 
to maintain the rule of law and trust in those who govern and public institutions. 

Corruption  is  an  impediment  to  sustainable  economic  growth,  diverting  resources  from 
productive  outcomes,  undermining  the  efficiency  of  public  spending  and  deepening  social 
inequalities.  It  hampers  the  effective  and  smooth  functioning  of  the  single  market,  creates 
uncertainties in doing business and holds back investment. Corruption is by its nature difficult 
to  quantify,  but  even  conservative  estimates  suggest  that  it  costs  the  EU  economy  at  least 
EUR 120 billion per year1. The negative effects of corruption are felt worldwide, undercutting 
efforts to bring good governance and prosperity, and to meet the United Nations Sustainable 
Development Goals. 

Effective anti-corruption policies are an essential part of the enabling environment required for 
the rule of law, alongside on respect for judicial independence, free and pluralistic media, a 
transparent  and  high-quality  public  administration,  and  a  free  and  active  civil  society.  A 
constant  commitment  to  prevention,  maintaining  a  culture  of  integrity  and  the  active 
enforcement  of  anti-corruption  legislation,  including  effective  prosecution  of  corruption 
crimes, is needed to keep corruption in check. This approach is also reflected in EU external 
action  on  anti-corruption  underpinned  by  support  to  the  rule  of  law  and  public  financial 
management of partner countries. 

Global corruption indices put many EU Member States among the countries seen as the least 
corrupt in the world2. However, as also set out in the Rule of Law reports, there are many issues 
to  address  and  corruption  remains  a  concern  for  people  across  the  EU,  as  shown  by 
Eurobarometer data. In 2022, almost seven in ten Europeans (68%) believed that corruption 
was widespread in  their  country  and  only 31%  were of the opinion that their government’s 
efforts to combat corruption are effective. In addition, over half of the companies based in the 
EU (51%) think that it is unlikely that corrupt people or businesses in their country would be 
caught, or reported to the police or prosecutors3.  

In the 2022 State of the Union address, President von der Leyen set out the need for decisive 
action against corruption. The EU can play a major role: not only in the way it manages its own 
work,  but  also  through  ongoing  efforts  to  integrate  measures  to  prevent  corruption  into  the 
design of EU policies and programmes, and by actively supporting Member States’ work to 
put strong anti-corruption policies and legislation in place.  

Today the Commission has adopted two targeted proposals to strengthen EU law in this area. 
First,  the  Commission  is  proposing  a  directive  to  update  and  harmonise  EU rules  on  the 

1  This estimate is based on the work of specialised institutions and bodies, such as the International Chamber of 
Commerce, Transparency International, UN Global Compact, World Economic Forum, and Clean Business is 
Good Business, which suggest that the loss of economic wealth due to corruption amounts to 5 % of GDP at 
world  level.  Another  estimate  suggested  that  the  costs  of  corruption  were  between  EUR 179  billion  and 
EUR 990  billion  per  year  in  the  EU  (The  Cost  of  Non-Europe  in  the  Area  of  Corruption  study  by  RAND 
Europe, 2016). 

2  See for example 2022 Transparency International Global CPI: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022. 
3  Special Eurobarometer 523 on Corruption (2022) & Flash Eurobarometer 507 on Businesses’ attitudes towards 

corruption in the EU (2022). 

1 

  
 
 
 
 
                                                           
definitions of and penalties for corruption offences, to ensure high standards against the full 
range  of  corruption  offences,  to  better  prevent  corruption  and  to  improve  enforcement4. 
Second, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, with the 
Commission’s support, is proposing to complement the Common Foreign and Security Policy 
(CFSP sanctions) toolbox of restrictive measures (sanctions) with a dedicated CFSP sanctions 
regime to fight corruption when and where acts of corruption seriously affect or risk affecting 
the fundamental interests of the Union and the objectives of the CFSP as set out in Article 21 
of the Treaty on European Union5. The High Representative is therefore submitting a proposal 
for a Council Decision and, jointly with the Commission, a proposal for a Council Regulation 
for a thematic framework for CFSP sanctions targeting corruption, to complement our internal 
and external policy actions to fight corruption. 

The  Commission  will  step  up  its  action  and  the  anti-corruption proposals presented  today 
represent  a  milestone  in  the fight against corruption  at  national  and  EU level.  This 
Communication shows how these building blocks will accompany a broader effort to build a 
comprehensive and systematic strategic approach. This needs to bring together existing work 
and develop new directions and new tools at both EU and Member State level, also feeding 
into a clear commitment to tackling corruption at the global level. Success will depend on a 
joint and  continuous effort  at  EU,  national,  regional,  and  local  level,  involving  public 
authorities, civil society, and the private sector, as well as international organisations. This will 
not only make the public aware of the consequences of corruption, but it will also give citizens 
and businesses the confidence to challenge it. 

2.  

  WHAT IS CORRUPTION? 

Corruption is commonly referred to as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain6. While 
the nature and scope of corruption may differ from one country to another, no country can call 
itself  corruption-free.  As  a  global  problem  with  major  cross-border  implications,  it  is  the 
subject  of  a  dedicated  United  Nations  Convention,  the  United  Nations  Convention  against 
Corruption (UNCAC). The Convention is  the only  legally binding universal  anti-corruption 
instrument and offers definitions of different manifestations of corruption, embracing crimes 
from petty bribery to major political scandals. The EU, and all Member States, are parties to 
the Convention. Combating corruption has also been a major theme for the Council of Europe7, 
with  instruments  including  the  Council  of  Europe  Criminal  and  Civil  Law  Conventions  on 
Corruption.  In  addition,  the  Organisation  for  Economic  Cooperation  and  Development 
(OECD)  works  on  measures  to  prevent  corruption,  and  has  established  legally  binding 
provisions  to  criminalise  the  bribery  of  foreign  public  officials  in  international  business 
transactions8. 

4  Proposal for a Directive on combatting corruption  COM (2023) 234. 
5  Proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the Council for a 
Council Decision concerning restrictive measures against serious acts of corruption (HR(2023)108) and Joint 
Proposal for a Council Regulation on restrictive measures against serious acts of corruption (JOIN(2023)13). 

6  There is no single legal definition of corruption due to the various forms it can take. 
7  Criminal  Law  Convention on Corruption plus the  Additional Protocol to the Criminal Law Convention on 
Corruption (CETS 191), and a Civil Law Convention on Corruption (CETS 191). The work of the Council of 
Europe  also  includes  Twenty  Guiding  Principles  against  Corruption  (Resolution  (97)  24),  as  well  as 
Recommendations covering areas such as the responsibilities of public officials and party financing. 

8  The  1997  OECD  Convention  on  Combating  Bribery  of  Foreign  Public  Officials  in  International  Business 
Transactions.  The  work  on  prevention  includes  the  OECD  Principles  for  Transparency  and  Integrity  in 
Lobbying and the OECD Recommendation on Public Integrity. 

2 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
A  political  and  institutional  system  based  on  integrity,  transparency  and  accountability  in 
public life is the best guarantee against corruption. Public services are also more resilient to 
corruption  when  there  is  a  strong  public  service  culture  and  fair  remuneration.  All  public 
authorities need to guard against the risk of corruption. While corruption is first and foremost 
a crime, and specific acts of corruption are defined in national and international law, failings 
in integrity, conflicts of interest or serious breaches of ethical rules can also signal corruption 
risks. This is why effective anti-corruption approaches often build on measures to enhance 
transparency,  ethics  and  integrity,  as  well  as  regulating  areas  such  as  conflict  of  interest, 
lobbying  and  revolving  doors.  Public  bodies  should  seek  the  highest  standards  of  integrity, 
transparency and independence as an important part of tackling corruption more broadly. 

Corruption is integral to almost every organised crime activity, with 60 % of organised crime 
using corruption to infiltrate the public or private sectors9. The EU Security Union Strategy10 
and the 2021-2025 EU Strategy on organised crime11 recognised this connection and pointed 
to  the  particular  risk  of  corruption  in  specific  sectors,  including  healthcare,  transportation, 
construction, waste management, aerospace and defence, agriculture, food, labour, and social 
protection.  A  recent  report shows  that  corruption  is  the  main  enabler  to  infiltrate  ports  and 
logistics  chains,  with  criminal  networks  seeking  to  form  corruption  networks  in  multiple 
locations to facilitate crimes such as drugs trafficking12.      

