COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2025-07-08
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Denmark, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, freedom of the press, human rights, independence of the judiciary, pluralism in the media, rule of law, whistleblowing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 8.7.2025  SWD(2025) 904 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report              Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report                The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2025) 900 final} - {SWD(2025) 901 final} - {SWD(2025) 902 final} - {SWD(2025) 903 final} - {SWD(2025) 905 final} - {SWD(2025) 906 final} - {SWD(2025) 907 final} - {SWD(2025) 908 final} - {SWD(2025) 909 final} - {SWD(2025) 910 final} - {SWD(2025) 911 final} - {SWD(2025) 912 final} - {SWD(2025) 913 final} - {SWD(2025) 914 final} - {SWD(2025) 915 final} - {SWD(2025) 916 final} - {SWD(2025) 917 final} - {SWD(2025) 918 final} - {SWD(2025) 919 final} - {SWD(2025) 920 final} - {SWD(2025) 921 final} - {SWD(2025) 922 final} - {SWD(2025) 923 final} - {SWD(2025) 924 final} - {SWD(2025) 925 final} - {SWD(2025) 926 final} - {SWD(2025) 927 final} - {SWD(2025) 928 final} - {SWD(2025) 929 final} - {SWD(2025) 930 final} - {SWD(2025) 931 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

The level  of perceived judicial  independence in  Denmark  continues to  be very high  among 
both the general public and companies. Human and financial resources for the justice system 
are being progressively increased. Procedural rules aimed at improving the efficiency of the 
judiciary  are  being  implemented,  while  it  is  too  early  to  assess  their  impact.  An  inquiry 
committee  was  appointed  to  report  on  the  organisation,  structure  and  tasks  of  the  courts. 
Work on the review of the legal  aid  system,  started in  2020, will  re-commence, as  the pre-
legislative committee did not complete its work and a new body has been tasked to present 
results by 2026. The trend of increasing average case handling times continues. 

Denmark is perceived as one of the least corrupt countries in the world. The anti-corruption 
programme adopted in the framework of the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience 
Plan  remains  applicable  to  EU  funded  projects.  The  system  used  to  monitor  investigations 
and prosecutions of corruption offences allows regular reporting. The reform of the rules on 
private financing of political parties is pending in Parliament. There are no plans to introduce 
rules  on  revolving  doors  for  ministers  and  on  lobbying,  and  to  ensure  adequate  control  of 
asset  declarations  submitted  by  persons  entrusted  with  top  executive  functions,  or  to 
strengthen integrity rules in Parliament. The implementation of the rules on whistleblowing is 
considered to be on the right track by both the authorities and civil society. While there is no 
specific process to identify areas with high-risk of corruption, foreign bribery is a focus for 
the authorities.  

The  human  resources  of  the  Danish  Radio  and  Television  Board  and  the  Danish  Press 
Council  have  been  strengthened.  New  rules  were  adopted  to  strengthen  the  transparency 
regarding the appointment of the board of directors of Danmarks Radio (DR). Current rules 
on media liability and the existing media support mechanisms are being reviewed in light of 
technological  developments.  The  work  on  strengthening  the  right  of  access  to  information 
continues.  The  safety  of  journalists  remains  high  although  there  are  calls  for  more 
transparency in reporting incidents. 

The legislative process is inclusive overall and rules have been amended to give Parliament 
more  time  for  the  consideration  of  legislative  proposals.  The  Danish  Institute  for  Human 
Rights was reaccredited with ‘A’ Status. Civic space in Denmark continues to be open while 
some stakeholders call for a more transparent and foreseeable approach to funding for civil 
society. 

1 

 
 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall,  concerning  the  recommendations  in  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Denmark  has 
made: 

•  Limited  progress  on  completing  the  review  of  the  legal  aid  system,  taking  into  account 

European standards on legal aid. 

•  No progress on introducing rules on ‘revolving doors’ for ministers and on lobbying and 
ensure  adequate  control  of  asset  declarations  submitted  by  persons  entrusted  with  top 
executive functions.  

•  Some  further  progress  on  advancing  with  the  process  to  reform  the  Access  to  Public 
Administrative  Documents  Act  in  order  to  strengthen  the  right  to  access  documents,  in 
particular by limiting the grounds for rejection of disclosure requests, taking into account 
the European standards on access to official documents. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, 
it is recommended to Denmark to: 

•  Step  up  efforts  to  complete  the  review  of  the  legal  aid  system,  taking  into  account 

• 

European standards on legal aid.  
Introduce rules on ‘revolving  doors’ for ministers and on lobbying and ensure adequate 
control of asset declarations submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions. 
•  Continue  to  advance  with  the  process  to  reform  the  Access  to  Public  Administrative 
Documents  Act  in  order  to  strengthen  the  right  to  access  documents,  in  particular  by 
limiting the grounds for rejection of disclosure requests, taking into account the European 
standards on access to official documents. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  in  Denmark  continues  to  be  very  high 
among both the general public and companies. Overall, 81% of the general population and 
82% of companies perceived the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or 
very good’ in 20252. The level of perceived judicial independence among the general public 
has  slightly  decreased  in  comparison  with  2024  (83%)  although  it  has  increased  in 
comparison  with  2021  (75%).  The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  among 
companies  has  decreased  in  comparison  with  2024  (88%)  and  has  slightly  decreased  in 
comparison with 2021 (83%).  

Quality  

Human and financial resources for the justice system are being progressively increased. 
The  multi-year  financial  agreement  for  2024-2027,  providing  a  total  of  some  EUR 
308 million  (DKK  2.3  billion)  additional  funds  over  that  period  compared  to  the  2023 
financing  levels,  is  designed  both  to  ensure  the  current  level  of  activity,  and  to  implement 
initiatives  specified  in  the  agreement3.  Under  the  agreement,  12  additional  district  court 
judges and a large number of assistant judges and clerical staff have been recruited in 20244. 
These  efforts  will  continue  in  2025,  when  a  total  of  nine  new  judges  will  be  appointed,  as 
well  as  additional  assistant  judges  and  clerical  staff  to  strengthen  case  processing  at  the 
courts5.  Stakeholders  were  overall  positive  about  the  increase  in  resources  for  the  judiciary 
but noted that it was too early to assess any impact on the case-handling times6. 

