COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2026 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Croatia 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 2026 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2026-07-17
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Croatia, 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  Brussels, 17.7.2026  SWD(2026) 911 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2026 Rule of Law Report                    Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Croatia 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 2026 Rule of Law Report                     The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2026) 900 final} - {SWD(2026) 901 final} - {SWD(2026) 902 final} - {SWD(2026) 903 final} - {SWD(2026) 904 final} - {SWD(2026) 905 final} - {SWD(2026) 906 final} - {SWD(2026) 907 final} - {SWD(2026) 908 final} - {SWD(2026) 909 final} - {SWD(2026) 910 final} - {SWD(2026) 912 final} - {SWD(2026) 913 final} - {SWD(2026) 914 final} - {SWD(2026) 915 final} - {SWD(2026) 916 final} - {SWD(2026) 917 final} - {SWD(2026) 918 final} - {SWD(2026) 919 final} - {SWD(2026) 920 final} - {SWD(2026) 921 final} - {SWD(2026) 922 final} - {SWD(2026) 923 final} - {SWD(2026) 924 final} - {SWD(2026) 925 final} - {SWD(2026) 926 final} - {SWD(2026) 927 final} - {SWD(2026) 928 final} - {SWD(2026) 929 final} - {SWD(2026) 930 final} - {SWD(2026) 931 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

In  Croatia,  the  process  for  appointing  the  new  Supreme  Court  President  was  concluded. 
Judicial  authorities  maintained  their  efforts  to  ensure  the  integrity  of  judges  and  state 
attorneys.  The  use  of  electronic  communication  between  courts  and  users  has  further 
increased and amendments would close the gap in the digitalisation of misdemeanour cases. 
Proposed amendments aim to address the challenges regarding the recruitment of new judges 
and deputy state attorneys. Some steps have been made to further improve the efficiency of 
justice,  particularly  as  regards  the  length  of  proceedings  in  litigious  commercial  and  civil 
cases.  Reforms  were  passed  to  adapt  the  system  of  ‘registrations  judges’  to  make  it 
compatible  with  EU  law  requirements,  and  to  transfer  the  power  to  prescribe  the 
implementation of the training for judges from the Ministry of Justice to the President of the 
Supreme Court. 

The implementation of the second Action Plan under the Anti-Corruption Strategy 2021-2030 
is ongoing. Significant steps were made as several laws were revised, including the Law on 
the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime, and institutional changes 
were introduced to  achieve greater efficiency in  corruption investigations and prosecutions. 
Croatia continues to experience a large number of reported corruption crimes, while also the 
number  of  initiated  investigations  has  risen,  including  against  several  high-level  officials. 
Croatia  digitalised  the  submission  of  asset  declarations  by  public  officials  and  several 
sanctions  for  non-compliance  were  imposed,  although  verification  remains  non-systematic. 
The  Government  has  increased  the  resources  of  the  Commission  for  the  Resolution  of 
Conflicts  of  Interest  for  lobbying  oversight,  while  several  challenges  remain,  including 
certain  limitations  of  the  information  included  in  the  lobbying  register.  The  Ministry  of 
Justice has published the first report on the application of the Code of Ethics for civil servants 
and  employees  at  State  level.  Amendments  to  improve  the  whistleblower  protection  law 
entered  into  force.  While  authorities  are  carrying  out  systematic  verifications,  the  timely 
reporting  of  party  and  campaign  finance  continues  to  present  challenges.  A  comprehensive 
public  procurement  reform  entered  into  force  to  enhance  transparency,  efficiency  and 
digitalisation.  

Amendments  to  the  media  law  enlarged  the  regulatory  mandate  of  the  independent  media 
regulator to also cover press, and expanded the database of media ownership and financing to 
include print media, while stakeholders’ concerns persist regarding the oversight of indirect 
ownership.  The  same  law  revised  the  relevant  framework  for  state  advertising  and  entered 
into  force.  There  are  ongoing  concerns  regarding  the  availability  of  stable  financing  for 
public  service  media.  Efforts  to  improve  the  safety  of  journalists  continued,  as  journalists 
called for measures to strengthen and protect their profession. The financial and governance 
dependence  of  local  radio  and  media  publishers  on  local  government  is  linked  to  concerns 
about their editorial independence. Meanwhile, a law to address the issue of strategic lawsuits 
against  public  participation  (SLAPP)  targeting  journalists  has  entered  into  force  and  a  new 
law on access to information is in preparation. 

Local and regional authorities started publishing draft regulations on the public consultations 
portal, and the impact assessments and evaluations of laws increased. Government authorities 
further improved the implementation of the recommendations of the People’s Ombudsperson. 
The opportunities for multiannual funding of the civil society organisations expanded. 

1 

 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall, based on the recommendations in  the 2025 Rule of Law Report, considering other 
developments  that  took  place  in  the  period  of  reference  and  in  addition  to  recalling  the 
relevant  commitments  made  under  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan,  and  the  country-
specific  recommendation  under  the  European  Semester  on  the  efficiency  of  the  justice 
system, the Commission concludes the following:  

•  Some  progress  has  been  made  on  the  recommendation  to  improve  the  efficiency  of 
justice, particularly as regards the length of proceedings in litigious commercial and civil 
cases as the total backlog further decreased, while the length of proceedings continues to 
be  a  serious  concern.  Therefore,  it  is  recommended  to  Croatia  to  continue  efforts  to 
improve  efficiency  of  justice,  including  by  introducing  case  management  reforms  in 
litigious commercial and civil cases. 

•  Significant  progress  has  been  made  with  a  view  to  further  increase  the  efficiency  of 
investigations  and  prosecution  of  corruption  offences,  as  the  Criminal  Procedure  Code, 
the Law on the State Attorney’s Office, and the Law on the Office for the Suppression of 
Corruption and Organised Crime entered into force. As the effects in practice still need to 
materialise,  it  is  recommended  to  Croatia  to  take  measures  to  further  develop  a  track 
record of  effective investigations,  prosecutions and final  judgments  in  corruption  cases, 
including  high-level  corruption,  including  by  further  improving  specialised  technical 
capacities. 

•  As control rates of asset declarations remain low due to inconsistent, incomparable data 
structures  preventing  machine-analysis,  it  is  recommended  to  Croatia  to  step  up 
digitalisation efforts to ensure effective and systematic verification of asset declarations. 
•  Some  further  progress  has  been  made  to  address  the  issue  of  strategic  lawsuits  against 
public participation targeted at journalists, in light of the entry into force of the law on the 
Protection of Persons Involved in Public Activities, while challenges remain. Therefore, it 
is recommended to Croatia to broaden the range of available safeguards to improve the 
protection of journalists, including by reviewing the legal provisions on defamation and 
encouraging  wider  use  of  procedural  rules  that  allow  dismissing  groundless  lawsuits, 
taking into account the European standards on the protection of journalists. 

As regards the other 2025 recommendations, the Commission concludes that:  

•  Some  progress  has  been  made  to  strengthen  the  legal  framework  and  oversight 
mechanisms  to  ensure  a  fair  and  transparent  allocation  of  state  advertising  at  national, 
regional  and  local  level,  including  the  public  tender  procedure,  as  the  legislation  was 
amended,  while  the  operational  guidance  to  be  adopted  by  the  media  regulator  remains 
outstanding. Given that the topics of this recommendation are  covered by provisions of 
the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), while the Rule of Law Report will continue 
to monitor significant developments and report on their impact, further follow-up will be 
ensured  as  part  of  the  Commission’s  support  to  Member  States  and  enforcement  of  the 
EMFA. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Croatia continues to be very low among 
both the general public and companies. Overall, 27% of the general population and 28% of 
companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ 
in  20262. Among  the  general  public,  this  figure  has  slightly  decreased  in  comparison  with 
2025 (28%) and has  significantly increased in  comparison  with  2022 (20%). The perceived 
judicial independence among companies remains at the same level as in 2025 (28%) and has 
increased in comparison with 2022 (23%). The main reasons cited by the general public and 
by companies for the perceived lack of independence of courts and judges are the perception 
of  interference  or  pressure  from  the  Government  and  politicians,  and  of  interference  or 
pressure from economic or other specific interests3.  