In some of these sectors, corruption in the private sector is also an important risk and has been 
the  focus  of  action,  as  corrupt  private-to-private  transactions  affect  the  entire  supply  chain, 
distort  markets,  undermine  competition,  and  increase  costs  to  companies.  This  is  part  of  a 
substantial  body  of  regulation,  legal  compliance  and  due  diligence  programmes,  as  well  as 
softer tools, that aim at fostering a general culture of ethics and integrity in business, which 
contribute to the broader anti-corruption framework at EU as well as global level13. 

3. 

THE EU ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK 

The work of the EU in helping to prevent, detect and combat corruption at all levels can build 
on a strong basis of measures already in place. This should also serve as the basis for a process 
of developing a more comprehensive strategic approach, including new workstreams and new 
approaches to match the scale of the challenge and to keep up with evolving corruption risks. 
As  recognised  in  the  Rule  of  Law  reports,  a  strategic  anti-corruption  framework  offers  an 
important opportunity to translate political commitment and vision into concrete actions. Anti-
corruption  strategies  can  ensure  that  individual  legislative  or  institutional  loopholes  are  not 
addressed  in  isolation,  and  that  anti-corruption  provisions  are  mainstreamed  in  all  relevant 
policy sectors. This calls for an EU anti-corruption strategy. To be effective, this needs to be 
developed on a strong foundation of consensus and broad consultation, in particular with the 
European  Parliament  and  Member  States.  It  also  needs  to  be  accompanied  by  specific  and 
measurable objectives, clear-cut budget and staffing and well-defined responsibilities. 

Preparing such reforms can greatly benefit by expertise and experience-sharing at EU level. A 
first step in the process will be to set up an EU network against corruption. Since 2015, an 

9  See: https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/socta2021_1.pdf. 
10  COM(2020) 605 final. 
11  COM(2021) 170 final. 
12   Joint report of Europol and the Security Steering Committee of the ports of Antwerp, Hamburg/Bremerhaven 

and Rotterdam (2023) Criminal networks in EU ports, Risks and challenges for law enforcement. 

13  UNCAC covers corruption in both the private and the public sector. Additional international initiatives that 
provide business ethics guidance come from the World Economic Forum, the United Nations Global Compact, 
the Alliance for Integrity, Transparency International, the OECD and the G20.  

3 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
EU  anti-corruption  experience-sharing  programme  has  offered  anti-corruption  practitioners 
from  Member  States  a  forum  where  they  can  seek  inspiration  and  learn  from  legislative, 
institutional  and  policy  reforms  in  other  Member  States.  This  work  will  be  extended  and 
deepened through a network to act as a catalyst for corruption prevention efforts across the EU. 
It will be tasked to develop best practices and practical guidance in various areas of common 
interest. It will also support a more systematic gathering of data and evidence that can serve as 
a solid basis for anti-corruption actions and for monitoring the success of these actions. The 
network  will  build  on  experience  of  working  not  only  with  law  enforcement  and  public 
authorities,  and  bring together all relevant  stakeholders,  including practitioners, experts and 
researchers, as well as representatives of civil society and international organisations.  

3.1 

Addressing corruption as a crime 

While the EU has criminal legislation in place to fight corruption, it is fragmented, outdated 
and limited in scope. The main EU criminal anti-corruption legislation is the 1997 Convention 
on the fight against corruption involving officials14 and the 2003 Council Framework Decision 
on combating corruption in the private sector15, both of which pre-date the Treaty of Lisbon. 
They  have  been  complemented  by  more  recent  instruments,  such  as  the  Directive  on  the 
protection of the EU’s financial interests by means of criminal law16 (‘PIF Directive’), and the 
proposed Directive on asset recovery and confiscation17. 

The proposal for a Directive adopted in parallel to this Communication establishes rules on 
definitions  and  penalties  for  corruption  offences18.  It  extends  the  list  of  corruption 
offences  to  cover  misappropriation,  trading  in  influence,  abuse  of  functions,  as  well  as 
obstruction of justice and the illicit enrichment related to corruption offences, beyond the 
more classic bribery offences. It also sets out consistent penalty levels, as well as aggravating 
and mitigating circumstances. Aggravating circumstances could be applicable, for example, 
when the offender holds a high level public office or is responsible for law enforcement. 
Mitigating  circumstances  could  include  situations  where  the  offender  identifies  other 
offenders or assists in bringing them to justice. For the first time at EU level, the proposal 
brings together public and private sector corruption in one legal  act. It also sets out clear 
monitoring and reporting requirements to help enforcement. 

Action on corruption begins with prevention, and creating a culture of integrity, in which 
corruption is not tolerated. The proposed Directive requires Member States to take action 
such  as  information  and  awareness-raising  campaigns  as  well  as  research  and  education 
programmes,  and  to  encourage  civil  society  and  community-based  organisations  to 
participate in anti-corruption efforts. It also requires them to ensure that key preventive tools 
such as an open access to information of public interest, effective rules for the disclosure and 
management of conflicts of interests in the public sector, effective rules for the disclosure 
and  verification  of  assets  of  public  officials  and  effective  rules  regulating  the  interaction 
between the private and the public sector are in place. It provides a coherent set of rules to 

14  Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of 

Member States of the European Union. 

15  Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA of 22 July 2003 (OJ L 192, 31.7.2003, p. 54-56). 
16  Directive (EU) 2017/1 371 of 5 July 2017 on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means 

of criminal law. 

17  COM(2022) 245 final. 
18   The proposed Directive is based on Articles 82(1)(d), 83(1) and 83(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the 

EU. 

4 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
better tackle corruption in the EU and to improve coordination of actions at national and EU 
level. 

The proposal will also strengthen enforcement. The Rule of Law reports have shown that 
efficient criminal justice systems with the right tools to fight corruption are key to upholding 
high standards. The Directive will facilitate an effective fight against corruption across the 
EU, providing minimum rules to tackle the complex web of interrelated activities that feed 
on  corruption  in  today’s  societies.  It  will  address  key  factors  in  effective  anti-corruption 
work, including capacity, specialisation and access to the relevant investigative tools, as well 
as  obstacles  to  effective  investigation  and  prosecution  such  as  burdensome  and  opaque 
procedures for lifting immunities or excessively short limitation periods covering corruption 
offences. 

3.2   Mainstreaming anti-corruption into EU policy design 

The fight against corruption has a central place in the EU’s internal and external policies. In its 
work, the Commission has  always  sought  to provide for anti-corruption safeguards,  closing 
potential loopholes, ensuring that transparency and clarity reduce the space in which corruption 
can thrive, and that the institutions and bodies responsible for implementing EU policies at all 
levels adhere to high standards of independence and integrity. Coordination of key players in 
the EU also helps both to minimise the risk of corruption damaging EU policies, and to support 
action at national level and worldwide. Enforcement measures that ensure corruption comes to 
light and is punished are an effective deterrent. EU policies and programmes therefore include 
a wide range of measures not only to deter  and detect corruption, but also to strengthen the 
effectiveness  of  action to investigate  and sanction corruption when it occurs. The proposed 
Directive will further strengthen this framework.  

Building a culture of integrity and transparency  

A  political  and  institutional  system  based  on  integrity,  transparency  and  accountability  in 
public  life  is  the  best  guarantee  against  corruption.  This  is  why  effective  anti-corruption 
approaches often build on measures to enhance transparency, ethics and integrity, as well as 
regulating areas such as conflict of interest, lobbying and revolving doors. 

Experience, including from the Rule of Law reports, shows that at both national and EU level 
a strong response to corruption builds on systems to prevent and address conflicts of interests; 
establishing  transparency  and  lobby  registers;  and  setting  up  viable  mechanisms  for  the 
disclosure and verification of public officials’ assets and interests.  

Transparency  is  not  only  central  to  political  accountability  –  it  is  also  essential  in  building 
integrity.  A  system  based  on  transparent  decision-making  and  implementation  is  crucial  in 
closing off the opportunities for corruption. Digital transactions and the publication of financial 
and other data by public bodies also make corrupt exchanges more difficult. Strong and clear 
ethical frameworks, with the structures and institutions required to function well, are powerful 
tools. There is also an important international dimension: as part of the upcoming Defence of 
Democracy initiative19, the Commission will come forward with legislation on the transparency 
of the representation of foreign interests, to limit the risk of covert interference in democratic 
processes at EU and Member State level.  

Over the past decades, important integrity and anti-corruption standards have been developed 
in  these  areas.  The  functioning  of  key  institutions  and  the  development  of  strong  anti-

19   https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13744-Transparency-of-covert-

interference-by-third-countries_en.  