The  procedural  rules  aimed  to  improve  the  efficiency  of  the  judiciary  are  being 
implemented, but stakeholders agreed that it was too early to assess their impact. On 15 
June  2024,  more  than  100  amendments  to  the  Administration  of  Justice  Act,  the  Criminal 
Code and the Execution of Sentences Act entered into force. These amendments are linked to 
the multi-year financial  agreement  for the judiciary and originate from the proposals  of the 
expert committee chaired by a former Supreme Court President  and the Judicial Council in 
20237.  The  amendments  aim  to  reduce  case  processing  times,  for  example  by  a  transfer  of 
criminal  cases  between  courts  based  on  agreements  between  district  court  presidents.  In 
October  2024,  the  court  presidents  of  four  district  courts  agreed  to  the  transfer  of  400 
criminal  cases between their courts,  with  the aim of reducing  backlogs.  While stakeholders 
agreed that it was too early to assess the impact of the overall reform8, they expressed some 

1  An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be found here.  
2   Figures 50 and 52, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard and Figures 49 and 51, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. The 
level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  is  categorised  as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents 
perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-
59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3   Some 43% for ongoing work, the rest for initiatives defined in the agreement.  
4   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration. 
5   Danish Court Administration (2025b), Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration.  
6   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration, Judges Association, Bar Association, Justitia.  
7   The  amendments  concern  a  wide  range  of  procedural  aspects  touching  upon  lay  judges’  involvement  in 
criminal cases, judgements in absentia in criminal cases, conditions for appeals in civil cases, thresholds for 
appeals, small claims cases and other issues. Danish Court Administration (2024a).  

8   Country visit Denmark, Bar Association, Judges Association, Danish Court Administration, Justitia. 

3 

 
 
 
concerns as regards the decision on the transfer of cases without the consent of the parties9. 
While parties must be given the opportunity to comment on such transfers, stakeholders deem 
that  the  lack  of  explicit  consent  could  give  rise  to  some  concern  for  individuals  tried  in 
criminal cases10.  

An inquiry committee was appointed to report on the organisation, structure and tasks 
of the courts. In March 2025, an inquiry committee was appointed to address the structural 
conditions of courts. This is a follow-up to the multi-year agreement on the financing of the 
judiciary for the period 2024-2027. The committee is tasked with examining the structure and 
organisation  of  the  courts,  their  specialisation  as  well  as  the  courts’  buildings  portfolio. 
According to the committee’s mandate, any reorganisation and structural changes should take 
into account the need to ensure user focus, accessibility throughout the country, short case-
handling  times,  uniformity  and  efficient  and  high-quality  solutions.  The  committee  is 
expected to report by the end of 202611. 

There was limited progress on completing the review of the legal aid system, as the pre-
legislative committee appointed in 2020 did not complete its work and a new body  has 
been  tasked  to  present  results  by  202612.  In  December  2024,  the  Ministry  of  Justice 
requested the Judicial Council, a permanent advisory body on civil justice, to review the legal 
aid system in Denmark. While a a pre-legislative committee had already been set up for the 
same purpose in 202013, according to the Government, it proved difficult for progress under 
the initial set-up. A similar mandate was given to the Judicial Council14. The Judicial Council 
is expected to present its results by summer 202615. As the review of the legal aid system has 
been re-initiated, there was limited progress on the recommendation to complete the review 
of the legal aid system. 

9   Country visit Denmark, Bar Association, Justitia. 
10   The  applicable  rules  provide  that  if  the  total  number  of  cases  pending  before  a  district  court  and  the 
processing times at the district court so warrant, the court may, at the request of a party, on its own initiative 
and in agreement with the president of the district court concerned or the president of the High Court, refer 
a criminal case to another district court in the jury district or, if circumstances so warrant, to another district 
court in the High Court district  if a decision at  this court can be  expected significantly faster. Before the 
court  decides  on  the  referral,  the  parties  must  be  given  the  opportunity  to  comment  on  the  matter. 
According to the Danish authorities, a transfer against the defendant's wishes should not be made if it would 
have significant negative effects on the defendant's defense. A decision to transfer the case can be appealed 
to  the  Supreme  Court  by  the  defendant  and  the  Prosecution  Service.  Danish  Government  (2025),  written 
contribution. Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration. 

11   Danish Court Administration (2025c). 
12   The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended to Denmark to “complete the review of the legal aid system, 

taking into account European standards on legal aid.” 

13   The  Ministry  of  Justice  had  set  up  the  pre-legislative  committee  in  April  2020  to  review  the  legal  aid 
system, in response to a number of studies conducted by stakeholders highlighting certain weaknesses in the 
functioning of the legal aid system. Criticisms of the system raised by the Bar and Law Society and Justitia, 
a  think  tank  working  on  judicial  issues,  relate  in  particular  to  the  access  to  legal  aid  offices  (including 
regional  disparities),  legal  aid  in  administrative  matters,  funding  as  well  as  the  need  to  clarify  the  legal 
insurance scheme. 2021 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, pp. 4-5, and 2023 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, 
pp. 6-7. 

14   Danish  Government  (2025),  written  contribution;  Country  visit,  Justitia.  Justitia  considered  that  the 
mandate of the Judicial Council differs from that of the pre-legislative committee. One significant omission 
in the Judicial Council’s mandate is the requirement to assess the possibility of strengthening information 
about the Danish legal aid model. Justitia also noted that the Judicial Council’s mandate dos not require it to 
incorporate recommendations from previous reports, unlike the pre-legislative committtee. Danish Lawyers, 
the Danish Bar and Law Society, and Justitia.   
15   Danish Government (2025), written input, pp. 4-5. 

4 

 
 
 
The  level  of  digitalisation  of  the  justice  system  is  overall  good  and  the  multi-year  IT 
project for processing criminal and probate cases should be completed in 2026. The use 
of  digital  technology  by  courts  and  prosecution  services  is  overall  good,  with  some  gaps 
remaining  on  electronic  case  allocation  with  automatic  distribution  based  on  objective 
criteria, or use of blockchain or artificial intelligence applications. Procedural rules allowing 
digital technology in courts in civil and commercial cases are fully in place, but some gaps 
still  exist  for  administrative  and  criminal  proceedings16.  In  December  2024,  a  new 
digitalisation strategy was adopted, focussing on the courts’ digital agenda and priority areas 
for  the  period  2024-2027,  notably  shortening  case-handling  times17.  The  Danish  Court 
Administration  also  continues  the  staggered  rolling  out  of  an  IT  system  for  processing 
criminal and probate cases18. Since October 2022, various solutions for handling both estate 
and  insolvency  probate  cases  and  uncontested  fine  administration  has  been  rolled  out.  In 
January 2025, a system for digitalisation of selected criminal cases was launched in six courts 
as  a  trial  run.  The  system  was  subsequently  implemented  in  all  courts  in  June  2025.  The 
stages  of  all  remaining  estate,  probate,  and  criminal  case  administration  elements  will  be 
implemented incrementally by late 202619. 