The process for appointing the new Supreme Court President was concluded. An acting 
President was leading the Supreme Court since March 20254 and the third attempt to appoint 
a  new  President  successfully  led  to  Parliament’s  appointment  of  a  new  Supreme  Court 
President on 15 May 20265. The President of the Supreme Court is appointed by Parliament 
upon  a  proposal  from  the  President  of  the  Republic.  Three  positions  for  members  of  the 
Constitutional Court are still vacant, following an unsuccessful vote in Parliament. 

Judicial authorities maintained their efforts to ensure the integrity of judges and state 
attorneys. The State Judicial Council received 52 requests to enable the initiation of criminal 
proceedings  against  judges  and,  at  the  request  of  competent  authorities,  started  11 
disciplinary  proceedings  in  relation  to  judges,  which  also  concluded  with  2  dismissals6. 
Additionally,  the  State  Judicial  Council  verified  external  activities  of  judges7.  In  2025  the 
State Attorney’s Council received no further requests from the competent authorities to start 
disciplinary  proceedings  regarding  state  attorneys.  The  State  Judicial  Council  and  the  State 
Attorney’s  Council,  assisted  by  their  own  human  resources  and  access  to  the  electronic 

1  An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be found here here.  
2   Figures 48 and 50, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard and Figures 51 and 53, 2024 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    Figures 49 and 51, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
4    The  Supreme  Court  and  representatives  of  the  judiciary  indicated  that  while  allowing  this  post  to  remain 
vacant until agreement was found on a new President did not prevent the Supreme Court from performing 
its  functions,  it  could  have  affected  how  it  is  perceived  by  the  public  and  affected  the  morale  within  the 
court. Supreme Court (2026b). Country visit Croatia, Supreme Court and Association of Croatian Judges. 
5    Two  prior  selection  processes  were  unsuccessful.  The  procedural  rules  for  appointment  are  explained  in 
more detail in the 2021 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, pp. 3-4, and 2022 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 4. 
6    Out of these, in 47 cases the requests to initiate criminal proceedings were denied after the Council verified 
that prosecution service had no open investigations, while in 2 cases the request was granted and in 1 it was 
dismissed (2 cases ongoing in March 2026). In March 2026, the State Judicial Council kept 8 judges under 
suspension  due  to  ongoing  criminal  proceedings,  and  3  due  to  ongoing  disciplinary  proceedings.  The 
number of initiated disciplinary  proceedings remained the same as in 2024. In 2025, the Council issued 8 
disciplinary  sanctions  (7  in  2024):  4  fines,  1  reprimand,  one  conditional  dismissal  and  2  dismissals. 
Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 2, and State Judicial Council (2026), written input. 
In 2025, the State Judicial Council received 53 requests from judges regarding external activities, approving 
50 and rejecting 3. State Judicial Council (2026), written input. 

7   

3 

 
 
 
registers, checked all annual updates of asset declarations of judges and state attorneys8, and 
started  one  disciplinary  proceeding  regarding  a  judge  for  not  submitting  a  declaration  for  a 
substantial  change  in  assets,  while  finding  no  other  substantial  irregularities.  In  May-June 
2026, the Supreme Court conducted the procedure for the supervision of the performance of 
court administration at two municipal courts9.  

The system of ‘registrations judges’ has been reformed to make it compatible with EU 
law. In January 2026, the Law on Courts was amended to address requirements set out in the 
case  law  of  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union  (Court  of  Justice)  as  regards  the 
‘registrations  judges’  system10.  The  amendment  removes  the  possibility  for  registrations 
judges  to  suspend  the  delivery  of  an  adopted  judgment  for  inconsistency  with  case  law. 
Instead, a judge or department of judges will be tasked with monitoring case law at all court 
levels  and  assisting  courts  to  improve  the  consistency  of  decisions11.  In  the  lower  courts, 
these departments will support judges in finding relevant case law; at the appeal courts and 
the Supreme Court they will receive draft judgments and may inform the panel when a draft 
might create inconsistency12. At the Supreme Court, departing from precedent would require 
the Supreme Court President  to  transfer the case  to  an expanded panel13. The parties to  the 
case  would  be  informed  about  such  transfers  and  about  the  composition  of  the  expanded 
panel. Stakeholders have broadly welcomed these changes14. 

Quality  

The power to  prescribe the  implementation of the  training for  judges  was transferred 
from the Ministry of Justice to the President of the Supreme Court.  The competence to 
impose professional development obligations on judges and court presidents was transferred 
from the Minister of Justice to the Supreme Court President, which the authorities consider 
better suited to the functioning of the justice system and the professional development needs 

8   A  related  milestone  214  (Electronic  tools  provided  and  adequate  administrative  capacities  for  the  State 
Judicial  Council  and  the  State  Attorney's  Council  in  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan  for  Croatia  was 
considered fulfilled in 2022. 

9    The  supervision  focussed  on  administrative  oversight  of  the  court  presidents’  decisions  on  annual  work 
distribution  among  judges  and  related  efficiency  challenges,  with  the  Supreme  Court  President  issuing 
conclusions on remedying the deficiencies in court administration. Supreme Court (2026a). 

10    Judgment  of  the  CJEU,  Joined  Cases  C-554/21  Hann-Invest,  C-622/21  Mineral-Sekuline  and  C-727/21 
Udruga Khl Medvešcak Zagreb. The CJEU ruled in a preliminary ruling request of the High Commercial 
Court regarding a practice in courts of second instance whereby ‘registrations judges’ (judges outside the 
panel  deciding  a  case  tasked  with  registering  adopted  judgments  and  performing  a  post-hoc  case  law 
review), when finding a judgment inconsistent with case law or the 'legal position' previously accepted at 
that court, could stay the delivery of the adopted judgment and request that a section meeting be convened. 
A  'legal  position'  adopted  at  a  section  meeting  would  be  binding  on  all  judicial  panels  belonging  to  the 
section; See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 4, and 2024 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 7. 
11    Such  judges  or  departments  would  be  set  up  at  first  instance  Municipal,  Commercial  and  Administrative 
Courts, and such departments would be set up at second instance County Courts, High Commercial, High 
Administrative, High Misdemeanour and High Criminal Courts, and at the Supreme Court.  

12    According to the adopted amendments, this would concern either a situation in which the draft  judgment 

diverges from the court’s established case law or when the court’s practice is not consistent. 

13    In December 2025, amendments to the Civil Procedure  Law  came into force  and redefined the  expanded 
panel of the Civil Chamber in the Supreme Court, which include the President of the Civil Chamber, the 
judge-rapporteur of the panel to which the case was assigned, the Head of the Department for monitoring 
and  studying  the  case  law  of  the  Civil  Chamber  and  10  judges  determined  by  random  selection. 
Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code are in preparation to introduce a similar expanded panel also 
in the Criminal Chamber in the Supreme Court. Croatian Government (2026b), written input, pp. 7-8. 
14   Country visit Croatia, Association of Croatian Judges and Centre for Democracy and Law – Miko Tripalo. 

4 

 
 
 
of  judges15.  The  law  was  also  amended  expressly  to  prohibit  judges  from  receiving  gifts, 
which until the entry into force of these legislative amendments was partly regulated by the 
Code of Judicial Ethics16. 

The  use  of  electronic  communication  between  courts  and  users  has  further  increased 
and amendments would close the gap in the digitalisation of misdemeanour cases.  The 
justice  system  has  seen  some  further  improvements  in  digitalisation17.  In  2025  the  eFile 
system  was  migrated to  the State information  infrastructure to  ensure stability and improve 
accessibility.  The  connection  of  the  e-communication  and  e-citizen  systems  already  allows 
the  submission  of  court  documents,  access  to  case  files  and  requesting  of  criminal  record 
extracts18. The Government on 29 June 2026 submitted for the second reading in Parliament 
amendments to the Law on Misdemeanours to introduce e-Communication in misdemeanour 
cases  before  the  misdemeanour  departments  of  municipal  courts,  as  well  as  before  the 
Misdemeanour Courts in Zagreb and Split, which is expected to speed up these proceedings, 
facilitate faster exercise of rights for citizens and reduce procedural costs. These amendments 
would  also  prescribe,  as  from  July  2027,  mandatory  audio  recording  of  the  hearings  in 
misdemeanour  court  proceedings,  which  is  expected  to  shorten  the  duration  of  the  main 
hearing19. In 2025, the overall use of the e-Communication system further increased, mostly 
among  professional  users  and  ministries20.  By  March  2026,  more  than  600 000  new  court 
decisions from all court instances were published in the new online system, thus increasing 
public access to judgments21. 