5 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
corruption and integrity frameworks has greatly benefited from the work of organisations like 
the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), and the Venice Commission of the Council 
of Europe, the OECD, and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). Building 
on these standards, integrity policies and policy reforms must however be tailored to the context 
if  they  are  to  be  successful.  Recommendations  in  the  Rule  of  Law  report  seek  to  support 
Member States in  enacting such  reforms and strengthen integrity  rules,  prevent  conflicts  of 
interests,  enhance  lobbying  transparency,  regulate  and  enforce  rules  on  ‘revolving  doors’ 
between public and private functions and have in place effective asset and interest disclosure 
systems.  

Preventive policies to address corruption risks 

Like all crime, corruption feeds on opportunity. EU policy design seeks to narrow the potential 
for corruption, by identifying risks and creating the necessary tools to address them.  One of 
the first tasks of the new EU network against corruption will be to map common high-risk 
areas by 2024. The Commission will lead this work in close consultation with Member States. 
It will form an important component in the development of future EU initiatives on fighting 
corruption.  

This will build on work already undertaken in areas of manifest risk. Public procurement — 
which represents 14 % of EU Member States’ GDP — has been a particular focus. A major 
reform in 201420 strengthened safeguards on conflict of interest, with mandatory exclusion of 
tenderers on grounds of past corruption. Full electronic procurement has been mandatory in the 
EU since 2018 and work continues to build a culture of transparency, with publication of all 
public  procurement  contracts  and  with  an  obligation  for  Member  States  to  report  cases  of 
corruption  linked  to  EU  procurement.  Open  competition  in  a  transparent  environment 
conducted by trained professionals is key to shutting down opportunities for corruption. 

Corruption thrives  where it cannot  be identified  or proven.  Corrupt  practices  are  frequently 
associated with tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance. Transparency rules in tax legislation 
help  detect  such  practices.  Updates  to  the  rules  on  administrative  cooperation  in  direct 
taxation21,  and  Value  Added  Tax22,  are  intended  to  step  up  the  exchange  of  information 
between Member States, which helps to identify corruption before formal criminal enquiries 
are launched. 

A particular problem in identifying corruption is when shell companies and other opaque and 
complex  corporate  vehicles23  are  used  to  conceal  transactions  and  the  identity  of  beneficial 
owners.  The  EU  Anti-money  Laundering  Directive  has  been  regularly  revised  and 

20  Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU of 26 February 2014 (‘the Concessions Directive’, the 

‘Classical Directive’, and the ‘Utilities Directive’). 

21  Directive 2011/16/EU on administrative cooperation (the ‘DAC’) and its amendment. A further proposal to 
amend the DAC (‘DAC8’ – COM (2022) 707) is currently ongoing. The proposal provides that tax information 
that is exchanged under the DAC between Member State tax authorities can also be used for other purposes, 
for example for anti-money laundering and anti-corruption purposes as well as purposes covered by an act 
based on Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. This will facilitate the cooperation between 
relevant authorities of Member States and a more effective fight against corruption.  

22   Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 of 7 October 2010 on administrative cooperation and combating fraud 
in the field of value added tax set up Eurofisc, a network of Member States to fight against cross border VAT 
fraud, able to request information from OLAF and Europol. Further improvements on the cooperation of tax 
authorities with EU institutions and bodies are envisaged as announced in the Action Plan for fair and simple 
taxation.  

23   On 22 December 2021, the Commission proposed a key initiative to fight against the misuse of shell entities 

for improper tax purposes, COM(2021) 565 final. 

6 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
strengthened24 to introduce mandatory registers of beneficial ownership of corporate and other 
legal entities25. These registers help uncover conflicts of interest, expose high-level corruption, 
and  support  investigations  into  illicit  flows  of  money.  The  Directive  also  has  an  important 
preventive  value,  as  it  requires  obliged  entities  from  the  private  sector  to  conduct  greater 
customer due diligence in cases where higher risks are identified, for example in relation to 
politically  exposed  persons26.  The  anti-money  laundering  package  proposal  of  July  2021 
further strengthens the EU framework to defend the integrity of its financial system and  the 
internal market27.  

Initiatives to combat specific risks of organised crime also help to limit the opportunities for 
corruption. An example is trafficking in cultural goods, where the December 2022 EU Action 
Plan against Trafficking in Cultural Goods28 provides a comprehensive framework for the EU 
and  the  Member  States  to  advance  prevention,  detection  and  criminal  justice  response  to 
cultural goods trafficking. 

Preventing corruption by design requires independence and impartiality in national bodies 
set up under EU law, whether national competition authorities, public procurement review 
bodies,  or  regulators.  This  brings  together  the  EU  and  national  levels  in  a  single  culture  of 
prevention  and  integrity.  For  example,  competition  legislation  sets  minimum  guarantees  of 
independence for national authorities enforcing EU competition rules29. These include rules on 
conflict of interest and protection against dismissal. Internal market legislation setting up rules 
for  national  regulatory  and  safety  authorities  in  areas  such  as  electronic  communications, 
media,  electricity,  gas,  food  and  feed,  the  single  European  railway  area  and  railway  safety 
requires Member States to guarantee that the bodies concerned are functionally independent 
and exercise their powers in an impartial and transparent way. 

Identifying and mapping areas of risk is key to effective anti-corruption action. Corruption 
activities are constantly evolving and adapting to new opportunities, and patterns differ across 
Member States. No sector or area of activity is safe from corruption risks, but common high-
risk areas deserve particular attention – usually those involving management of significant 
public funds or access to permits or to a critical service. Sectors such as healthcare, construction 
or  urban  planning  are  therefore  vulnerable,  and  sudden  increases  in  public  investment  can 
create new corruption-related risks. Areas with a risk of high criminality such as ports, which 
are pressure points for organised crime groups trafficking drugs, also need constant monitoring.   

24  Directive 2015/849 of 20 May 2015, amended by Directive 2018/843 of 30 May 2018. This is complemented 
by  Directive  2018/1673  of  23  October  2018  on  combating  money  laundering  by  criminal  law,  which 
harmonises  definitions  and  sanctions  of  money-laundering  criminal  offences,  including  corruption  as  a 
predicate offence.  

25   Collection of beneficial ownership data has also been made compulsory for control and audit purposes in a 
number of basic acts, such as the regulation setting up the Recovery and Resilience Facility or the Common 
Provision Regulation. This is also part of the proposal for the upcoming review of the Financial Regulation 
26   Under the anti-money laundering legislation, a 'politically exposed person’ (PEP) is an individual who is or 
has been entrusted with a prominent function. As PEPs hold positions that can be abused for the purpose of 
corruption/bribery and the laundering of the subsequent illicit funds, they are considered as posing a higher 
risk and shall therefore be subject to additional due diligence measures.   

27   The package consists of proposals for a new Anti-money Laundering Directive (COM(2021)423); for an Anti-
money Laundering Regulation (COM(2021)420); for a Regulation establishing an  Anti-money Laundering 
Authority (COM(2021)421) and for a recast of the 2015 Transfer of Funds Regulation (COM(2021)422). The 
package is currently under inter-institutional negotiations.  

28  COM (2022) 800 final. 
29   Directive (EU) 2019/1 of 11 December 2018 to empower the competition authorities of Member States to be 
more  effective  enforcers  and  to  ensure  the  proper  functioning  of  the  internal  market  (Article 4 
‘Independence’). 

7 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
Examples of how emerging areas for action can be tackled include  investor residence and 
citizenship schemes (‘golden visas’ and ‘golden passport’ schemes) which the Commission 
has  warned  can  be  used  to  hide  financial  crimes,  including  bribery  and  corruption30.  The 
Commission  considers  investor  citizenship  schemes,  under  which  citizenship  of  a  Member 
State, and thus Union citizenship, is systematically awarded in exchange for pre-determined 
payments or investments, and without a genuine link with the awarding Member State, to be in 
breach of EU law and has taken action against Member States maintaining such schemes31. 
Sport is another example of an area relatively recently identified as high risk, where organised 
crime groups seek profit through match fixing through corruption and extortion32.  

Detecting corruption 

While internal and external control mechanisms and authorities in the public sector – as well 
as active and resourceful law enforcement bodies – are best placed to detect signs of corrupt 
activities, society as a whole has a key role to play in bringing corruption to light. 