Efficiency 

The trend of increasing average case handling times continues. The number of incoming 
civil and commercial litigious cases at first instance continued to increase in 2023 (0.9 cases 
per  100 000  inhabitants  compared  to  0.8  in  2022).  The  estimated  time  needed  to  resolve 
litigious civil  and commercial cases at  first  instance has remained stable  (268 days in  2022 
compared to 265 days in 2023), whereas the rate of resolving litigious civil and commercial 
cases  remained  stable  at  a  low  level  (93%  in  2022  and  2023)20.  According  to  the  Danish 
Court Administration, the efforts to reduce the backlog of cases at the district courts in 2024 
led to an expected increase in average case processing times in the short term21. The average 
case processing time for criminal cases at the district courts has increased from 8.6 months in 
2023 to 10.7 months in 2024. The average case processing time for ordinary civil cases with a 
main hearing at the district courts has increased from 22.5 months in 2023 to 22.9 months in 
202422. 

II. 

 ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The perception among experts, citizens and business executives is that Denmark is one 
of  the  least  corrupt  countries  in  the  world.  In  the  2024  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  by 
Transparency International, Denmark scores 90/100 and ranks 1st in the European Union and 

16   Figures 41, 42 and 43, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. A new artificial intelligence solution for court hearing 
scheduling has been implemented in an early version at the beginning of 2025. The solution is planned to be 
fully  implemented  and  comprise  all  criminal  and  civil  case  hearings  by  early  2027.  Danish  Government 
(2025a).  

17   Danish Court Administration (2024c). 
18   2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, pp. 4-5. 
19   Danish Court Administration (2025a, 2025d).  
20   Figures 2, 5 and 10, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
21   According  to  the  Danish  Court  Administration,  the  case  processing  time  continues  to  increase  while  the 
number of pending cases decreases because the courts' case backlog contains cases that are older than the 
average case processing time.  

22   The data for criminal cases concerns proceedings with a judge and two jurors. Danish Court Administration 

(2024b). 

5 

 
 
 
1st globally23. This perception has been relatively stable over the past five years24. The 2025 
Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  28%  of  respondents  consider  corruption 
widespread  in  their  country  (EU  average  69%)  and  4%  of  respondents  feel  personally 
affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 18% of 
companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 11% consider that 
corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  35%).  Furthermore,  29%  of 
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from  corrupt 
practices  (EU  average  36%),  while  44%  of  companies  believe  that  people  and  businesses 
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 33%)25. 

The anti-corruption programme adopted in the framework of the implementation of the 
Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan  remains  applicable  to  the  relevant  EU  funded  projects. 
The  anti-corruption  programme  adopted  in  the  framework  of  the  implementation  of  the 
Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan26  remains  applicable  to  the  relevant  EU  funded  projects. 
Reflections on the potential usefulness of a strategic framework in the national context have 
taken place, and authorities continue to consider an overarching anti-corruption strategy or a 
specialised agency dealing with anti-corruption issues unnecessary in the national situation27. 
Coordination  of  the  anti-corruption  matters  continues  to  be  carried  out  on  a  case-by-case 
basis by the Ministry of Justice. The anti-corruption forum created in  2014 did  not meet  in 
the  last  two  years.  The  lack  of  strategic  framework  is  continues  to  be  challenged  by  civil 
society and academia28. Overall, the Danish anti-corruption system is considered by GRECO 
as lacking focus on integrity-related risks29.  

The system set up for  collecting data on investigations and prosecutions of corruption 
offences  allows regular reporting. After a first  reporting in  2023, the authorities provided 
data  from  all  13  police  districts  for  2024  on  the  number  of  reports,  charges  and  judgments 
regarding  corruption  offences.  While  the  reported  number  of  ongoing  investigations  into 
complex or cross-border cases, which are handled by the National Special Crime Unit (SCU) 
and the State Prosecutor for Special Crime Unit (SPSCU) at the central level continues to be 

23   Transparency  International  (2025).  The  level  of  perceived  corruption  is  categorised  as  follows:  low  (the 
perception among experts and business executives of public sector corruption scores above 79); relatively 
low (scores between 79-60), relatively high (scores between 59-50), high (scores below 50). 

24   In 2020 the score was 88, while, in 2024, the score is 90. The score significantly increases/decreases when 
it  changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years.  

25   Special Eurobarometer 561 (2025) and Flash Eurobarometer 557 (2025).  
26   2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, pp. 9-10. 
27   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. See also the UN Convention Against Corruption, Articles 5, 6 
and  36.  International  standards  (such  as  UNODC/UNDP  (2013)  and  UNODC  (2015))  recommend  the 
implementation  of  effective,  coordinated  anticorruption  policies  that  promote  the  participation  of  society 
and reflect the principles of the rule of law, with robust anticorruption strategies identified as good practice.  
28   Country  visit  Denmark,  Transparency  International  and  Magtudredningen  2.0.  Under  the  relevant  OECD 
public integrity indicators, Denmark scores below the EU average on the coverage of strategic framework 
(1 out of 7). 

29   GRECO (2023) recommendation i and xii. Denmark’s reputation as a country with a low level of corruption 
may  contribute  to  limited  attention  being  paid  to  corruption.  The  fact  that  corruption  is  not  directly 
addressed  in  the  Criminal  Code  may  also  reflect  limited  awareness  in  Denmark.  Danish  Financial 
Intelligence Unit (2022), p. 78.  

6 

 
 
 
low  in  202430,  data  from  the  police  districts  allows  a  broader  picture  over  investigative 
activity, indictments and adjudications31.  

A reform of the rules on private financing of political parties is pending in Parliament. 
The revised law on public financing of political parties, adopted in 2023, entered into force in 
January 2024. As regards the rules on private financing of political parties, a revision of the 
law  has  been  pending  in  Parliament  since  June  202332,  which  raised  criticism  from  civil 
society33.  Negotiations  of  a  draft  bill  aim  to  address  the  issue  of  multiple  and  anonymous 
donations,  and  to  introduce  sanctions  for  breaching  the  rules  on  the  political  parties’ 
framework which are considered necessary by some organisations34.  

There are no plans to introduce rules on revolving doors for ministers and on lobbying, 
and  to  ensure  adequate  control  of  asset  declarations  submitted  by  persons  entrusted 
with  top  executive  functions35.  Concerns  related  to  the  lack  of  rules  on  integrity  for 
ministers  and  top  executive  functions,  and  on  lobbying  and  revolving  doors  have  not  been 
addressed and the authorities have no plans in this area36. Civil society continues to argue for 
the need to regulate revolving doors, given the complexity of various interest groups and the 
professionalisation  of  lobbying,  which  could  increase  the  opacity  of  contacts  between  the 
public and private sectors37. This lack of progress was also noted by GRECO38. The Danish 
authorities  continue  to  consider  that  the  current  system  works  well,  whilst  also  confirming 
that  no  specific  monitoring  mechanism  is  in  place39.  Recent  cases  of  revolving  doors 
continued  to  raise  concerns  on  how  appropriate  ethical  standards  can  be  ensured  in  the 
absence of clear rules. Integrity rules are also lacking for Parliament, as no code of conduct is 
in  place  and  no  system  to  register  external  activities  and  financial  interest  of  Members  of 
Parliament is available40. There was no progress on this recommendation.    