Proposed amendments aim to address the challenges regarding the recruitment of new 
judges and deputy state attorneys. In view of the decreasing numbers of judges and deputy 
state attorneys (judicial officials) employed in courts and state attorney offices22 and lagging 
new intake into the professions23, the Government on 29 June 2026 submitted to Parliament 

15    The changes were introduced in amendments to the Law on Courts, which entered into force on 1 January 

2026. Croatian Government (2026b), written input, pp. 5-6. 

16   The  law  also  clarified  the exceptions  to  this  rule (ordinary  gifts  among  family  members  and  friends,  and 

state and international awards). Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 6. 

17    Figures 39-47, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. The electronic tools improved in the availability of electronic 
communication tools at courts (Figure 42), and more  significantly in the online accessibility to published 
judgments (Figure 46) and the arrangements for producing machine-readable judicial decisions (Figure 47). 
18   Croatian Government (2026), written input, p. 6. A related milestone 224 in the Recovery and Resilience 
Plan for Croatia (Upgraded eSpis system with new functionalities and new architecture integrated into the 
Shared Services Centre) was considered fulfilled in 2025. 

19    Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 7. 
20    In  2025,  the  total  volume  of  incoming  documents  arriving  to  courts  electronically  further  increased  to 
nearly 1.7 million, with largest increases among lawyers, ministries and court experts. For example, before 
commercial,  municipal  and  administrative  courts,  the  lawyers  submitted  55-68%  of  their  documents 
electronically.  Outgoing  electronic  communication  from  courts  to  court  parties  and  legal  professionals 
substantially  increased  to  3.8  million  documents  (3.4  million  in  2024.  Croatian  Government  (2026b), 
written input, additional written input, pp. 1-6. 

21   A  related  milestone  226  (All  new  first  and  second  instance  court  decisions  ending  proceedings  are 
anonymised and published on the portal.) in the Recovery and Resilience Plan for Croatia was considered 
fulfilled  in  2025.  See  Figure  46,  2026  EU  Justice  Scoreboard  for  a  comparative  perspective  on  the 
publication of judgments.   

22   The total number of judicial officials decreased from 2 508 in 2014 to 2 316 in 2024, while the number of 
judges decreased from 1 903 to 1 660. Ministry of justice, administration and digital transformation (2026). 
23    According  to  the  ministry,  intake  of  new  judges,  state  attorneys  and  judicial  officials  into  the  system  is 
lagging the rate at which they leave the service. 30% of judicial officials are aged between 60 and 70, while 
only 7% are aged between 30 and 40. 35% of judges (572), are aged between 60 and 70, while only 6% of 
are  between  30  and  40.  20% of  state  attorneys  are  aged 60  to  70.  Ministry  of  justice,  administration  and 
digital transformation (2026b). 

5 

 
 
 
for adoption the final drafts of the amendments to the Law on the Judicial Academy, Law on 
State  Judicial  Councils  and  the  Law  on  the  State  Attorney’s  Council  that  would  simplify 
entry  into  the  professions  of  judges  and  deputy  state  attorneys.  These  amendments  would 
remove the requirement to pass exams in the State School for Judicial Officials to become a 
judge  or  deputy  state  attorney  and  would  redefine  the  State  school  into  a  training  centre 
within the Judicial Academy for already appointed judges and state attorneys24.  

Efficiency 

There  has  been  some  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  improve  the  efficiency  of 
justice,  particularly  as  regards  the  length  of  proceedings  in  litigious  commercial  and 
civil cases25. The 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard shows that backlogs and length of proceedings 
continue  to  be  a  serious  concern,  despite  some  improvements  in  reducing  the  length  and 
backlog in litigious civil and commercial cases26. At the year-end of 2025, the total backlog 
further decreased (by nearly 3% compared to the year-end 2024), including in litigious civil 
and  commercial  cases  (by  2%)27.  Despite  improvements  in  some  types  of  cases,  such  as 
litigious  civil  cases  and  bribery  cases,  the  average  length  of  proceedings  in  most  cases 
increased, which remains an important concern. In 2025, the average length of proceedings in 
the first  instance courts remained among  the longest in  the EU with  1 182 days  in  litigious 
commercial cases (1 147 days in 2024) and 776 days in litigious civil cases (797 in 2024)28. 
While the average length of proceedings decreased in first instance administrative cases (256 
days, 278 in 2024) and first instance criminal cases before county courts (652 days, 779 days 
in 2024), it increased in first instance criminal cases before municipal courts (785 days, 752 
days in 2024). In narrower category, in 2024, the average length of proceedings before first 
instance courts further decreased in bribery cases (107 days, 478 days in 2023)29. Considering 
the overall reduction in the backlog, including in litigious civil and commercial cases, and the 
decrease in length of proceedings particularly in litigious civil and administrative cases, there 
has been some progress on the implementation of the recommendation. 

24    Among  the  reasons  for  the  proposed  reform  was  the  unnecessary  duplication  of  the  exam  in  the  State 
School  for  Judicial  Officials  with  the  Bar  Examination.  Ministry  of  justice,  administration  and  digital 
transformation (2026b). 

25   The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended Croatia to “take measures to further improve the efficiency of 

justice, particularly as regards the length of proceedings in litigious commercial and civil cases”.  

26    The  data  for 2024  continue  to  show  particular  challenges  in  litigious  civil  and  commercial  cases,  and  all 
non-criminal cases (Figures 5, 12, 13 of the 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard), where lengths of proceedings and 
backlogs,  despite  some  improvements,  remained  among  the  highest  in  the  EU.  In  the  context  of  the 
European  Semester,  the  Commission  has  proposed  that  the  Council  recommend  that  Croatia  “[f]urther 
improve[s] the efficiency of the justice system”. European Commission (2026) 211 final, CSR 3. 

27    The total number of pending cases across all courts at the end of 2025 amounted to 404 621 (416 879 at the 
end of 2024), which represents a 7% decrease compared to 2023. However, at the end of 2025, the number 
of  pending  cases  older  than  ten  years  and  seven  years  slightly  increased.  Croatian  Government  (2025), 
written input, pp. 7-8, and Ministry of justice, administration and digital transformation (2026a). 

28   A  related  target  221  (Reduction  of  the  duration  of  litigation  and  commercial  cases)  is  part  of  the  10th 

payment request, hence it has not yet been assessed by the Commission. 

29    Figures 20 and 21, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. A related target 238 (Reducing the average length of court 
cases  for  corruption  and  organized  crime  offences)  in  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan  for  Croatia  was 
considered fulfilled in 2025. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The perception among experts, citizens and businesses is that the level of corruption in 
the public sector remains high. In the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency 
International,  Croatia  scores  47/100,  ranks  24th  in  the  European  Union  and  63rd  globally30. 
This  perception  remained  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five  years31.  The  2026  Special 
Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  88%  of  respondents  consider  corruption  to  be 
widespread  in  their  country  (EU  average  71%)  and  61%  of  respondents  feel  personally 
affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 94% of 
companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 65%) and 62% consider that 
corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  37%).  Furthermore,  49%  of 
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from  corrupt 
practices  (EU  average  38%),  while  20%  of  companies  believe  that  people  and  businesses 
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 31%)32.  

The  2025  Report  on  the  implementation  of  the  second  Anti-Corruption  Action  Plan 
(2025-2027)  is  being  finalised.  As  part  of  the  2021-2030  Anti-Corruption  Strategy33,  the 
second  Action  Plan34  contained  63  actions  for  2025,  covering  legislative,  institutional  and 
preventive  measures  to  strengthen  public  sector  integrity,  transparency  and  accountability. 
Key actions implemented in the course of 2025 included, among others, enhanced lobbying 
regulations,  stricter  whistleblower  protection  and  a  new  specialised  anti-corruption  court 
division in Varaždin. The main initiatives planned for 2026 include amendments to the act on 
rights  to  access  to  information  and  to  the  public  procurement  legislation35.  Apart  from  the 
regular  implementation  monitoring,  an  independent  final  evaluation  of  the  strategy  is 
envisaged for 2030. 

There  has  been  significant  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  revise  laws  to  further 
increase the efficiency of corruption investigations and prosecutions36. The amended Law 
on the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime entered into force on 
13  November  2025.  The  changes  aim  to  accelerate  and  decentralise  complex,  high-level 
corruption investigations and prosecutions of the specialised prosecution service (USKOK)37. 
Key  amendments  include  jurisdictional  changes  to  decentralise  and  reduce  the  workload  of 

30   Transparency International (2026), Corruption Perceptions Index 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). 