Many  prominent  recent  cases  have  been  revealed  thanks  to  people  speaking  up  when  they 
encounter  wrongdoing  in  the  context  of  their  work.  The  key  role  of  whistleblowers  in 
defending the public interest is recognised in the 2019 Whistleblower Protection Directive33. 
This Directive contributes to the fight against corruption in many key EU policy areas, such as 
public  procurement,  financial  services,  the  protection  of  the  EU’s  financial  interests, 
environmental  protection,  transport  safety,  public  health,  and  nuclear  safety.  It  establishes 
effective  standards  of  protection  against  retaliation  for  whistleblowers  unveiling  illegal 
activities. It requires Member States to set up clear internal and external reporting channels that 
can guarantee confidentiality for whistleblowers in both public and private sectors, as well as 
defined  feedback  and  follow-up.  Effective  implementation  of  the  Whistleblower  Protection 
Directive is a key step in building strong enforcement of anti-corruption rules. The proposed 
Directive  would  take  this  a  step  further  by  extending  the  protection  to  people  reporting 
corruption offences. This will encourage people to report corruption offences without fearing 
retaliation and improve the effectiveness of anti-corruption investigations.  

Journalists  play  a  particularly  important  part  in  uncovering  corruption.  However,  many 
journalists  and media  organisations  face  harassment  and other threats  when speaking up on 
issues of public interest and exposing corruption. The Commission recently proposed measures 
to improve their safety34 and better protect them from abusive litigation35. The 2022 proposal 
for  a  European  Media  Freedom  Act36  sets  out  important  provisions  to  strengthen  media 
independence.  Safeguards  against  political  interference  in  editorial  decisions  through 
independence requirements, adequate stable funding of public service media, and rules on the 
transparency of media ownership and the allocation of state advertising will allow media to 
better exercise their important societal role, including in maintaining oversight and exposing 

30  COM(2019) 12 final of 23 January 2019. 
31   In March 2022, in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Commission recommended that Member 
States immediately assess whether past naturalisations of Russian or Belarusian nationals, which were based 
on an investor citizenship scheme, should be withdrawn because the person concerned is subject to the Union 
restrictive  measures  or  because  it  significantly  supports  the  war  in  Ukraine.  The  Commission  also 
recommended  that  Member  States  take  immediate  action  to  address  the  risks  posed  by  investor  residence 
schemes (C(2022) 2028 final of 28 March 2022). 

32   In 2019, the Commission published a study on ‘Mapping of corruption in sport in the EU’, which set out the 

links between doping and match fixing and corruption. 

33  Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. 
34   C(2021) 6650, 16 September 2021. 
35   COM/2022/177 final and C/2022/2428 of 27 April 2022. 
36  COM(2022) 457 final. 

8 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
corruption. The proposal also sets out measures to protect the independence of editors and on 
disclosing conflicts of interest. 

The private sector is also an important partner in fighting corruption. In the financial sector, 
private entities have due diligence obligations which help to protect the EU financial system. 
They need support in their efforts to identify and report cases of laundering  the proceeds of 
corruption,  and  the  EU  anti-money  laundering  framework  seeks  to  enhance private  sector 
entities’ understanding of the risks and strengthen their detection and reporting capabilities. 
This  is  backed  up  with  information  from  Financial  Intelligence  Units  and  law  enforcement 
authorities on corruption typologies, trends and risk indicators. To foster a culture of integrity, 
the 2022 Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive37 sets out obligations for private sector 
entities within its scope to include in their management reports information related to business 
ethics and corporate culture, including anti-corruption. 

Cracking down on corruption 

Investigating,  prosecuting  and  sanctioning  corruption  is  largely  the  responsibility  of  law 
enforcement in Member States. Monitoring under the Rule of Law reports reveals challenges 
in  the  investigation,  prosecution  and  adjudication  of  corruption  cases,  and  the  proposed 
Directive on combatting corruption by criminal law addresses specific weaknesses. The fight 
against corruption needs independent  and efficient justice systems,  equipped with sufficient 
financial means, adequate human resources and the opportunity to make full use of digital tools, 
to effectively apply and enforce anti-corruption legislation, based on impartial investigations 
and  prosecutions.  Effective,  proportionate,  and  dissuasive  sanctions  for  corruption  and  due 
recovery and confiscation of the proceeds of these crimes support the credibility of justice and 
law enforcement and act as deterrents. 

Stepping up cooperation between EU and national levels can deliver a stronger response to 
corruption.  Harmonised  rules  on  offences  and  sanctions,  rules  on  judicial  cooperation  in 
criminal  matters  based  on  the  principle  of  mutual  recognition,  and  the  work  of  specialised 
agencies and bodies such as Eurojust, Europol, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and 
the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  (EPPO)  contribute  to  detecting,  investigating  and 
prosecuting corruption. 

The  Commission  has  taken  important  steps  to  equip  Member  States  with  better  tools  for 
depriving  criminals  of  illicitly  gained  wealth,  including  assets  obtained  from  corruption 
crimes38. The mutual recognition of freezing orders39 makes freezing and confiscating criminal 
assets  across  the  EU  quicker  and  simpler.  More  recently,  in  May  2022  the  Commission 
proposed a Directive on asset recovery and confiscation40 to ensure that profits stemming from 
criminal activity, including corruption, can be effectively traced, identified, frozen, managed 
and confiscated41. 

Other  EU  legislation  supporting  law  enforcement  against  corruption  includes  the  newly 
adopted e-evidence package, reflecting the increased use of electronic communication channels 
by  criminals  and  organised  crime  structures.  This  will  allow  national  authorities  to  request 

37   Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of 14 December 2022.  
38  COM(2021) 170 final. 
39  Regulation 2018/1805 of 14 November 2018 on the mutual recognition of freezing orders and confiscation 

orders. 

40  Proposal for a Directive on asset recovery and confiscation; COM(2022) 245 final. 
41  Together with the proposed Directive on the criminalisation of the violation of restrictive measures, the Asset 
Recovery  and  Confiscation  Directive  will  allow  for  the  confiscation  of  assets  of  individuals  and  entities 
circumventing EU restrictive measures imposed due to Russia’s war against Ukraine. 

9 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
electronic evidence for criminal cases directly from service providers in other Member States. 
Corruption is amongst the offences for which it will be possible to use European Production 
and  Preservation  Orders.  The  European  Arrest  Warrant42  already  allows  for  a  swift  cross-
border  surrender  procedure  between  judicial  authorities  of  Member  States  for  criminal 
prosecution or the execution of a custodial sentence, including in corruption cases. The work 
of law enforcement, in  particular Asset  Recovery Offices  and anti-corruption  authorities, is 
also facilitated by the possibility to access and use financial and bank account information43.  

The EU’s work to combat fraud supports anti-corruption efforts 
The EU and its Member States share responsibility for protecting the EU’s financial interests44. 
Very often action to combat fraud – where people try to secure illicit gains from the EU budget 
–  also  helps  action  against  corruption  –  where  public  power  is  being  misused  for  the  same 
purpose. 
The EU Financial Regulation45 includes general provisions on fraud prevention and detection, 
setting  out  rules  on  public  procurement  and  the  award  of  funding,  to  minimise  the  risks  of 
corruption affecting EU funds. This includes rules on the avoidance of conflict of interests46. 
The Commission’s current Anti-Fraud Strategy47 provides a framework for the coordinated 
application of the rules protecting the EU budget from fraud, corruption and other intentional 
irregularities. For the implementation of the EU budget, different tools are in place to ensure 
strict controls are carried out, adapted to whether financial programmes are implemented in 
direct management by the Commission, in indirect management, or in shared management with 
Member States. Tools such as the early detection and exclusion system (EDES) help to detect 
fraudulent or unreliable economic operators and disqualify them from obtaining EU funds. A 
recent proposal to revise the Financial Regulation48 would also improve the quality of data on 
the  recipients  of  EU  funding  (including  their  beneficial  owners),  including  through  the 
compulsory use of a single integrated IT system for data-mining and risk scoring provided by 
the Commission. The proposal would also extend the EDES to new areas of spending49. 

Rigorous ex-ante assessments help ensure that entities implementing EU funds have effective 
internal control systems in place to notably prevent fraud and corruption. Anti-fraud and anti-
corruption safeguards are key requirements of the control systems for EU funds at national 
level50,  and    Member  States  have  an  obligation  to  prevent,  detect,  correct  and  report  on 
irregularities, which may be linked to corruption. Audit bodies also have an important role to 
play in ensuring that effective systems are in place to detect and prevent corrupt practices. The 
European  Court  of  Auditors  and  the  Commission’s  Internal  Audit  Service  complement 

42  Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures 

between Member States (2002/584/JHA). 

43   Directive  (EU)  2019/1153  of  20  June  2019  laying  down  rules  facilitating  the  use  of  financial  and  other 

information for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of certain criminal offences. 