The implementation of the rules on whistleblowing is considered to be on the right track 
by  both  the  authorities  and  civil  society.  The  authorities  report  that  the  rules  on 

30   No corruption offence beyond foreign bribery is currently ongoing. Country visit Denmark, SCU. 
31   In 2024, the police registered 42 reports of bribery (including both private and public sector), compared to 
156 in 2023. There were 129 judgments on bribery-related charges in 2024 compared to 13 in 2023. State of 
play for January 2025. Danish Government (2025), written input, pp. 14-15.  

32   The Minister of the Interior and Health (2023). 
33    Country visit Denmark, Transparency International. 
34   2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 11. 
35   The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Denmark  to  ‘introduce  rules  on  “revolving  doors”  for 
ministers and on lobbying, and ensure adequate control of asset declarations submitted by persons entrusted 
with top executive functions’. 

36  Danish Government (2025), written input.  
37   Country  visit  Denmark,  Magtudredningen  2.0.  It  is  a  project,  launched  by  the  Danish  Government  and 
Parliament,  that  examines  how  Denmark  is  governed,  how  entrusted  power  is  handled,  and  who  has 
influence. See https://ps.au.dk/forskning/forskningsprojekter/magtudredningen2. 

38   Those  recommendations  include,  among  others,  the  need  for  a  code  of  conduct  for  persons  with  top 
executive  functions,  increased  transparency  of  lobbying  and  rules  introduced  on  how  to  deal  with  the 
employment of for persons with top executive functions following the termination of their public service, 
more  data  should  be  included  in  the  financial  declarations  of  ministers  and  these  declarations  must  be 
subject to substantive control. GRECO (2023), recommendation i, ii, iii, v, vi, vii, viii. 

39   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 
40    Politik (2025). Due to lack of progress regarding rules on integrity in the Parliament, GRECO noted that the 
level  of  compliance  with  their  recommendations,  put  forward  in  2018,  remains  unsatisfactory.  GRECO 
(2024). 

7 

 
 
 
whistleblowing  have  been  implemented  well41.  This  view  is  shared  by  Transparency 
International  Denmark  in  a  report  on  evaluation  of  the  functioning  in  practice  of  the 
whistleblowing framework published in 2025. According to the report, the number of reports 
has been on the rise since 2022 (increase of 50% from 2022 to 2023 and then of 23% from 
2023 to 2024) and this trend is likely to continue. In parallel, the report concludes that up to 
60%  of  reports  are  rejected  mostly  to  being  outside  of  the  scope  of  the  whistleblowing 
legislation42. 

While there is no specific process to identify areas with high-risk of corruption, foreign 
bribery  is  a  focus  for  the  authorities.  Businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  in  the  EU 
show  that  11%  of  companies  in  Denmark  (EU  average  25%)  think  that  corruption  has 
prevented them from winning a public tender or a public procurement contract in practice in 
the  last  three  years43.  44%  of  companies  perceive  the  level  of  independence  of  the  public 
procurement  review  body  (the  Complaints  Board  for  Public  Procurement)  as  very  or  fairly 
good44. The Single Market and Competitiveness Scoreboard on access to public procurement 
in  Denmark  reports  17%  of  single  bids  for  2023  (29%  EU  average).  In  relation  to  foreign 
bribery45,  identified  in  2023  by  OECD  as  a  risk  area  in  Denmark46,  the  authorities  are 
considering  the  relevant  follow-up  to  the  recommendations.  Overall,  the  authorities  do  not 
consider corruption a major risk and do not have any dedicated monitoring mechanism in this 
regard, a view which is challenged by some stakeholders47, also as  risks in some areas, such 
the  pharmaceutical  industry,  and  the  energy  sector  have  attracted  public  attention48. 
Nevertheless, a general risk assessment under the money-laundering rules is expected in 2026 
and may cover corruption as well49.  

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

The human resources of the Danish Radio and Television Board and the Danish Press 
Council have been strengthened. The national media regulatory authority, the Danish Radio 
and  Television  Board,  has  received  an  increase  in  human  resources  to  deal  with  new  tasks 
deriving  from  the  implementation  of  the  Regulation  on  the  transparency  and  targeting  of 
political advertising and the European Media Freedom Act50. The Media Pluralism Monitor 
(MPM) 2025 notes that eight out of eleven members of the media authority are appointed by 
the  Minister  of  Culture,  although  there  is  no  evidence  of  government  interference  in  the 
authority’s decisions. The risk regarding the media authority’s independence is considered to 

41   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 
42   Transparency International noted that awareness raising could be used to address this (2024 Whistleblowing 

in Denmark). 

43   Flash  Eurobarometer  557  on  Businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  in  the  EU  (2025).  This  is  14 

percentage points below the EU average. 
44   Figure 59, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
45   There  are  currently  three  ongoing  investigations  on  foreign  bribery.  Country  visit  Denmark,  SPSCU  and 

SCU. 

46   OECD (2023). 
47   Country visit Denmark, Transparency International and Magtudredning 2.0. 
48   2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 12. 
49   Danish  Government  (2025),  written  input.  According  to  the  last  threat  risk  assessment,  the  level  of 
corruption,  including  bribery  in  the  private  and  public  sectors,  is  low  in  Denmark  and  there  are  no 
indications that the scale and proceeds would increase in the  coming years. Danish Financial Intelligence 
Unit (2022), p. 78. 

50   This includes six additional employees. Country visit, Danish Radio and Television Board. 

8 

 
 
 
be  very  low51.  The  Press  Council  has  also  received  one  new  employee  to  deal  with  an 
increasing  number  of  complaints.  In  2024,  the  Press  Council  made  the  highest  number  of 
decisions since its establishment, although the share of cases where it found issues with press 
ethics was lower than in the last couple of years52. 

New  rules were adopted to strengthen the  transparency regarding the appointment of 
the board of directors of Danmarks Radio (DR). The public service media in Denmark – 
primarily  Danmarks  Radio  (DR)  and  TV  2  Danmark  -  are  considered  to  be  independent53. 
The  MPM  2025  finds  a  low  risk  for  the  independence  of  the  public  service  media  with  no 
documented  instances  of  direct  political  interference  in  editorial  policies  or  leadership 
appointments.  Together,  they  hold  about  80%  of  audience  share  in  the  country54.  To 
strengthen transparency, a new act amending the Radio and Television Broadcasting Act has 
been adopted. It sets out new competence-based criteria for the appointment of the board of 
directors of DR. The law will enter into force in 202755. 