31   In  2021,  the  score  was  47,  while  in  2025,  the  score  was  47.  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. 

32   Data from Special Eurobarometer 573 (2026) and Flash Eurobarometer 582 (2026).  
33   Croatian  Government  (2021),  Corruption  Prevention  Strategy  for  the  period  2021-2030.  See  related  RRP 

milestone 238. 

34   Croatian Government (2025), Action Plan for the period from 2025 to 2027. 
35   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Justice, Administration and Digital Transformation, amendments to the 
access  to  information  act  were  previously  envisaged  for  2025  and  will  be  based  on  an  already  finalised 
evaluation (see related milestone 243). 

36   The  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  Croatia  to  “take  forward  plans  to  revise  the  Criminal 
Procedure Code and the Law on the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime, in line 
with the Anti-Corruption Strategy, so as to further increase the efficiency of investigations and prosecution 
of corruption offences”. Some progress was previously assessed on this recommendation in 2025 and 2024. 

37   Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 2. These efforts aim to align with OECD standards.  

7 

 
 
 
courts that deal with USKOK cases38. The judges presiding the panel in these cases are now 
obliged to prioritise USKOK cases and to concentrate the number of hearings39. More serious 
and  complex  corruption  cases,  as  well  as  those  concerning  a  public  official  and  abuse  of 
office, remain in the competence of USKOK40, which may also transfer corruption cases to 
competent municipal or county state attorneys41. The law lowered the seniority requirements 
to be eligible for the post of the USKOK Director and limited the tenure to two consecutive 
terms42.  Beyond  this,  amendments  to  the  Criminal  Procedure  Code  entered  into  force  in 
February  2026  introducing  an  in  camera  procedure  for  the  speedier  examination  at  the 
indictment stage without the participation of the parties43. Amendments to the Criminal Code 
entered  into  force  in  November  2025,  now  criminalising  all  acts  of  bribery  of  members  of 
Parliament  (both  national  and  foreign)  in  one  provision44  and  providing  for  new  rules  of 
jurisdiction regarding the liability of legal persons45. Since January 2026, a new specialised 
court  department  for  corruption  and  organised  crime  established  at  the  County  Court  in 
Varaždin is operational. Overall, there has been significant progress on the implementation of 
the recommendation.  

Authorities  are  further  developing  a  track  record  of  investigations,  prosecutions  and 
convictions, including in high-level cases. Corruption occurrence is still high. At the same 
time,  authorities  are  actively  pursuing  corruption  and  several  high-level  officials  are  under 
investigation46. The length of USKOK-led proceedings was overall shorter in 2025 compared 
to  2024,  with  a  higher  share  of  investigations  concluded  within  a  year  and  fewer  lasting 
longer47.  The  amendments  to  the  Criminal  Procedure  Act  aim  to  address  a  bottleneck 

38   The jurisdiction of the County Court in Varaždin would be extended to cover USKOK corruption cases of 
the  Zagreb  and  Bjelovar  County  Courts;  the  Rijeka  County  Court  to  cover  the  Karlovac  County  Court 
cases. 

39   Amended Art. 30, Law on the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime. 
40   Art. 21 (1) and (2). Municipal prosecutors are now by law obliged to inform USKOK. 
41   Ex-officio corruption prosecutions of municipal and county prosecutors may also be taken over by USKOK. 

Specific criteria for USKOK intervention or transfer of cases are, however, not stipulated in the law. 

42   The  introduced  time  limit  serves  to  reduce  risks  of  abuse  of  office.  The  seniority  requirements  for  the 
USKOK Director were reduced from 15 to 10 years, allowing for a wider pool of eligible candidates. On 23 
December 2025, a new Director of the USKOK was appointed for a period of four years. 

43   A hearing before the indictment chamber is only envisaged when a judgment is to be delivered following a 
plea  bargain  (which  is  the  case  in  most  corruption  cases)  and  when  deciding  on  the  admissibility  of 
evidence.  To  expedite  proceedings,  no  appeal  is  allowed  against  the  exclusion  of  illegally  obtained 
evidence. 

44   The  offence  covers  the  giving,  offering  or  promising  of  a  bribe  in  relation  to  all  acts  and  omissions  of 
members  of  Parliament,  including  acts  outside  the  legislative  process,  acts  prior  to  the  vote  and  voting 
itself, at national, European and international level, merging Arts. 293 and 294 in Art. 339 Criminal Code 
45   Jurisdiction  for  legal  persons  is  now  based  on  their  registration  in  Croatia,  irrespective  of  the  natural 

persons. 

46   The  State Attorney’s Offices  received  more corruption notifications  (1 979  alleged  corruption  suspects in 
2025;1  464  in  2024).  While  86%  of  these  notifications  were  dismissed  as  lacking  ground,  the  State 
Attorney’s offices in 2025 initiated corruption investigations for 262 individuals - considerably more than 
in  2024  (149).  State  Attorney’s  Office  (2026),  p.  248.  Cases  involve  former  ministers,  members  of 
Parliament,  police,  state  attorneys,  judges,  court  presidents,  mayors,  representatives  of  state-owned 
enterprises,  tax  administration  officials,  and  heads  of  state  oversight  institutions.  Croatian  Government 
(2026b), written input, pp. 19-22. In 2026, investigations into alleged corruption concerning several sports 
associations started. 

47   In 2025, 42% of investigations finished within 6 months (42% in 2024), 85% within a year (69% in 2024). 
Investigations  of  more  than  a  year  decreased  to  14%  (31%  in  2024).  State  Attorney’s  Office  (2026),  pp. 
192-193.  

8 

 
 
 
identified by the State Attorney’s Office  in the indictment panels  before  the courts48. More 
than half of the convictions in  USKOK corruption cases, including  in  high-level  corruption 
cases,  were  based  on  plea  bargaining  agreements  between  the  defendants  and  the  State 
Attorney’s  Office  without  a  full  trial  taking  place49.  The  specialised  anti-corruption 
prosecution  service  (USKOK)  and  the  specialised  anti-corruption  police  (PNUSKOK) 
continue  to  view  the  level  of  access  to  relevant  registries50  and  of  cooperation  between  the 
relevant national state agencies as adequate to carry out their tasks51. The revised Law on the 
State  Attorney’s  Office  adopted  in  October  2025  allows  the  State  Attorney  General  to 
establish specialised teams  as advisory, instructive and coordinating bodies52. While human 
and  financial  resources  are  increasing,  the  high  turnover  of  staff  in  USKOK  continues  to 
present a challenge53. The EPPO highlighted shortcomings in the level of specialisation and 
expertise  of  the  police  and  a  lack  of  necessary  technical  equipment  to  investigate  complex 
EPPO  cross-border  corruption  cases,  with  the  police  responding  by  providing  specific 
training for the officers working with the EPPO54. As a mitigation measure, the Government 
is  investing  in  both,  in  order  to  enhance  technical  capacities55.  There  are  also  challenges 
regarding  law  enforcement’s  expertise  and  proactive  investigations  of  foreign  bribery,  with 
no  cases  initiated  to  date,  but  the  Government  aims  to  report  back  to  the  OECD  on  its 
enforcement efforts by December 202656. The extent to which the recent amendments to the 
Criminal  Procedure  Code,  the  Law  on  the  State  Attorney’s  Office  and  to  the  Law  on  the 
Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime will increase the effectiveness 
of  investigation  and  prosecution  of  corruption  offence  in  practice  will  need  to  be  assessed 
based on monitoring enforcement. 

Croatia  digitalised  the  submission  of  asset  declarations  by  public  officials  and  several 
sanctions  for  non-compliance  were  imposed,  although  verification  remains  non-
systematic.  Croatia’s  comprehensive  legal  framework  obliges  all  elected  officials,  public 
officials,  state  attorneys  and  judges  to  submit  conflicts  of  interest  and  asset  declarations57. 
The  Commission  for  the  Resolution  of  Conflicts  of  Interest  (CRC)  checks  all  declarations 
under  their  jurisdiction  as  to  their  technical  correctness58.  The  veracity  of  the  declaration’s 

48    At  year-end  2025,  the  indictment  panels’  backlog  had  increased  by  23%.  In  2025,  142  persons  were 
convicted for corruption, the lowest in 4 years (301  in 2024). The conviction rate for corruption remained 
high at 96% as in 2024. State Attorney’s Office (2026), pp. 193-194, 249. 