44   Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.  
45  Regulation 2018/1046. 
46   See also Commission Notice “Guidance on the avoidance and management of conflicts of interest under the 

Financial   Regulation” 2021/C 121/01, OJ C 121 of 9 April 2021.  

47   COM(2019) 196 final. As part of the internal control framework, the Commission has designed an Anti-Fraud 
Strategy at corporate level (CAFS) as well as tailored anti-fraud strategies in each of its departments, which 
applies to all management modes of the EU programmes and funds.   

48   COM(2022) 223 final. 
49   Notably  shared  management,  which  accounts  for  more  than  70%  of  the  EU  budget  and  the  Recovery  and 
Resilience Facility. The Commission has also set up a variety of tools to prevent, detect and investigate the 
possible misuse of EU funds, such as the risk-scoring tool Arachne or the Irregularity Management System.  

50   Regulation 2021/1060 and Regulation 2021/2116. 

10 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
Member State and programme-specific audits, and clawback mechanisms are applied to all EU 
funds affected by corruption.  

As well as preventing corruption in EU funds, the EU has also developed a strong institutional 
architecture  to  help  identify  and  prosecute  any  corruption  linked  to  the  EU  budget.  This 
includes OLAF, the EPPO, the coordinating role of Eurojust, and the analytical capacity of 
Europol,  all  in  close  cooperation  with  national  authorities.  The  EPPO  has  been  operational 
since June 202151, and is responsible for investigating, prosecuting and bringing to judgment 
the perpetrators of, and accomplices to, criminal offences affecting the EU’s financial interests, 
including  corruption  that  can  damage  the  EU  budget.  Within  this  scope,  it  undertakes 
investigations  and  exercises  the  functions  of  prosecutor  in  the  competent  courts  of  the 
participating Member States. 

The proper functioning of investigation and public prosecution services in tackling corruption 
is  key  to  ensuring  that  the  rule  of  law  is  upheld.  The  general  regime  of  conditionality52 
protects the EU budget from breaches of the principles of the rule of law that affect or seriously 
risk  affecting  the  budget.  This  includes  systemic  failures  by  Member  States  to  address 
corruption.  Under  this  Conditionality  Regulation,  the  Council  may,  on  a  proposal  of  the 
Commission, suspend commitments or payments or adopt other measures  if breaches of the 
principles of the rule of law in that Member State53 affect or seriously risk affecting the sound 
financial management of the EU budget or the protection of the EU’s financial interests in a 
sufficiently direct way. 

4.   SUPPORTING THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION IN MEMBER STATES 

Corruption comes in many forms and corruption patterns are different across Member States, 
at  national  and  local  level,  and  across  different  sectors.  And  while  certain  common  rules, 
standards and good practices are necessary to fight corruption, effective policy responses need 
to be adapted to specific challenges, risks and needs. The EU is therefore undertaking tailor-
made initiatives to support each Member State in its fight against corruption at national level. 

EU support for national anti-corruption reforms 

The EU is making its own contribution to the development and sharing of best practices through 
the annual Rule of Law report cycle. Since 2020, the Commission has been monitoring anti-
corruption developments at national level as one of the central aspects of the rule of law. Since 
2022, the reports also include recommendations for each country, aimed at supporting Member 
States  in  their  efforts  to  take  forward  ongoing  or  planned  reforms,  encouraging  positive 
developments, and helping to identify where improvements or follow-up to recent changes or 
reforms may be needed.  

The  country  assessments  in  the  annual  Rule  of  Law  reports  show  how  each  Member  State 
works  to  prevent  corruption,  adapting  laws  to  keep  pace  with  new  trends  and  drawing  on 
lessons  learned;  how  they  build  a  culture  to  combat  corruption;  and  efforts  to  improve 
enforcement.  Through  recommendations  and  the  follow-up  to  each  report,  the  Commission 

51   Council  Regulation  (EU)  2017/1939  of  12 October  2017  implementing  enhanced  cooperation  on  the 
establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. 22 Member States are currently part of the enhanced 
cooperation and participate in the EPPO. 

52  Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. 
53   Possible  breaches  of  principles  of  the  rule  of  law  under  the  regulation  include  situations  where  national 
authorities  investigating  and  prosecuting  corruption  do  not  function  properly,  where  national  measures  to 
prevent and sanction corruption are insufficient, or where there is lack of effective and timely cooperation with 
OLAF or with the EPPO. 

11 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
engages  at  technical  and  political  level  with  Member  States  to  offer  expertise,  help  them 
overcome the challenges identified and take forward the necessary reforms. The process also 
offers valuable common insights, highlighting specific themes which can be taken forward in 
the new network. 

The  fight  against  corruption,  together  with  the  independence  and  efficiency  of  the  justice 
system  and  the  quality  and  inclusiveness  of  the  law-making  process,  are  also  part  of  the 
European  Semester.  Given  their  economic  significance  and  direct  impact  on  the  business 
environment,  investment,  economic  growth  and  jobs,  the  assessments  in  the  European 
Semester reports include the challenges some Member States face from corruption. Specific 
examples have included more effective protection for whistleblowers, strengthening the anti-
corruption framework by setting up new independent control bodies, more stringent control 
procedures, systematic controls of asset declarations, creating independent avenues to pursue 
corruption cases, and stricter conflict of interest rules and their enforcement. 

Country-specific  recommendations  under  the  Semester  have  guided  concrete  reforms  and 
investments in several Member States to improve their capacity to fight corruption. These are 
reflected in concrete milestones in the national recovery and resilience plans. Specific reform 
commitments  taken  in  these  plans  by  several  Member  States  will  ensure  the  prevention, 
detection  and  correction  of  conflict  of  interests,  corruption  and  fraud  relating  to  the  use  of 
public funds.  

The Commission also makes use of sectoral programmes to support anti-corruption efforts in 
the  Member  States.  The  Technical  Support  Instrument  provides  tailor-made  technical 
expertise  to  help  Member  States  build  administrative  capacity  and  design  and  implement 
reforms,  many  of  which  have  focused  on  increasing  their  defences  against  corruption. 
Examples  of  reforms  supported  by  the  Technical  Support  Instrument  include  embedding 
transparency  and  accountability  in  national  structures,  technical  support  for  the  design  and 
implementation of ethical guidelines and anti-corruption and anti-fraud strategies, and support 
for transposing and implementing EU laws on anti-corruption.  

Under the Internal Security Fund, the EU also funds a range of anti-corruption actions. These 
aim mainly to reinforce coordination and cooperation between law enforcement authorities and 
between  other  national  authorities,  including  with  key  bodies  such  as  Europol  and  relevant 
international  organisations.  Examples  include  capacity  building  for  national  anti-corruption 
authorities as well as support for projects carried out by civil society organisations. The Union 
Anti-Fraud Programme offers support to Member States to counter fraud, corruption and any 
other illegal  activities affecting the Union’s  financial interests. Specifically, the programme 
helps national authorities strengthen their investigative capacity and includes a training section.  

Example:  The  ‘Speak  Up  Europe’  project  aims  to  empower  Europeans  to  speak  up  about 
misconduct in public, private and civil society organisations. It encourages safe channels for 
reporting corruption and provides technical, legal and advocacy assistance. The Commission 
also funds national projects. In Austria, this included a programme by the Federal Bureau of 
Anti-Corruption to spread awareness in both government and civil society. In Lithuania, the 
Special  Investigative  Service  was  supported  in  2021  to  launch  an  e-learning  platform  with 
professional  anti-corruption  education  training  material  for  civil  servants  and  for  others 
interested in creating an anti-corruption environment. 

Supporting judicial and law enforcement authorities 

Cooperation  between  law  enforcement  authorities  can  make  a  major  contribution  to 
investigating  and  prosecuting  corruption.  Eurojust  fosters  judicial  cooperation  between 

12 

  
 
 
 
 
Member  States  in  the  fight  against  corruption.  In  2021,  it  supported  Member  States  in  326 
corruption cases, set  up  11  joint  investigation  teams  and held 13  case-specific  coordination 
meetings. Anti-corruption policies are highlighted in the European Judicial Training Strategy 
for 2021-202454 for training justice professionals on EU law. The European Judicial Training 
Network organised several anti-corruption seminars in 2023. In its first 7 months of activities 
in 2021, the EPPO investigated 40 cases of corruption affecting the EU budget. In 2022, the 
number increased to 87. 