Current rules on media liability and the existing media support mechanisms are being 
reviewed in light of technological developments. The Media Liability Committee set up in 
2022  has  delivered  a  report  in  January  2025  regarding  possibilities  to  update  the  current 
framework  for  media  liability  in  view  of  the  digital  media  reality.  The  committee  was 
composed of a number of experts and representatives from the media industry, civil society 
and governmental authorities. The report sets out recommendations as a basis for subsequent 
discussions  at  political  level.  One  of  the  recommendations  concerns  setting  up  a  publicly 
funded  independent  media  Ombudsperson.  The  institution  could  have  competences  both 
regarding new media actors and traditional media, for example by proactively bringing cases 
to the Press Council56. Stakeholders have generally welcomed the proposal, but consider that 
the future media Ombudsperson should be appointed by the media sector and not be able to 
bring cases to court57. The recommendations of the Media Liability Committee also include a 
quality label scheme for responsible media and a simplified judicial procedure for defamation 
on social media. The Government is expected to decide on the next steps in autumn 2025. In 
parallel, work is ongoing to potentially reform the current media support mechanisms to be 
more  neutral  regarding  its  distribution58.  Direct  subsidies  are  currently  available  for  text-
based  news  media  in  print  and  online59.  The  MPM  2025  finds  a  very  high  level  of  market 
concentration of audiovisual media services. The newspaper market is more diverse60. 

Some further progress has been made on the recommendation to strengthen the right of 
access  to  information61.  The  committee  examining  possible  amendments  to  the  Access  to 

 Press Council (2025). 

51   Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2025), pp. 15-16. 
52  
53   Country visit Denmark, Danish Union of Journalists and Danish Media Association. 
54   Centre  for  Media  Pluralism  and  Media  Freedom  (2025),  pp.  20,  29;  European  Audiovisual  Observatory 

(2024). 

55   Danish Parliament (2025); Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Culture. 
56   Ministry of Culture (2025); Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Culture. 
57  Danish Union of Journalists (2025); Country visit Denmark, Danish Union of Journalists and Danish Media 

Association. 

58   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Culture. 
59   Nordicom (2022). 
60   Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2025), p. 20. 
61   The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Denmark  to  ‘Advance  with  the  process  to  reform  the 
Access  to  Public  Administrative  Documents  Act  in  order  to  strengthen  the  right  to  access  documents,  in 

9 

 
 
 
 
Public  Administrative  Documents  Act,  aimed  at  enabling  wider  access  to  the  political 
decision-making  process,  is  expected  to  conclude  its  work  and  publish  a  report  by  autumn 
2025. The Ministry of Justice set up the committee in February 202462. After the committee’s 
report,  political  negotiations  will  commence  concerning  revising  the  Act63.  Stakeholders 
noted  progress  at  committee  level  and  the  need  for  political  willingness  to  proceed  with 
relevant  reforms  and  to  limit  the  grounds  for  rejection  of  disclosure  requests64.  In  2024, 
complaints about access to documents under the Access to Public Administrative Documents 
Act  mainly  concerned the refusal  of authorities  -  particularly  the central  administration  -  to 
grant  access  to  documents  or  the  length  of  the  proceedings65.  Given  that  the  work  in  the 
committee is ongoing and its report is to be published by autumn 2025, there has been some 
further progress on last year’s recommendation.   

The safety of journalists remains high although there are calls for more transparency in 
reporting  incidents.  Apart  from  one  instance  of  a  Russian  law  firm  threatening  to  sue  a 
Danish investigative news outlet, no cases potentially classified as strategic lawsuits against 
public  participation  (SLAPPs)  have  been  identified  in  Denmark  since  the  previous  Rule  of 
Law Report. Besides this alert, the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of 
journalism  and  safety  of  journalists  registered  another  alert  concerning  a  surge  in  deepfake 
advertising campaigns on Meta platforms targeting Danish journalists66. Ten alerts have been 
registered  in  the  Media  Freedom  Rapid  Response,  including  the  above-mentioned  legal 
warning  to  the  Danish  investigative  news  outlet  and  a  few  instances  of  threatening  of 
journalists, among others67. Denmark is not subject to the application of the EU Anti-SLAPP 
Directive due to an opt-out68. The MPM 2025 notes tensions between national legislation on 
mistreatment of religious texts, essentially constituting blasphemy, and the right for political 
and  artistic  expression69.  However,  journalists  generally  benefit  from  favourable  working 
conditions,  including  a  comprehensive  social  security  system70.  The  Danish  Ministry  of 
Foreign  Affairs  also  supports  projects  to  create  safer  media  environments  and  to  promote 
freedom  of  the  press  outside  of  Denmark71.  Recommendations  by  a  dedicated  committee 
regarding future financial support to be given to Danish media are expected to be published 
in  autumn  202572.  The  Danish  Union  of  Journalists  encourages  more  transparency  in 
reporting incidents in line with the action plan on the safety of journalists, which was adopted 
in 2022 and was meant to facilitate journalists’ reporting of any harassment or threats73. 

particular  by  limiting  the  grounds  for  rejection  of  disclosure  requests,  taking  into  account  the  European 
standards on access to official documents.’ 
62   2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 16. 
63   Danish Government (2025), written input, p. 18; Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Culture. 
64   Country visit Denmark, Danish Media Association and Danish Union of Journalists. 
65   Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman (2025). 
66   Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists. Denmark has 

responded to one of the two alerts. 

67   European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response. 
68   Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark. 
69   Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2025), p. 12-13. 
70   Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2025), p. 15. 
71   See International Media Support (2025). 
72   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Culture. 
73   Country visit Denmark, Danish Union of Journalists; 2022 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 14. 

10 

 
 
 
IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

The  legislative  process  is  inclusive  overall  and  rules  have  been  amended  to  give 
Parliament more time for consideration of legislative proposals.  In June 2024, the rules 
for  Parliament’s  examination  of  legislative  proposals  were  amended  in  order  to  allow 
Parliament a more thorough consideration74. The third and final reading shall now take place 
no earlier than 40 days after submission to Parliament and no earlier than two days after the 
second  reading.  There  were  no  fast-track  legislative  procedures  used  in  the  parliamentary 
year  2024-202575.  In  terms  of  public  consultations,  stakeholders  considered  them  to  be 
inclusive  and  the  deadlines  largely  acceptable,  with  some  stakeholders  noting  too  short 
consultation periods. Since the last report, 151 public consultations have taken place and 41 
of these (27%) were shorter than the recommended four weeks76.  