49   88 out of 142 convicted persons. Country visit Croatia, PNUSKOK and USKOK. State Attorney’s Office 
(2026), p. 248. RRP target 238 (Reducing the average length of corruption and organised crime court cases) 
was fulfilled in 2025. 

50   The EPPO does not have a direct access to the Tax Administration’s databases. Negotiations for a Working 

Arrangements were interrupted. EPPO (2026), pp. 32-33. 

51   This includes cooperation with the FIU, the tax and customs authorities. Country visit Croatia, PNUSKOK 

and USKOK; 2025 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 7. 

52    The team members do not have specific powers on the state attorney’s handling individual cases, remaining 
autonomous  and  independent.  Croatian  Government  (2026b),  additional  written  input,  p.1;  Country  visit 
Croatia, Attorney General. 
53    Country visit Croatia, USKOK.  
54   Country visit Croatia, PNUSKOK; EPPO (2026), p. 32. 
55 

Including  trainings  for  police  officers  by  the  Police  Academy  and  the  College  of  Criminal  Justice  and 
Public Safety and EU bodies. 
 Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Justice, no cases of active investigations or convictions were reported. 
OECD (2024). 

56  

57   Law on the Prevention of Conflict of Interest and other relevant laws. RRP milestone 232 (Adoption of the 

new Law on the Prevention of Conflict of Interest) was considered fulfilled in 2022. 

58   In 2025, five staff were in charge of 4 300 submitted asset declarations and one additional counsellor was 
recruited.  Croatian  Government  (2025),  written  input,  p.  10.  The  election  of  new  CRC  members,  not 
exclusively dedicated to asset verification, is in parliamentary procedure. Country visit Croatia, CRC. 

9 

 
 
 
content  is  checked  for  selected  officials  on  an  annual  risk-based  verification  prioritisation 
plan59.  The  low  control  rates  are  reportedly  due  to  the  complexity  of  the  verification 
procedure  and  the  inconsistent,  incomparable  data  structure,  preventing  machine-analysis60. 
Several  sanctions  for  non-compliance,  including  against  ministers,  were  imposed61. 
Stakeholders point out that the level of fines may act as an insufficient deterrent62. Croatia’s 
asset declaration system has improved in terms of digitalisation, facilitating public officials’ 
electronic submission of their declarations63, while the tool for comparing asset declarations, 
as  part  of  a  broader  IT  platform,  remains  under  construction64.  The  CRC  continues  to  note 
that  it  can  only  carry  out  manual  verifications  and  that  the  system  does  not  yet  allow  for 
automatic  notifications  of  discrepancies  between  declarations  and  data  in  other  registries, 
making cross-verification challenging65. In November 2025, the Parliament appointed a new 
president of the CRC66.  

The  Government  has  increased  resources  for  lobbying  oversight,  while  several 
challenges  remain,  including  certain  limitations  of  the  information  included  in  the 
lobbying  register.  In 2025, both  human and financial resources of the  Commission  for the 
Resolution of Conflicts of Interest (CRC) dedicated to lobbying oversight were  increased67. 
While the Government confirms that the register is harmonised with the existing legislative 
framework,  the  competent  entity  for  the  lobbying  register’s  maintenance  (CRC)  called  for 
further legal revisions to address the shortcomings it has identified a year after the register’s 
operation. These include ambiguities in  the personal  scope and in  conflicting definitions  of 
gifts  in  the  Law  on  Lobbying  and  the  Law  on  the  Prevention  of  Conflicts  of  Interest,  with 
risks  of  legal  uncertainty68.  The  lobbying  register  is  publicly  available  and  includes  certain 
data on interest representatives to be updated every two years69. The register could be further 
improved  by  adding  details  on  the  specific  legislation  or  decisions  targeted  in  the  lobbying 
process, the interest representatives’ available lobbying budget or expenses invested, and on 

59   2025  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Croatia,  p.  9.  Due  to  limited  oversight  capacities,  the  CRC’s  prioritisation 
strategy focused on high-level officials in 2024 (President, Prime Minister, ministers), and in 2025 on State 
Secretaries,  local  officials  and  local  company  board  members.  The  CRC  can  also  launch  content 
verification procedures ex-officio upon suspicion raised by complaints or media reports. 

60   OECD (2025), p. 10.  Of the 3 000 asset declarations, 50 are verified per year,  2025 Rule of Law Report, 

Croatia, pp. 8-9. 

61   E.g. CRC (2025); CRC (2025a); CRC (2025b); EDUS Lexpera (2026). 
62   Country  visit  Croatia,  GONG,  Centre  for  Peace  Studies,  Human  Rights  House,  Crosol,  DKolektiv,  also 
highlighting the lack of systematic verification controls of high-ranking government officials and the failure 
to include indexation of the real estate value. 

63   RRP  milestone  241  (Improved  asset  declaration  information  systems  for  state  officials  and  judicial 
officials)  fulfilled  in  2025.  An  IT  tool  connected  to  the  tax  authority  allows  officials  to  automatically 
retrieve data about their own and their spouse’s assets from existing state registries, such as land, vehicle 
and tax. 2025 Rule of law Report, Croatia, p. 9. Alignment with the land registry data remains an issue. 
64   The CRC can only retrieve data of the current year, but not of previous years, and needs to check different 
registers and request information. Country visit Croatia, CRC. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 9. 
65   Country visit Croatia, CRC. Illicit wealth checks are not part of the CRC’s mandate, but suspicious cases 

can be submitted to the police and prosecution service. No such referral occurred in 2025. 

66   2025 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, pp. 8-9. 
67   Three new counsellors were recruited for the lobbying oversight service, while the CRC’s budget increased 

by 20% compared to 2024. Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 10. 

68   It  is  unclear  which  managerial  level  is  under  an  obligation  and  what  constitutes  a  lobbying  activity,  and 
whether experts are considered lobbyists. Country visit Croatia, CRC; EDUS Lexpera (2025). The Law on 
Lobbying prohibits any gift or benefit; the Law on Conflict of Interest excludes gifts as of a certain amount. 
69   CRC,  Lobbying  Register,  https://www.sukobinteresa.hr/hr/lobiranje,  including  the  name  of  the  natural/ 
legal  person,  contact  details  and  general  areas  of  activity.  By  February  2026,  64  legal  persons  had 
registered. 

10 

 
 
 
the  actual  lobbying  meetings  that  took  place70,  which  would  increase  the  transparency71. 
While public officials are obliged to disclose lobbying meetings of importance, there are no 
criteria  or  practical  guidance  to  define  this,  and  disclosure  practice  is  fragmented72. 
Stakeholders,  including  standards  bodies,  have  indicated  that  the  lobbying  register  is 
insufficiently comprehensive and lacks a comprehensive public record of lobbying inputs and 
contacts (‘legislative footprint’) to strengthen transparency of decision-making73. 

The Ministry of Justice has published the first report on the application of the Code of 
Ethics for civil servants and employees at State level. The Code of Ethics for civil servants 
and  employees  at  State  level  entered  into  force  in  202574.  The  report  details  the  submitted 
recommendations and complaints about the conduct of civil servants in state bodies. For the 
first time, the data supporting the report were submitted exclusively via the electronic eEtika 
information system, speeding up and thus enhancing more effective data collection from the 
Ethics Commissioners appointed in every state and judicial authority to monitor compliance 
and  receive  complaints75.  As  regards  the  2022  Code  of  Conduct  for  high-level  officials76, 
including  ministers  and  state  secretaries,  the  Implementation  Council  does  not  have 
sanctioning  powers to  enforce the rules of the Code  on integrity, conflicts  of interest,  gifts, 
and  post-employment.  Instead,  mitigating  measures  in  response  to  the  recommendations  of 
the Implementation Council as a preventive body remain at the discretion of the State entity 
where the concerned public official works77. While statistics exist on the CRC’s caselaw and 
the  sanctions  imposed,  there  are  no  statistical  data  on  the  number  of  conflicts  of  interest 
detected, recommendations issued, and mitigation measures applied78. 

Amendments to improve the whistleblower protection law entered into force. Since 13 
November 2025, new whistleblowing rules extended the protection to individuals who report 

70   Interest representatives must report to the CRC by end of March each year, including on meetings, but these 
data are not recorded in the lobbying register, and are made available only following access to information 
requests.  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Croatia,  p.  10.  RRP  milestone  237  (Setting  up  an  IT  platform  to 
monitor the implementation of national anti-corruption measures) is not yet fulfilled (as part of the future 
9th payment request). 