The connections between corruption and organised crime mean that Europol actively supports 
Member States in the fight against corruption by carrying out strategic analysis and providing 
support to criminal investigations and criminal intelligence operations. Europol has a European 
Financial and Economic Crime Centre to provide operational and analytical support to Europol 
partners  and  Member  States  when  investigating  financial  and  economic  crime,  including 
corruption, and when freezing and seizing criminal assets. 

Example: Europol’s European Financial and Economic Crime Centre supported the Spanish 
Civil Guard (Guardia Civil) and National Police (Policía Nacional)  to identify corruption 
amongst police and customs officers facilitating the trafficking of drugs into the EU. This 
corruption scheme aimed to facilitate the shipment of hundreds of millions of euros’ worth 
of cocaine and hashish into Western Europe. The Centre supported the investigation with 
actionable intelligence and analytical support, as well as direct operational support.  

5.  EU INSTITUTIONS AND THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION 

The credibility of the EU’s action to tackle corruption in EU policies, and to support the efforts 
of  Member  States,  rests  on  the  effectiveness  and  reputation  of  its  own  institutions,  bodies, 
offices and agencies. Since the 1990s, the EU has built up a set of rules and processes designed 
to minimise the risk of corruption by its own staff and at political level. It has sought to put in 
place a set of ethical, integrity and transparency rules helping to prevent corruption, as well as 
new bodies to pursue any cases. However, recent events have served as a reminder that the EU 
institutions are not immune to corruption and that this framework must not only be applied 
with  rigour  and  consistency,  but  also  be  continually  updated.  The  EU  institutions  and  the 
Member  States  should  be  held  to  the  same  standards,  drawing  on  the  same  commitment  to 
preventing corruption, a culture of integrity and enforcing demanding rules. 

Within the EU institutions, there is a zero-tolerance policy towards corruption. The foundation 
for preventing corruption is a strong ethical, integrity and transparency framework. The EU 
Staff  Regulations55  establish  the  individual  ethical  obligations  for  EU  staff  members.  They 
contain  specific  rules  for  areas  such  as  conflicts  of  interest,  favours  and  gifts,  honours  and 
decorations, outside activities and public office, activities of spouses, obligations after leaving 
the  service,  confidentiality,  reporting  of  possibly  illegal  activities,  whistleblowing  and 
disciplinary sanctions. Each EU institution, body, office and agency has a responsibility for 
applying  the  legal  framework  to  its  staff  and  ensuring  compliance.  This  includes  regular 
updates of internal rules, actions to raise awareness, providing advice to staff and sanctioning 
breaches of rules. Under the Staff Regulations, staff can face disciplinary sanctions for breaches 

54  COM(2020) 713 final. 
55   Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of 
the European Union (Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and 
the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European 
Atomic Energy Community).  

13 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
of rules and institutions, bodies, offices and agencies can decide to set up dedicated, specialised 
internal  services  for  investigation  and  disciplinary  matters56.  Obligations  under  the  Staff 
Regulations apply in addition to those under the EU Financial Regulation57.  

In order to allow for public scrutiny and give citizens and other interest groups the possibility 
to  track  lobbying  activities  at  EU  level,  in  2021,  the  European  Parliament,  Council  and 
Commission adopted a new joint framework for their cooperation on the transparency register58 
to further promote the ethical and transparent representation of interests at EU level59. It sets 
out a code of conduct with ethical rules and principles to be observed by registered interest 
representatives  and  is  supplemented  by  internal  transparency  measures  in  the  institutions 
concerning meetings and other interactions with lobbyists.  

As regards Members of the EU institutions, namely Members of the European Parliament, 
the President of the European Council, the European Commission, the Court of Justice of the 
EU,  the  European  Central  Bank  and  the  Court  of  Auditors,  the  Treaties  set  the  different 
frameworks  for  the  individual  ethical  obligations,  and  sanctions  in  case  of  breaches,  of  the 
Members of each institution.60 These are usually complemented by more detailed rules, notably 
rules of procedure or codes of conduct61, which vary between the different institutions. These 
ethical  frameworks  require  regular  updates  to  further  increase  transparency,  integrity  and 
accountability in the EU institutions. The Commission will therefore propose to establish an 
inter-institutional  ethics body that will set  strong common standards as  well as  measures  to 
reinforce transparency.  

A  core  task  of  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  (OLAF)  is  to  carry  out  administrative 
investigations into fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the EU’s financial 
interests. The EU institutions agreed in 1999 to extend OLAF’s mandate to cover all cases of 
serious  misconduct  committed  by  EU  staff  or  by  members  of  the  EU  institutions,  bodies, 
offices and agencies, regardless of any impact on the EU’s financial interests. This includes for 
instance serious matters relating to the discharge of professional duties or breaches of the code 
of  conduct.  Other  institutions  and  bodies  can  join  this  Agreement,  but  some  obstacles  are 
encountered in terms of the practical application as regards OLAF’s access to information or 
to  deal  with  cases  of 
premises  of  some 

its  general  powers 

institutions.  Within 

56  The Commission set up its Investigation and Disciplinary Office of the Commission (IDOC) in 2002 to enforce 
ethics  and  integrity  in  the  Commission.  It  investigates  facts  which  may  constitute  breaches  of  the  Staff 
Regulations,  and  carries  out  disciplinary  procedures  to  be adjudicated by  a  Disciplinary  Board  in  cases  of 
serious misconduct. Sanctions are set out in the Staff Regulations.  

57   See Section 3.2. 
58  Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European 

Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register. 

59  Under the Interinstitutional Agreement, the registration of interest representatives in the transparency register 
is a necessary precondition for carrying out certain types of interest representation activities. The Agreement 
also  sets  out  a  code  of  conduct  which  contains  the  ethical  rules  and  principles  to  be  observed  by  interest 
representatives that sign up to the transparency register. 

60   Article 223(2) TFEU; Article 15(5) and (6) TEU for the President of the European Council; Article 245 TFEU 
for the Members of the Commission; Article 6 of Protocol No. 3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the 
EU for the Members of  the  Court;  Article 11 of Protocol No. 4 on the Statute of the  European System of 
Central Banks and the European Central Bank; Article 286 TFEU for the Members of the Court of Auditors. 
61   As  for  Commissioners,  the  Code  of  Conduct  for  the  Members  of  the  Commission  (C(2018)700,  OJ  C  65, 
21.2.2018, p. 7) clarifies their obligations deriving from the Treaties, in particular as regards the principle of 
independence, possible conflicts of interests and their obligation to discharge their duties in the general interest 
of  the  Union.  An  Independent  Ethical  Committee  advises  the  Commission  on  the  compatibility  with  the 
Treaties of former Commissioners envisaged post-office activities and any ethical question related to the Code. 
According to Article 245 TFEU, if obligations are breached, the Court of Justice may, on application by the 
Council or the Commission, rule that the Member concerned be compulsorily retired or deprived of a pension 
or other benefits in its stead. 

14 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
maladministration  by  EU  institutions,  the  European  Ombudsman  also  has  an  important 
oversight role. 

National  courts  are  competent  to  deal  with  cases  related  to  criminal  offences,  including 
corruption and fraud, committed by staff or Members of the institutions. Such cases can be 
brought  to  court  either  by  national  prosecutors  or,  when  the  EU’s  financial  interests  are 
affected, by the EPPO. If Members or staff benefit from immunity in respect of acts performed 
in  an  official  capacity,  the  EU  institution  concerned  must  waive  this  immunity  when  such 
waiver is not contrary to the interests of the Union and its decision is subject to the control of 
the Court of Justice of the EU. 

6. 

BUILDING A COMMON CULTURE TO CHALLENGE CORRUPTION 

A  collective,  whole-of-society  culture  based  on  zero-tolerance  to  corruption  is  a  strong 
expression of the European commitment to rule of law and high standards of integrity in public 
life. Fostering these values is an essential complement to more immediate action on prevention, 
detection  and  prosecution.  Creating  such  a  culture  requires  action  on  many  fronts:  from 
building  ethics  and  integrity  into  the  expectations  of  individual  young  people  through  their 
education,  to  facilitating  exchanges  between  actors  at  national  and  European  levels  to 
strengthen understanding of the challenges and make them more determined to act. Close and 
regular  coordination  with  all  relevant  public  authorities,  multilateral  organisations,  civil 
society, media and the private sector are essential. 

Partnering  with  the  private  sector,  civil  society,  research  and  academia,  media  as  well  as 
citizens  can help  to  create a culture of integrity through  a  whole-of-society approach. The 
Commission  will  prioritise  awareness-raising  campaigns  and  civic  education  programmes, 
emphasising the crucial role that individuals play in supporting a culture of integrity, including 
through  exploring  how  those  following  such  programmes  could  act  as  ambassadors  for 
integrity as multipliers. The Commission will also map existing EU funding opportunities in 
the anti-corruption area to give them more visibility and coherence. 