The  Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights  was  re-accredited  in  October  2024  with  ‘A’ 
status. It was reaccredited with ‘A’status in October 2024 by the Global Alliance of National 
Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) and its Sub-committee on Accreditation (SCA). In this 
context, the SCA made recommendations to the Institute, including on introducing guidance 
on  conflict  of  interests  of  its  Board  Members  and  outlining  in  its  bylaws  an  objective  and 
independent  procedure  for  their  removal.  The  Institute  is  in  the  process  of  deciding  on  the 
best follow up. The SCA stressed that the Institute must be provided with sufficient resources 
to  effectively  fulfil  newly  assigned  responsibilities77.  As  of  1  January  2025,  the  Institute  is 
also  tasked  with  promoting,  analysing  and  monitoring  and  supporting  gender  balance  in 
corporate  bodies  of  listed  companies78.  In  March  2025,  Parliament  elected  a  new 
Parliamentary Ombudsman79. The post was advertised publicly following a recommendation 
from the Danish Institute for Human Rights. While a vacancy and Parliament’s consideration 
of candidates are usually not public, Parliament published a call for the vacant position this 
time,  following  the  suggestion  by  the  Institute  to  that  effect.  Both  the  Danish  Institute  for 
Human Rights and the Parliamentary Ombudsman consider that they have adequate resources 
for their operations in Denmark. 

Over  two  thirds  of  the  companies  surveyed  in  Denmark  express  confidence  in  the 
effectiveness of investment protection. 76% of companies are very or fairly confident that 
investments are protected by law and courts80. As regards authorities relevant for economic 

74   A  bill  must  be  read  three  times  in  Parliament  before  it  can  be  adopted.  Before  the  amendment,  the  final 
reading was not supposed to be earlier than 30 days after the submission. However, Parliament can allow a 
shorter period than 40 days by simple majority (but not shorter than 30 days). Danish Government (2025), 
written input, p. 19. 

75   Between  October  2024  when  the  parliamentary  year  commenced  and  28  May  2025.  In  a  fast-track 
procedure, the period between submission to Parliament and the final reading would be less than 40 days. 
Danish  Government  (2025),  written  input,  p.  20.  Secretariat  of  the  Standing  Orders  Committee  of  the 
Parliament, written contribution. 

76   Out of these 41 proposals, 25 were subject to a consultation period shorter than 21 days, and 16 proposals 
were  subject  to  a  consultation  period  shorter  than  14  days.  Period  between  24  July  2024  and  20  March 
2025.  Danish  Government  (2025),  written  contribution.  The  Danish  parliamentary  period  stretches  from 
October to July the following year. 

77   Global Alliance of Human Rights Institutions (2024). 
78   ENNHRI (2025). 
79   Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman (2025).  
80   Figure 54, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. Only 7% and 7% of the surveyed investors respectively perceive 
the frequent changes in legislation or concerns about the quality of the law-making process, and the quality, 
efficiency  or  independence  of  justice,  respectively,  as  a  reason  for  the  lack  of  confidence  in  investment 
protection. 

11 

 
 
 
operators, 60% of companies perceive the level of independence of the national competition 
authority (Danish Competition and Consumer Authority) as very or fairly good81. There are 
no  judicial  mechanisms  in  place  at  the  level  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  ensure  the 
implementation of administrative court judgments82.  

On  1  January  2025,  Denmark  had  3  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, the same number as the previous year83. At that 
time, Denmark’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that had been implemented 
was at 57% (compared to 50% in 2024; 43% remained pending), and the average time that 
the judgments had been pending implementation was 2 years and 3 months (compared to 2 
years in 2024)84. The oldest leading judgment, pending implementation for 4 years, concerns 
inhuman  or  degrading  treatment85.  As  regards  the  respect  of  payment  deadlines,  on  31 
December  2024  there  was  no  case  awaiting  confirmation  of  payments  (the  same  as  in 
2023)86.  On  15  June  2025,  the  number  of  leading  judgments  pending  implementation  had 
increased  to  487.  In  June  2024,  the  Danish  Administration  of  Justice  Act  was  amended  to 
allow the Director of Public Prosecutions or a convicted person to request reopening of a case 
dealt with in the criminal justice system in order to comply with a final judgement from the 
European  Court  of  Human  Rights88.  From  a  broader  perspective,  in  April  2025,  the 
Government  tasked  two  experts  to  report  on  Denmark's  obligations  under  the  European 
Convention  on  Human  Rights,  which  will  help  to  clarify  the  limits  of  the  Member  States' 
margin of appreciation within the scope of the Convention89. 

Civic space in Denmark continues to be open, while some stakeholders call for a more 
transparent  and  foreseeable  approach  to  funding  of  civil  society.  The  civic  space  in 
Denmark  continues  to  be  considered  as  open90  and  the  legal  framework  for  civil  society 
organisations  is  an  enabling  factor,  even  though  some  organisations  may  experience 
administrative  burdens,  for  instance  when  dealing  with  banks  or  in  their  cooperation  with 
municipalities91. The operating environment is safe overall, although some level of refraining 
to  engage  in  public  discussion  was  noted  by  the  Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights92.  The 
current civil society funding scheme is based on a Financial Bill proposed by the Government 
to Parliament, which lists the civil society organisations annually selected for public funding 

81   Figure 60, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
82   Figure 49, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. The data presented reflects exclusively the mechanisms in place at 
the level of the highest administrative jurisdictions; the same or other mechanisms may be in place at lower 
instance administrative courts. 

83   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.   
84   All figures calculated by the European  Implementation Network (EIN) and based on the number of cases 
that are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2025. EIN (2025), written input, p. 3. 

85   Judgment of the ECtHR, 45439/18, Aggerholm v. Denmark, pending implementation since 2020.  
86   Council of Europe (2025), p. 156.   
87   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
88   ENNHRI (2025). 
89   Ministry of Justice (2025b).  
90   Rating  given  by  CIVICUS,  ratings  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed,  obstructed, 

repressed and closed.   

91   See also 2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 21. 
92   In June 2024, the Danish Institute for Human Rights published a report on the right to freedom of speech 
and  self-censorship,  which  found  that  10  %  of  surveyed  individuals  in  2024  have  refrained  from 
participating in public debate in the physical public space through demonstrations or public meetings due to 
fear of negative reactions. Fear of violence and threats is the reason for self-censorship for 31 % of those 
who  have  refrained  from  participating  in  public  debate  in  a  physical  space  in  2024.  Danish  Institute  for 
Human Rights (2024), p. 10. 