71   This criticism was also expressed by the OECD and civil society (Civil Liberties Union for Europe (2025)). 
OECD  identified  some  areas which  could be  aligned  with best  practice,  e.g.  the  definition of  lobbying  is 
narrow  as  it  only  focuses  on  direct  communications  with  a  lobbied  person,  and  the  list  of  exemptions  is 
quite broad, including persons participating as experts in government meetings. OECD (2024).  

72   Meetings are disclosed either on the authority’s website or on social media.  Neither the Code of Conduct 
for State Officials in Executive Bodies nor the 2025 Guidelines on the basic obligations of lobbied persons 
define precisely what ‘important meetings’ are, leaving it to the discretion of the reporting person. OECD 
(2024), p. 27. There is currently no requirement for the proactive disclosure of ministers’ agendas. 

73    See also GRECO (2026), recommendation v, paras. 24-29, pp. 6-8; OECD (2024b), recommendation (III); 

and Liberties (2026), p. 153. 

74   2025 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 9.   
75   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Justice. See RRP milestone 240 (Establishment of an information system 

for the management of the ethical infrastructure of civil servants) fulfilled in 2025. 

76   Code of Conduct for State Officials in Executive Bodies. See RRP milestone 240 (Adoption of a code of 

ethics for parliamentarians and a code of ethics for officials in the executive) fulfilled in 2025. 

77   One  case  of  the  Implementation  Council  was  referred  to  the  CRC,  which  can  impose  an  administrative 
sanction  (e.g.  salary  suspension),  yet  only  for  breaches  of  the  Law  on  the  Prevention  of  Conflicts  of 
Interest, but not of the Code of Conduct. It cannot reverse the public official’s decision breaching the Code 
nor  enforce  information-sharing  in  case  of  the  public  official’s  lack  of  cooperation  with  the  CRC,  see 
GRECO (2026), recommendation ii, paras. 14-15, pp. 4-5; GRECO (2020), paras. 92-94, p. 29, highlighting 
also the need for practical guidance for public officials.  

78  The Commission for Deciding on Conflicts of Interest publishes in its annual reports information on case 

law and sanctions imposed. 

11 

 
 
 
on irregularities79. Individuals who report directly to the police or the State Attorney’s Office 
now  have  the  same  right  to  protection  as  those  who  submit  reports  to  the  Ombudsperson, 
eliminating  previous  uncertainties  as  to  when  the  right  to  protection  was  acquired.  New 
deadlines  also  apply  for  court  proceedings  to  ensure  faster,  more  effective  whistleblower 
protection in practice, which aims to address the previously indicated lengthy proceedings on 
retaliatory  measures  taken  against  whistleblowers,  indicated  as  discouraging  reporting80. 
While the number of internal whistleblower reports to the Ombudsperson’s Office dropped in 
2025,  the  Office  dealt  with  many  new  cases  following  external  reports81.  The  IT  anti-
corruption  platform 
include  a  safe  electronic  submission  channel  for 
whistleblower  reporting  to  the  Ombudsperson,  which  is  in  the  testing  phase  and  should  be 
operational  in  the  first  half  of  202682.  The  evaluation  of  the  public  awareness-raising 
campaign conducted by the Ministry of Justice found that the public places the highest level 
of trust for external reporting in the Ombudsperson’s Office83. Stakeholders consider that the 
offence  introduced  to  the  criminal  code  in  2024  criminalising  unauthorised  disclosures  of 
information  from  ongoing  criminal  investigations  could  discourage  the  reporting  of 
corruption84, while the Government maintains that there is no evidence that this provision is 
deterring whistleblowers from reporting criminal offences. 

tool  would 

The State Audit Office reported no substantial violations of the rules on political party 
financing,  while  some  shortcomings  remain,  and  the  timely  reporting  of  party  and 
campaign  finance  continues  to  present  a  challenge.  In  2025,  the  State  Electoral 
Commission (SEC), as the oversight body over political party and campaign financing85, and 
the  State  Audit  Office  found  no  substantial  violation  of  political  party  and  campaign 
financing rules, but concluded on a number of irregularities, as many political parties still fail 
to  fully  comply  with  reporting  obligations86.  Consequently,  the  SEC  adopted  several 
decisions in 2025 on political parties and independent councillors that had not submitted their 
annual reports on time in 2024 and 2025, withdrawing the right of payment of regular annual 
funds or temporarily suspending disbursement as sanctions87. As for donations, in 2025, the 

79   Including criminal offences against the economy, offences against official duty, embezzlement and bribery 
of members of legislative bodies (Parliament, international bodies, local councils). See RRP milestone 233 
(Adoption of amendments to the Act on the protection of persons reporting irregularities) fulfilled in 2023. 

80   Cf. also 2025 Rule of Law Report, p. 11. Country visit Croatia,  GONG, Centre for Peace Studies, Human 
Rights  House,  Crosol  and  DKolektiv,  highlighting  also  the  lack  of  legal  aid  for  legal  persons.  The 
Ombudsperson’s proposal to regulate psychological support was also not taken up in the Law. 

81   In  2025,  72  new  cases  were  opened  due  to  external  reports  (46  in  2024),  and  31  internal  reports  (50  in 

2024), Ombudsperson Office (2026), additional written input. 

82   Croatian  Government  (2026b),  written  input,  p.  16,  including  also  a  virtual  assistant  as  a  separate 
application  in  the  platform  providing  information  on  anti-corruption  legislation.  RRP  milestone  237 
(Setting  up  an  IT  platform  to  monitor  the  implementation  of  national  anti-corruption  measures)  is  under 
assessment. 

83   Country  visit  to  Croatia,  Ministry  of  Justice,  Administration  and  Digital  Transformation.  See  RRP 
milestone 239 (Evaluation of the effects of the national information campaign against corruption) fulfilled 
in 2026. 

84   Art.  307a  Criminal  Code.  Country  visit  Croatia,  Centre  for  Peace  Studies,  Human  Rights  House,  Crosol, 
DKolektiv  and  GONG.  On  corruption  charges  against  police  officers,  see  Croatian  Government  (2025), 
written input, pp. 21-22. See section III below as to the impact of this article and the access to information. 

85  The  subjects  of  oversight  include  political  parties,  independent  members  of  Parliament  and  independent 

councillors. 

86   See  State  Audit  Office  report  (2026)  2025  data,  https://www.revizija.hr/reports/677,  and  State  Election 

Commission report, https://www.izbori.hr/site/UserDocsImages/5471. 

87   25 independent councillors and three political parties failed to submit the 2023 annual  reports on time (33 
decisions on losing the right of payment), and 28 councillors and four political parties for the 2024 reports 
(38 decisions temporarily suspending payments). 

12 

 
 
 
SEC  notified  the  State  Attorney’s  Office  of  about  77  cases  in  which  political  parties  and 
independent members of Parliament had either failed to submit the required half-yearly report 
(50 cases) or had failed to submit it on time (27 cases)88. For donations and expenditures, the 
political  party and campaign  financing  law sets  upper ceilings  for donations, and donations 
through third-parties are prohibited. There are, however, no regulations regarding third-party 
campaigning89 and corporate donations from companies involved in public contracts90.  

increased 

in  comparison 

The Government is implementing a comprehensive public procurement reform, which 
could  contribute  to  reducing  corruption  in  this  high-risk  area.  Businesses’  attitudes 
towards  corruption  in  the  EU  shows  that  34%  of  companies  in  Croatia  (EU  average  30%) 
think  that  corruption  has  prevented  them  from  winning  a  public  tender  or  a  public 
procurement  contract  in  practice  in  the  last  three  years91.  37%  of  companies  perceive  the 
level  of  independence  of  the  public  procurement  review  body  (the  State  Commission  for 
Supervision  of  Public  Procurement  Procedures-DKOM)  as  very  or  fairly  good,  which  has 
to  2025  (27%)92.  The  Single  Market  and 
significantly 
Competitiveness  Scoreboard  on  access  to  public  procurement  in  Croatia  reports  31%  of 
single  bids  for  2025  (27%  EU  average).  High-level  cases,  also  involving  members  of 
Government, are pending before criminal courts93. On 16 May 2026, amendments to the Law 
on  Public  Procurement  entered  into  force  introducing  measures  to  enhance  transparency, 
efficiency and digitalisation, carrying the potential to reduce corruption risks and conflicts of 
interest at all stages of the procurement procedure94. Furthermore, the changes introduced aim 
to  address  the previously  identified lack of legal  protection95 and  provide an opportunity  to 
address the lack of competence of the DKOM to review contracts in simplified procurement 
procedures below the national threshold, through which a large part of the national budget is 
spent96. Additionally, the amendments aim to address the risks of irregularities in the contract 
implementation  phase97  by  introducing  mechanisms  for  verifying  contract  execution  and 
introducing  the  obligation  to  publish  all  contract  amendments.  The  high  level  of 

88   The State Attorney's Office decides on whether to prosecute campaign finance violations, however, it does 

not publicly disclose details of financial sanctions. 