The Erasmus+ programme includes anti-corruption themes in its work on education, training, 
youth  and  sport  in  Europe.  Anti-corruption  efforts  are  addressed  under  different  policy 
priorities, such as civic engagement and responsible citizenship. The EU supports for example 
the Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degree in Sports Ethics and Integrity at university level and 
Erasmus+  has  supported  innovative  approaches  to  anti-corruption  education  in  schools  in 
Hungary, Italy and Slovenia. The Framework Programmes for research and innovation are 
also supporting research and collecting evidence on new forms of corruption with a view to 
developing innovative solutions for the benefit of anti-corruption authorities and practitioners.  

Civil society has a key role to play, not only as watchdogs to identify potential risks or cases 
of  corruption,  but  also  as  catalysts  for  fostering  and  maintaining  an  anti-corruption  culture, 
through  awareness-raising,  educational  and  advocacy  work.  In  many  Member  States,  civil 
society organisations are important partners in the implementation of national anti-corruption 
strategies.  This  role  can  be  expanded.  An  example  is  the  ‘integrity  pacts’  that  have  been 
developed as a tool to prevent corruption in public procurement, based on a commitment of the 
contracting authority and bidders to comply with best practice and maximise transparency. This 
work is monitored by a third actor, usually a civil society organisation. Integrity pacts are being 
promoted  in  the  EU  financial  programmes  for  2021-2027  and  Member  States  are  being 
encouraged to gradually build integrity pacts into their programmes. 

A free and plural media and an environment in which journalists can work free of harassment 
or  intimidation  is  essential  for  ensuring  that  the  media  can  do  its  job  as  watchdog.  The 

15 

  
 
 
 
Commission supports actions that promote a free, diverse and pluralistic media environment. 
These include support for collaborative and cross-border journalism, monitoring risks to media 
pluralism, mapping violations of media freedom and defending journalists under threat. For 
example,  since  2021,  the  EU  has  funded  a  Europe-wide  rapid  response  mechanism  for 
violations  of  press  and  media  freedom  and  maintained  an  emergency  support  fund  for 
investigative journalists and media organisations. 

7.   ANTI-CORRUPTION IN EU EXTERNAL POLICIES 

Building anti-corruption actions into external policies is an important part of efforts to promote 
good governance and prosperity worldwide. A coherent approach between internal and external 
anti-corruption policies is important for the EU’s credibility. The EU promotes human rights, 
democratic governance, the rule of law and the fight against corruption policies as a priority in 
its external action62. The High Representative, supported by the Commission, is today putting 
forward  a  proposal  for  the  establishment  of  a  horizontal  CFSP  sanctions  framework.  More 
generally,  in  its  external  actions,  the  EU  supports  legal  and  policy  reforms  to  build  anti-
corruption institutions and oversight bodies,  and to strengthen civil society, whistleblowers, 
human  rights  defenders  and  independent  media  as  watchdogs  against  corruption.  Strong 
integrity  standards  in  the  EU’s  own  programmes  help  to  promote  high  standards  among 
partners. The fight against corruption is also part of the political and security dialogues with 
third countries and international organisations conducted by the High Representative on the 
Union’s  behalf.  The  EU  supports  international  cooperation  in  this  field,  working  with  like-
minded partners to raise standards63.  

Use of common foreign and security policy (CFSP) sanctions to target corruption 

Beyond  the  implementation  of  existing  international  anti-corruption  legal  instruments,  an 
important  debate  is  currently  ongoing  at  EU  level  on  the  use  of  CFSP  sanctions  to  tackle 
systematic or widespread corruption in non-EU countries when this corruption seriously affects 
or risks affecting the EU’s fundamental values and interests or when action is needed to achieve 
other  CSFP  objectives,  such  as  supporting  democracy  and  the  rule  of  law.  So  far,  a  CFSP 
sanctions regime has only been designed to enable the EU to target corruption outside of the 
EU  in  two  specified  third  countries64.  A  horizontal,  thematic  framework  (not  limited  to  a 
specific geographic context) addressing corruption would add an extra  dimension and more 
flexibility to the Union’s sanctions65 toolbox. The High Representative is therefore submitting 
a proposal for a Council Decision and, jointly with the Commission, a proposal for a Council 
Regulation for a thematic framework for CFSP sanctions targeting corruption, to complement 
our internal and external policy actions to fight corruption. 

62  Following from Article 21 of the Treaty on the European Union, respect for the rule of law and the universality 
and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms are founding values of the EU and fundamental 
principles guiding the EU’s action in its external relations. 

63  For example: OECD Network on Governance (GovNet) and Anti-Corruption Task Team (ACTT), Summit for 
Democracy Cohorts, IFIs and multilateral organizations, EU Member State and Team Europe initiatives. 
64   See  Council  Decision  (CFSP) 2021/1277  of  30 July  2021  concerning  restrictive  measures  in  view  of  the 
situation in Lebanon and Council Regulation (EU) 2021/1275 of 30 July 2021 concerning restrictive measures 
in view of the situation in Lebanon. See also Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/891 of 28 April 2023 concerning 
restrictive measures in view of actions destabilising the Republic of Moldova and Council Regulation (EU) 
2023/888 of 28 April 2023 concerning restrictive measures in view of actions destabilising the Republic of 
Moldova.  

65   The Union has adopted thematic restrictive  measures to tackle serious human rights violations and abuses, 
combat terrorism, the proliferation and use of chemical weapons, and cyber attacks threatening the Union or 
its Member States, see for example EU Sanctions Map available at https://www.sanctionsmap.eu . 

16 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
The  proposal  for  the  establishment  of  a  horizontal  CFSP  sanctions  framework  will 
complement and enhance the Union’s capacity to tackle serious acts of corruption, by giving 
it a tool to adopt restrictive measures when those acts seriously affect or risk affecting the 
fundamental interests of the Union and the objectives of the Common Foreign and Security 
Policy. Passive or active bribery of a public official or the embezzlement or misappropriation 
by a public official could constitute such serious acts of corruption, especially in a country 
that appears on the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes, or a country 
that suffers from strategic deficiencies in its national regimes on anti-money laundering and 
countering  terrorism  financing  that  pose  significant  threats  to  the  financial  system  of  the 
Union. 

Anti-corruption as a priority in the EU’s enlargement and neighbourhood policies 

In the enlargement process, alignment with existing EU law, adherence to the rule of law and 
anti-corruption reforms largely determine the pace of candidate countries’ progress  towards 
accession to the EU. These are also priorities of the Eastern Partnership, under which anti-
corruption strategies are supported to promote high standards of integrity and transparency in 
public  bodies,  and  to  strengthen  anti-corruption  agencies,  investigative  capacity,  justice 
reforms and civil society. 

Regular  monitoring  of  anti-corruption  and  related  reforms  under  the  annual  ‘Enlargement 
package’ includes a detailed assessment of the state of play in  each candidate and potential 
candidate country, including guidelines on future reform priorities. The Commission reviews 
the  legislative  and  institutional  framework  linked  to  both  prevention  and  repression,  with 
emphasis on the actual track record of proactive investigations, indictments and court rulings 
(particularly for high-level  corruption).  In 2022, the Commission also  rolled out  a round of 
peer  review  missions  focusing  on  the  fight  against  corruption,  organised  crime  and  money 
laundering.  The  latest  analytical  reports  on  Ukraine,  Moldova,  and  Georgia66  assess  their 
capacity to  assume the obligations of EU membership, and the fight  against  corruption  is  a 
priority of these reports. One important issue is ‘de-oligarchisation’, aiming to eliminate the 
excessive influence of vested interests in economic, political, and public life. 

Positive  steps  have  included  a  new  e-platform  for  the  systematic  collection  of  data  on 
organised crime and high-level corruption, which can be used to help assess the progress of 
each  partner  country  in  upholding  the  rule  of  law.  The  aim  of  the  platform  is  to  empower 
national  authorities  of  candidate  countries  and  potential  candidates  to  mainstream  data 
collection and enable the aggregation of data and identification of trends supported by the use 
of a dashboard based on Key Performance Indicators (KPI) identifying trends and anomalies67. 

Example:  The  EU  contributes  almost  EUR 6  million  to  a  project  implemented  by  the 
Organization  for  Security  and  Co-operation  in  Europe  to  monitor  serious  corruption  and 
organised  crime  trials,  identifying  systemic  issues  and  providing  recommendations  to 
strengthen rule of law in the Western Balkans.  