12 

 
 
 
and the amounts awarded to them93. The Government also provides funding to civil society 
organisations through a wide range of thematic open calls. On a local level, municipalities are 
obliged  to  cooperate  with  civil  society  organisations  and  disburse  funding  to  support 
voluntary  social  work  by  civil  society  organisations.  Some  stakeholders  consider  that  the 
current financing scheme with the Financial Bill entails risks leading to self-censorship, and 
should be more transparent and foreseeable. The Government announced the intention to put 
a  new  funding  model  in  place  for  202694.  To  this  end,  the  Minister  for  Social  Affairs  and 
Housing  held  a  meeting  with  around  200  participants  from  a  wide  range  of  civil  society 
organisations and representatives of the political system about a new funding model for civil 
society  organisations  on  17  December  2024,  as  well  a  series  of  bilateral  discussions  with 
representatives from civil society organisations95.  

93   Stakeholders  referred  to  example  of  civil  society  organisations  having  experienced  pressure  and  negative 
statements  from  politicians  about  their  activities  or  advocacy  work  and  calling  for  cutting  their  funding, 
ahead of the parliamentary vote on the Financial Bill 2025. They considered this as having a particularly 
negative  effect  on  the  freedom  of  speech  of  civil  society  organisations,  leading  to  self-censorship.  Nyt 
Europa,  Globalt  Fokus.  Berlingske  (2024a,  2024b),  Radio IIII  (2024).  Similar  examples  were  reported  in 
the past. See also 2024 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 20. 

94   Danish Parliament (2024).  
95   Danish Government (2025), written input. 

13 

 
 
 
 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2024 Rule of Law report 
can  be 
found  at  at  https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en.  

Berlingske  (2024a),  Berlingske  believes:  The  case  of  Mellemfolkeligt  Samvirke  points  to  a  general 
problem  –  your  tax  krones  are  spent  on  left-wing  propaganda  (Berlingske  mener:  Sagen  om 
Mellemfolkeligt  Samvirke  peger  på  et  generelt  problem  –  dine  skattekroner  bruges  på 
venstreorienteret 
https://www.berlingske.dk/ledere/berlingske-mener-sagen-om-
mellemfolkeligt-samvirke-peger-paa-et-generelt. 

propaganda), 

Berlingske  (2024b),  Blue  parties:  Stop  the  grant  to  Mellemfolkeligt  Samvirke  (Blå  partier:  Stop 
bevillingen 
til  Mellemfolkeligt  Samvirke),  https://www.berlingske.dk/politik/blaa-partier-stop-
bevillingen-til-mellemfolkeligt-samvirke. 

Centre for  Media  Pluralism  and Media  Freedom  (2025), Monitoring Media  Pluralism in the  Digital 
Era  in  the  year  2024  ,  Country  report:  Denmark,  https://cmpf.eui.eu/projects/media-pluralism-
monitor/. 

Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2025), 
https://fom.coe.int/en/pays/detail/11709504. 

Danish  Bar  Association  (2024),  Lawyers  seen  from  the  outside:  Lawyers  are  particularly  obligated 
(Advokater set udefra: Advokater er særligt forpligtede), https://www.advokatsamfundet.dk/nyheder-
medier/tidligere-artikler/2024/advokaten-3/2024-advokaten-3-advokater-set-udefra-advokater-er-
saerligt-forpligtede/. 

Danish  Financial  Intelligence  Unit  (2022),  The  National  risk  assessment  of  money  laundering, 
https://hvidvask.dk/en/-/media/mediefiler/hvidvask/hvidvask-en/publications/nrv/national-risk-
assessment-2022.pdf. 

Danish 
16/forhandling.htm .  

Parliament 

(2024), 

https://www.ft.dk/samling/20241/forespoergsel/F5/BEH1-

Danish Government (2025), Input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Danish Government (2025a), additional written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Danish Institute for Human Rights (Institut for Menneske Rettigheder) (2024), Freedom of Expression 
selvcensur), 
and 
https://menneskeret.dk/files/media/document/Ytringsfrihed-og-selvcensur_DK_juni2024.pdf. 

Self-Censorship 

(Ytringsfrihed 

og 

ENNHRI (2025), https://rule-of-law.ennhri.org/?country%5B0%5D=15&year%5B0%5D=2025&  

Danish Parliament (Folketinget) (2025),  L 161 Proposal for an Act amending the Act on Radio and 
Television Activities, etc. (L 161 Forslag til lov om ændring af lov om radio- og fjernsynsvirksomhed 
m.v.),https://www.ft.dk/samling/20241/lovforslag/L161/som_vedtaget.htm. 

Danish 
(Beretning 
https://www.ombudsmanden.dk/Media/638790845705040412/Beretning%202024_web.pdf. 

Parliamentary 

Ombudsman 

(2025), 

Report 

2024 

2024) 

Danish Parliamentary Ombudsman (2025), Christina Britten Lundblad chosen as the new ombudsman 
(Christian  Britten  Lundblad  valgt  som  ny  ombudsmand),  https://www.ombudsmanden.dk/find-
viden/nyheder/2025/christian-britten-lundblad-valgt-som-ny-ombudsmand. 

14 

 
 
Danish  Union  of  Journalists  (2025),  DJ  and  Danish  Media:  Parts  of  the  Media  Responsibility 
Committee's proposal for a publicly funded ombudsman go too far (DJ og Danske Medier: Dele af 
Medieansvarsudvalgets 
for  vidt) 
https://journalistforbundet.dk/nyhed/dj-og-danske-medier-dele-af-medieansvarsudvalgets-forslag-om-
en. 

finansieret  ombudsmand  går 

forslag  om  en  offentligt 

Danish Union of Journalists (2025), Input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

European 
https://www.obs.coe.int/en/web/observatoire/-/key-trends-2023/2024-report-just-published. 

Observatory 

Audiovisual 

Yearbook 

(2024), 

2023/2024, 

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response – Denmark. 

European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Denmark.  

European Commission (2023), 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Denmark.  

European Commission (2023), 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2024), 2024 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Denmark.  

European Commission (2025), 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2025), Flash Eurobarometer 557 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption 
in the EU. 

European Commission (2025), Special Eurobarometer 561 on Corruption. 

Global  Alliance  of  Human  Rights  Institutions  (2024),  Sub-Committee  on  Accreditation  Report  – 
October  2024,  https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/countries/nhri/report-sca-second-
session-2024-en.pdf.  

GRECO (2023), Fifth evaluation round, Compliance report on Preventing corruption and promoting 
integrity in central governments (top executive functions) and law enforcement agencies. 

GRECO (2024), Fourth evaluation round, fourth interim compliance report on Denmark, Corruption 
prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors. 

International Media Support (2025), https://www.mediasupport.org/about/. 