89  See OSCE (2026), recommendation to explicitly regulate third-party campaigning. 
90   Candidates can finance their election campaigns by their own funds and through donations made by natural 
and  legal  persons,  Law  on  the  Financing  of  Political  Activities,  Election  Campaigns  and  Referendums, 
creating risks of structural corruption where public funds may be diverted in exchange for political support. 
OECD (2025); OSCE (2024). 

91   Flash  Eurobarometer  582  on  Businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  and  businesses’  perceptions  of  the 
independence  of  national  justice  systems  in  the  EU  and  selected  enlargement  countries  (2026).  This  is  4 
percentage points above the EU average. 
92   Figure 59, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
93   Country visit Croatia, USKOK and PNUSKOK. 
94   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Justice, Administration and Digital Transformation. The amendments of 
the  Ministry  of  Economy  impose  higher  standards  of  preparation,  stricter  deadline  management  and 
enhanced  procedural  discipline  for  contracting  authorities.  As  to  economic  operators  and  their  legal 
advisers, cost assessment in appeal proceedings is proposed, among others. 

95  Economic  operators  have  the  possibility  now  to  submit  complaints  through  appropriate  legal  protection 

institutes. 

96   In  2025,  the  share  of  public procurement procedures  reviewed  by  DKOM  was  launched  remained  low  at 
3.5% of all published procedures in 2025 (2.6% in 2024). Around 13% of the public spending is procured 
by  simplified  procedure  without  any  control.  The  DKOM  does  not  have  the  competence  to  review  these 
procurements. DKOM (2026), additional written input.  

97   Such as approvals of non-compliant supplies/services. Such practices during the implementation phase are 
critical  because  they  are  frequently  used  to  modify  after  the  award  the  terms  of  a  competitive  tenders  in 
favour of a contractor to increase costs or decrease the scope, often bypassing competitive rules. Country 
visit Croatia, DKOM. 

13 

 
 
 
administrative fees for companies to initiate reviews before DKOM  were reported to be the 
main reason for the low number of reviewed contracts98. Following the appointment of new 
DKOM members by Parliament in  July  2025, the three councils  hearing  appeals  have been 
fully  operational  since  late  August  2025.  DKOM  transmitted  two  notifications  to  the  State 
Attorney’s Office in 2025. Overall, sectors vulnerable to corruption are reportedly the health, 
renewable  energy,  environment  and  construction  sectors,  creating  uncertainty  for 
businesses99.  The  new  Law  on  Foreign  Investment  in  force  since  13  November  2025 
mandates prior approval for third country investments and entities under third country control 
of  sectors  deemed  critical,  including  integrity  and  criminal  records  checks,  including 
corruption convictions of foreign  investors100. In June 2025, Croatia was removed from  the 
‘grey  list’  of  jurisdictions  under  enhanced  monitoring  of  the  Financial  Action  Task  Force 
(FATF)101,  signalling  that  Croatia  improved  transparency  and  its  capacity  to  investigate, 
prosecute  and  sanction  the  laundering  of  corruption  proceeds,  which  may  enhance  investor 
confidence and access to capital markets. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

Amendments  to  the  media  law  enlarged  the  regulatory  mandate  of  the  independent 
media  regulator.  With  a  view  to  alignment  with  the  European  Media  Freedom  Act  on  26 
March  2026,  a  new  law  amending  certain  provisions  of  the  media  law  entered  into  force, 
enlarging  the  Agency  for  Electronic  Media  (AEM)  mandate  to  cover  also  print  media  and 
additional functions, such as assessing media market concentrations. This initiative is part of 
a  broader  effort  to  establish  a  unified  regulatory  framework,  aimed  at  enhancing 
comprehensive media oversight. Croatia's media regulator has scored low risk by the Media 
Pluralism  Monitor  (MPM)  as  for  its  independence  and  effectiveness102,  while  human  and 
financial resources are assessed by the media regulator as matching its responsibilities103. In 
view of the amendments, the Media Council – the main governing and regulatory body – will 
be tasked with  overseeing the  appointments  of the management  of  public service bodies104. 
Stakeholders, however,  have expressed some concerns over the indefinite re-election of the 
Media  Council’s  members,  and  that  election  and  dismissal  processes  are  controlled  by  the 
parliamentary  majority,  with  discussions  focusing  on  term  limits105.  In  arguing  for 
strengthened  safeguards  for  the  Council,  stakeholders  pointed  to  its  future  role  in  issuing 
ordinances  setting  minimum  criteria  for  the  public  procurement  of  programme  production 
and broadcasting for media generally106.  

Discussions  on  public  service  media  reform  focus  mainly  on  the  model  for  electing 
management  bodies.  These  debates  are  part  of  broader  legislative  and  governance 

98   Country visit Croatia, DKOM and American Chamber of Commerce. The 2022 Rule of Law Report found 
that  ‘safeguards  for  the  State  Commission’s  independence,  particularly  regarding  the  appointment  and 
discipline of the members of the State Commission, could be further improved’. 

99   Country visit Croatia, USKOK, PNUSKOK, State Audit Office and the American Chamber of Commerce. 
100   Law  on  Foreign  Investment  Screening.  Obliged  entities  include  companies,  among  others,  in  critical 

infrastructure, defence, technology. 

101   Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 23. 
102   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 14. 
103   Country visit Croatia, AEM.  
104   Media law of 6 March 2026; Country visit Croatia, HRT Management.  
105   Croatian  Journalists’  Association  (2026),  written  input,  p.  16.  See  also  analyses  in  2025  Rule  of  Law 

Report, Croatia, p. 12, and 2024 Rule of Law Report, Croatia, p. 21. 

106   Croatian Journalists’ Association (2026), written input, p. 16. 

14 

 
 
 
reforms107. Moreover, some stakeholders have expressed concerns about current appointment 
procedures,  particularly  about  potential  political  influence,  notably  highlighting  possible 
influence  on  editorial  decision-making  by  the  management  of  the  Croatian  News  Agency 
(HINA)108. The Media Pluralism Monitor noted medium-high risk of independence of public 
service media, pointing particularly to persistent structural vulnerabilities in governance and 
editorial  practices  despite  a  relatively  comprehensive  legal  framework109.  Anticipated 
legislative  reforms  to  address  these  concerns  for  the  Croatian  Radio-Television  (HRT)  are 
expected to be presented by late 2026. There are no detailed plans reported for the reform of 
HINA110.  

There  are  ongoing  concerns  regarding  the  availability  of  stable  financing  for  public 
service media. While HINA and HRT have been funded based on licence fees for over three 
decades,  new  funding  strategies  are  currently  under  consideration  to  enhance  financial 
security in a context of falling licence fee revenues111. In 2025, HRT incurred an additional 
deficit  of  EUR  50  million,  with  EUR  22  million  attributed  to  the  enduring  gap  between 
licence  fees  collected  and  the  costs  associated  with  content  production  and  distribution,  as 
well  as  substantial  incidental  costs  following  staff  reduction112,  which  have  attracted  some 
expressions of concern from stakeholders, including because of existing funding shortfall113. 
Since  2010,  HRT  has  experienced  significant  financial  challenges.  The  licence  fee  has 
remained at the same rate, resulting in declining revenues in real terms. The current funding 
model  is  generally  viewed  as  outdated,  prompting  ongoing  discussions  about  potential 
alternatives.  Stakeholders  have  highlighted  persistent  issues  with  sustainability  of  financing 
of  public  service  media  through  the  licence  fee  system,  noting  that  relying  on  annual  state 
subsidies  granted  in  addition  by  Government  decision  raises  concerns  about  predictability, 
stability and independence from the political influence114.  