Promoting anti-corruption reforms in the EU’s external action and trade relations 

The 2020-2024 EU Action Plan on human rights and democracy has a strong focus on the 
rule of law and includes anti-corruption lines of action. Political, human rights and sectoral 
policy dialogues are among the tools used to implement these actions. This is reflected also in 

66  2 February 2023, Analytical reports on Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia (europa.eu). 
67  The dashboard will report on the Key Performance Indicators to allow comparisons between countries. The 
final version of the e-platform will be available to the Commission from June 2023.   

17 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
funding under the Global Europe/Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation 
Instrument (NDICI) programme. 

The EU promotes democratic governance and the rule of law through thematic, bilateral and 
regional programmes, and support for improved public finance management. Support focuses 
on public administration reform and sound public financial management, capacity-building for 
law enforcement and judicial authorities, establishing a robust legal  framework in  line with 
international standards, and establishing and strengthening specialised anti-corruption bodies, 
as  well  as  providing  support  to  civil  society,  the  media,  whistleblowers,  and  human  rights 
defenders. Broader support for the rule of law in key institutions and for improving the business 
and investment climate also benefits the anti-corruption framework. Policy dialogues play a 
key part, supported by the shaping of EU financial support. EU budget support is an important 
tool for improving transparency and accountability at country level with corruption being one 
of the risks analysed in the context of these funding operations68. 

Measures  are  under  way  to  strengthen  the  anti-corruption  dimension  in  all  development 
areas.  As  well  as  the  targeted  programmes  above,  this  includes  operational  guidelines  to 
provide in-depth  guidance to  EU Delegations working outside traditional  governance  areas, 
including sectors targeted by the EU’s Global Gateway Initiative. This rests on a broader Team 
Europe  approach  to  the  corruption  threat,  working  together  with  Member  States  and 
International  Financing  Institutions  (IFIs)  and  building  on  international  standards  and  best 
practice. A number of global thematic programmes also support anti-corruption and the rule of 
law. The Team Europe Democracy (TED) initiative – bringing together 14 Member States – 
includes support to rule of law with a focus on accountability. The EU also partners with civil 
society to prevent corruption and promote open government. 
A  recent  evaluation  of  EU  support  to  rule  of  law  and  anti-corruption  in  partner  countries69 
concluded  that  the  EU  has  been  less  visible  and  successful  in  fighting  corruption  than  in 
promoting the rule of law, and recommended that the EU assume global leadership in the fight 
against corruption. One of the benefits of a clear and robust EU anti-corruption framework, 
anchored in UNCAC, will be to serve as a benchmark in its partnerships with other countries 
outside the EU. 

EU  trade  policy  also  supports  the  fight  against  corruption.  Since  2015,  anti-corruption 
provisions are included into of the EU trade agreements with non-EU countries. Autonomous 
trade tools such as the EU General Scheme of Preferences (GSP) also include provisions aimed 
at addressing corruption. Under the GSP, additional market access (GSP+) can be provided to 
developing  countries  that  ratify  and  effectively  implement  key  international  agreements, 
including the UNCAC. The EU monitoring process under the GSP rules involves exchanges 
of information, dialogue and visits to the country as well as the publication of regular progress 
reports. 

Supporting anti-corruption work in multilateral fora 

The EU leads by example in the fight against corruption, promoting the values of respect for 
democracy, human rights and the rule of law by pushing forward the fight against corruption 
on  the  global  agenda.  To  assist  Member  States  and  amplify  the  EU’s  voice,  the  EU  will 

68    In  the  implementation  of  external  funds,  corruption  is  among  the  grounds  under  which  all  co-financing 

agreements signed with partner countries can be suspended or terminated. 

69  Evaluation of the European Union support to rule of law and anticorruption in partner countries (2010-2021) 

- Publications Office of the EU (europa.eu) 

18 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
intensify its efforts to facilitate and coordinate positions in multilateral fora, alongside its work 
as a party to UNCAC. 

The review process of the implementation of UNCAC by the EU is well under way, with the 
Commission coordinating. In December 2020, the Commission adopted a Communication 
on the review of the European Union under the Implementation Review Mechanism of 
the  UNCAC70  outlining  the  steps  for  cooperation  among  the  EU  institutions,  bodies  and 
agencies  participating  in  the  review  process  from  July  2021.  In  September  2022,  the  EU 
submitted and published its self-assessment for the first cycle of the review mechanism. The 
Commission is committed to promoting transparency and the involvement of civil society in 
the review process and will support the completion of the review under the first cycle by 
2024. 

Building on previous action in 2021 by the secretariats of GRECO, the OECD and the UNODC, 
the  EU  will  contribute  to  the  international  debate  on  how  to  best  improve  synergies  and 
streamline reviews of implementation of anti-corruption measures. The experience of the EU’s 
Rule  of  Law  report  cycle  and  the  ongoing  EU  review  under  UNCAC  will  help  to  ensure  a 
strong EU participation  at  the upcoming UNCAC  Conference of State Parties  in  December 
2023. 

The  EU  currently  has  an  observer  status  with  GRECO  and  this  offers  an  important  expert 
forum and a valuable complement to the work of the annual Rule of Law report cycle. GRECO 
has proved itself a highly valuable source of expertise and a driver of reform. The Commission 
will further step up its engagement with GRECO by establishing a more regular and formal 
dialogue,  including  by  inviting  GRECO  to  have  a  standing  involvement  in  the  network.  In 
parallel, the Commission will continue discussing with the other institutions the possibility of 
moving toward full participation of the EU in GRECO. 

8.   CONCLUSION: LOOKING FORWARD 

Integrity, transparency and the fight against corruption are clear political commitments of the 
Union. The current set of proposals will further strengthen the fight against corruption in the 
EU, raising the standards of EU law to ensure better prevention and fight against corruption as 
well  as  providing  for  an  international  sanctions  mechanism.  The  Commission  invites  the 
European Parliament and the Council to give swift consideration to the proposed Directive on 
combating corruption by criminal law. The Commission and the High Representative invite 
the Council to give swift consideration to the proposal to establish a new framework of CFSP 
sanctions targeting corruption. 

The proposals accompanying this Communication will complement the constant efforts made 
to deepen anti-corruption across a wide range of areas. These efforts include regular updates to 
the  framework  to  promote  integrity  and  guard  against  the  risks  of  corruption,  maintaining 
strong  anti-corruption  provisions  in  all  relevant  horizontal  and  sector-specific  legislation. 
Ensuring that corruption prevention is adequately mainstreamed into the design of new policies 
and  programmes,  and  the  evaluation  of  existing  ones,  will  continue  to  be  a  priority  for  the 
Commission. This will be informed by the new strand of work to map corruption-related risks 
in high-risk sectors.  

Corruption  cannot  be  fought  in  isolation.  Cooperation  and  exchange  of  experience,  and  a 
constant  dialogue  between  Member  States  and  the  EU  level  on  how  to  develop  and  apply 

70  COM(2020) 793 final. 

19 

  
 
 
 
                                                           
reforms and tools to prevent, detect and prosecute corruption, are key ingredients for making 
anti-corruption  efforts  a  success  on  the  ground.  By  establishing  the  EU  network  against 
corruption, the Commission will give new impetus to corruption prevention efforts across the 
EU.  

Fighting corruption benefits society as a whole, and individual citizens should be fully engaged 
in this work, alongside civil society organisations and the private sector. The Commission will 
prioritise  awareness-raising  campaigns  and  civic  education  programmes,  as  well  as  map 
existing EU funding opportunities for anti-corruption actions, with a view to provide more 
visibility and coherence and to improve their impact.  

Fighting corruption within the EU’s borders is important for the credibility of EU action in the 
international arena. As well as the extension of the sanctions regime, deepened engagement in 
multilateral  fora  such  as  UNCAC  and  GRECO  will  help  the  EU’s  contribution  in  building 
strong and coherent understanding of why effective integrity and anti-corruption policies are 
so central to security and prosperity worldwide. The EU will continue its work to fight against 
corruption and promote good governance and the rule of law as one of the major priorities of 
the enlargement process and the EU’s external relations more generally.  

The workstreams set out in this Communication represent a major EU commitment to further 
efforts to combat corruption and to work towards a comprehensive and strategic approach with 
an EU Anti-corruption Strategy. This will be an essential part of how the EU can ensure a 
democratic and prosperous future equal to EU citizens’ expectations.  

20