The  Minister 
https://www.ft.dk/samling/20222/beslutningsforslag/B28/BEH1-36/forhandling.htm. 

and  Health 

Statement 

Interior 

(2023), 

the 

of 

in 

parliament, 

Ministry of Culture (2025), The Media Responsibility Committee has submitted its recommendations 
(Medieansvarsudvalget 
anbefalinger), 
https://kum.dk/aktuelt/nyheder/medieansvarsudvalget-har-afleveret-sine-anbefalinger. 

afleveret 

sine 

har 

Ministry  of  Justice  (2025a),  New  proposal  from  the  government  will  create  a  safe  Denmark  for 
everyone 
alle), 
skal 
https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/pressemeddelelse/nyt-udspil-fra-regeringen-skal-skabe-et-trygt-
danmark-for-alle/. 

trygt  Danmark 

regeringen 

udspil 

skabe 

(Nyt 

for 

fra 

et 

15 

 
 
Ministry of Justice (2025b), The Minister of Justice appoints experts for an inquiry on the European 
Convention on Human Rights (Justitsministeren udpeger eksperter til udredning om Den Europæiske 
Menneskerettighedskonvention),  https://www.justitsministeriet.dk/pressemeddelelse/justitsministeren-
udpeger-eksperter-til-udredning-om-den-europaeiske-menneskerettighedskonvention/. 

Danish Court Administration (Danmarks Domstole) (2024a), New rules simplify the administration of 
justice 
forenkler  retsplejen),  https://www.domstol.dk/aktuelt/2024/6/nye-regler-
forenkler-retsplejen/. 

  (Nye  regler 

Danish 
https://www.domstol.dk/alle-emner/straffesag/domsmandssager/. 

(2024b),  Magistrate 

Administration 

Court 

Cases 

(Domsmandssager), 

Danish  Court  Administration  (2024c),  New  digitalisation  strategy  to  promote  case  processing  (Ny 
digitaliseringsstrategi  skal  fremme  sagsbehandling),  https://www.domstol.dk/aktuelt/2024/12/ny-
digitaliseringsstrategi-skal-fremme-sagsbehandling/. 

Danish Court Administration (2025a), The Danish Court Administration extends the pilot period for 
the  criminal  case  system 
for  straffesagssystem), 
https://www.domstol.dk/aktuelt/2025/3/domstolsstyrelsen-udvider-pilotperiode-for-
straffesagssystem/. 

(Domstolsstyrelsen  udvider  pilotperiode 

Danish  Court  Administration  (2025b),  Special  efforts  for  pile  control  in  2024  (Særlig  indsats  for 
bunkebekæmpelse 
https://www.domstol.dk/aktuelt/2025/3/saerlig-indsats-for-
bunkebekaempelse-i-2024/ 

2024), 

i 

Danish  Court  Administration  (2025c),  Terms  of  Reference  for  the  Structural    Committee  for  the 
Courts 
domstolene), 
https://www.domstol.dk/media/3wlf0qjz/kommissorium-for-strukturudvalg-for-domstolene_april-
2025.pdf. 

(Kommissorium 

strukturudvalg 

for 

for 

Danish  Court  Administration  (2025d),  The  Criminal  and  Probate  Programme  (Straffe-  og 
skifteprogrammet), https://www.domstol.dk/om-os/digitalisering/straffe-og-skifteprogrammet/. 

(2022),  Direct  media 

Nordicom 
https://www.nordicom.gu.se/en/facts-analysis/nordic/factsheets/direct-media-subsidies-news-media-
nordic-overview. 

to  news  media  –  a  Nordic  overview,  

subsidies 

OECD (2023), Working Group on Bribery in international business transactions, Phase 4 evaluation 
of Denmark: Final report, https://one.oecd.org/document/DAF/WGB(2023)4/FINAL/en/pdf. 

Politik (2025), Søren Gade defends himself against criticism of board position in Esbjerg (Søren Gade 
defends 
Esbjerg), 
https://www.dr.dk/nyheder/politik/soeren-gade-forsvarer-sig-mod-kritik-af-bestyrelsespost-i-esbjerg. 

criticism 

position 

against 

himself 

board 

in 

of 

Council 

(2025),  Annual 

2024), 
Press 
https://www.pressenaevnet.dk/uncategorized/aarsberetning-for-2024/.Radio  IIII  (2024),  Lars  Løkke 
flatly  refuses  to  draw  support  from  NGOs  (Lars  Løkke  afviser  blankt  at  trække  NGO  i  støtte), 
https://radio4.dk/nyheder/lars-loekke-afviser-blankt-at-traekke-ngo-i-stoette-
q2RJlOSCuqLcabTfNoJN. 

(Årsberetning 

report 

2024 

for 

for 

Transparency 
(2025), 
https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024.   

International 

Corruption 

Perceptions 

Index 

2024, 

Transparency 
https://transparency.dk/whistleblowers/  

International 

(2025), 

2024  Whistleblowing 

in 

Denmark 

16 

 
 
UNODC  (2015),  National  Anti-Corruption  Strategies:  A  Practical  Guide  for  Development  and 
Implementation, 
https://www.unodc.org/documents/corruption/Publications/2015/National_Anti-
Corruption_Strategies_-_A_Practical_Guide_for_Development_and_Implementation_E.pdf 

Strategies, 
UNODC/UNDP 
https://www.unodc.org/roseap/uploads/archive/documents/2013/10/corruption/Kuala_Lumpur_Statem
ent_on_Anti-Corruption_Strategies_Final_21-22_October_2013.pdf. 

on  Anti-Corruption 

(2013),  Kuala 

Statement 

Lumpur 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Denmark 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in April 2025 with: 

•  Agency for Culture and Palaces 
•  Danish Bar and Law Society 
•  Danish Media Association 
•  Danish Union of Journalists 
•  Danish Press Council 
•  Danish Institute for Human Rights 
•  Globalt Fokus 
•  Danish Judges Association 
•  Justitia 
•  Magtutredning 2.0 project 
•  Ministry of Business 
•  Ministry of Culture 
•  Ministry of Justice 
•  National Audit Office 
•  Danish Courts Administration 
•  Nyt Europa 
•  Parliamentary Ombudsman 
•  Prosecution Service, including the National Special Crime Unit and the State 
•  Prosecutor for Special Crime Unit 
•  Secretariat of the Standing Orders Committee of the Parliament 
•  Supreme Court 
•  Transparency International Denmark 
•  The Confederation of Danish Industry 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

•  Amnesty International 
•  Araminta 
•  Civil Liberties Union for Europe  
•  Civil Society Europe  
•  European Civic Forum  
•  European Partnership for Democracy 
•  European Youth Forum, 
• 
• 
•  JEF Europe 
•  Philea – Philanthropy Europe Association. 
•  Transparency International  

International Commission of Jurists  
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) 

18