Adopted amendments expand the database of media ownership and financing to include 
print  media,  while  stakeholders’  concerns  persist  regarding  the  oversight  of  indirect 
ownership. The centralised online media ownership and financing platform provides data on 
media entities and their owners, as recorded in  official  registers, along  with information  on 
revenues, funding methods and sources, and concessions held115. Stakeholders were generally 
positive  about  the  database116.  Moreover,  the  Media  Pluralism  Monitor  assessed  that 
transparency of media ownership has improved significantly following the introduction of the 
media  ownership  database,  scoring  low  risk117.  However,  concerns  were  raised  by  some 
stakeholders regarding silent owners of media providers118, who are not required to be listed 

107   Country visit Croatia, HRT Management. 
108   Country visit Croatia, Croatian Journalists’ Association. 
109   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 28. 
110   Country visit Croatia, HRT Management. 
111   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Culture and HRT Management.  
112   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Culture and HRT Management.  
113   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 29.  
114   Country visit Croatia, Croatian Journalists’ Association. The Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 28. The 
MPM 2026 flagged in addition some concerns regarding the effectiveness and evaluation of direct subsidies 
for  public  funding  mechanisms,  raising  concerns  that  its  monitoring  focuses  primarily  on  administrative 
compliance rather than the quality or pluralistic value of funded content. 

115   Croatian  Government  (2026b),  written  input,  p.  23.  A related  milestone  27  (Setting  up  a  system  for fact-
checking) in the Recovery and Resilience Plan for Croatia is part of the 10th payment request, hence it has 
not yet been assessed by the Commission. 

116   Country visit Croatia, Croatian Journalists’ Association. 
117   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 17. 
118   Non-voting shareholders, as authorised by the Law on Companies, Chapter III, Articles 148 to 157. 

15 

 
 
 
in the register of beneficial ownership119. Stakeholders have also highlighted some practical 
shortcomings in the monitoring of advertising funding by state-owned enterprises120.  

A  law  revising  the  relevant  framework  for  state  advertising  entered  into  force121. 
Stakeholders  continue  to  express  concerns  of  perceived  favouritism  towards  media  outlets 
with government affiliations and the challenges with complying with reporting requirements, 
especially  at  local  level122.  The  law,  adopted  with  a  view  to  alignment  with  the  EMFA, 
entered into force on 26 March 2026. It has the objective of establishing a legal framework 
and oversight mechanisms to ensure the fair and transparent allocation of state advertising123. 
However,  further  specification  of  the  framework  is  required  through  more  specific  and 
necessary  guidelines  to  be  issued  by  the  media  regulator  to  make  this  framework 
operational124. The law retained the existing legal requirement that 15% of public advertising 
budgets  must  be  allocated  to  regional  and  local  media.  Therefore,  some  progress  has  been 
made on the implementation of the recommendation. 

The financial and governance dependence of local radio and media publishers on local 
government  is  linked  to  concerns  about  their  editorial  independence.  The  Ministry  of 
Culture  noted  that  many  regional  media  publishers  and  commercial  radio  operators  receive 
funding  from  municipal  bodies,  and  this  can  put  at  risk  their  independence125.  Similarly, 
reports  indicate  that  political  influence  in  local  media  is  exerted  through  supplementary 
funding,  advertising  revenue  and  ownership,  with  some  outlets  under  local  government 
ownership126.  While  the  risk  is  assessed  as  medium-low,  the  MPM  highlighted  that  local 
media  markets,  particularly  regional  television  and  radio,  are  rather  vulnerable  to  political 
capture  and  ownership  concentration127.  In  particular,  the  MPM  flagged  that  many  local 
online  outlets  rely  heavily  on  reproducing  official  information  from  municipal  authorities, 
which  raises  concerns  about  editorial  diversity  and  independence128.  Furthermore,  local 
government  officials  combine  their  public  functions  with  membership  in  the  management 
bodies of local commercial TV and radio stations129. Stakeholders also report the closure or 
marginalisation  of  several  national  and  local  media  outlets,  including  the  withdrawal  of 
funding, which adversely affects the working conditions of many media professionals130. The 
Ministry of Culture suggested that alternative funding sources would be considered, such as a 

119   Croatian Journalists’ Association, written input, p. 20. 
120   European Federation of Journalists (2026),  written  input, p. 18, reporting that state-owned enterprises are 
estimated  to  spend  substantially  more  on  advertising  than other  public  institutions,  yet  such  expenditures 
are often neither adequately monitored nor transparently reported; Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 28. 
The Media Pluralism Monitor also noted that in 2025 significant funds were channelled through marketing 
agencies without public tenders.  

121   The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended Croatia to “step up efforts to strengthen the legal framework 
and  oversight  mechanisms  to  ensure  a  fair  and  transparent  allocation  of  state  advertising  at  national, 
regional  and  local  level,  including  the  public  tender procedure”.  No progress  was  previously  assessed  on 
this recommendation in 2025, 2024 and 2023. 

122   Country visit Croatia, Croatian Journalists’ Association. 
123   Law on the implementation of the Regulation establishing a common framework for media services in the 

internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU.  

124   Country visit Croatia, AEM.  
125   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Culture. 
126   Country visit Croatia, AEM. 
127  Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 25. 
128  Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 34. 
129   Country visit Croatia, AEM. 
130   Croatian Journalists’ Association (2026), written input, p. 15.   

16 

 
 
 
dedicated local fund, and is working on plans to reform the Media Pluralism Fund to address 
current challenges and support economically non-viable content creation131. 

Trends  in access  to public information remain unchanged with some delays  or partial 
information being provided, while work on a new access-to-information law is ongoing. 
The  Protection  of  the  right  to  information  in  Croatia  scores  low  risk,  as  assessed  by  the 
MPM132.  However,  some  practical  challenges  continue  in  accessing  information,  such  as 
delays,  the  broad  application  of  exceptions  and  obstacles  related  to  the  classification  of 
information133.  In  2025,  a  Government-established  working  group  analysed  expert 
recommendations  to  amend  the  Law  on  the  Right  of  Access  to  Information,  resulting  in  a 
draft  proposal  to  enhance  elements  such  as  proactive  publication,  public  consultation, 
information  officers  and  the  resolution  of  information  access  requests134.  After  public 
consultation,  which  is  planned  for  the  end  of  2026/beginning  of  2027,  the  draft  will  be 
submitted  to  the  Government.  In  2025,  the  Information  Commissioner  actively  promoted 
access  to  information  and  conducted  39  training  sessions  on  the  right  of  access  to 
information, including specialist sessions for journalists and other media professionals.  

Efforts to improve the  safety of journalists  continued, as journalists called for further 
measures to strengthen and protect their profession. The journalist community described 
continued  challenges  due  to  lacking  self-regulatory  measures  to  bolster  the  status  of 
journalists135.  In  response  to  these  challenges,  the  Government  adopted  the  Action  Plan  for 
the  Development  of  Culture  and  Media  on  6  November  2025,  with  objectives  set  until 
2027136.  The  Ministry  of  Culture  is  also  exploring  options  for  a  mandatory  register  for 
journalists, influencers and content creators to support specific protective actions, though this 
initiative  also  elicited  concerns  and  reservations  from  journalist  representatives  questioning 
the  potential  negative  impact  on  journalistic  independence137.  Regarding  the  safety  of 
journalists, in the reporting period, the Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection 
and  safety  of  journalists  recorded  seven  new  alerts  concerning  Croatia.  Five  of  the  alerts 
concerned  harassment  and  intimidation  of  journalists,  while  two  other  incidents  were 
recorded  concerning  attacks  on  the  physical  safety  and  integrity  of  journalist138.  Moreover, 
Mapping  Media  Freedom  has  noted  22  new  alerts  since  the  publication  of  the  last  report. 
Sixteen  of  them  concerned  verbal  attacks,  including  threats  or  harassment;  five  concerned 
interferences, with the most common example being obstruction of journalistic activity; while 
the  remaining  alerts  relate  to  physical  assaults,  attacks  on  property,  and  legal  incidents139. 
According to data provided by the Ministry of the Interior, in 2025, 19 incidents involving 23 
criminal  offences  against  journalists  and  other  media  professionals  were  recorded.  The 

131   Country visit Croatia, Ministry of Culture. 
132   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 12. 
133   European Federation of Journalists (2026), written input, p. 21. 
134   Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 25. A related milestone 243 (Evaluation of the effects of the 
Law on the right of access to information) in the Recovery and Resilience Plan for Croatia was considered 
fulfilled in 2024. 

135   Croatian Journalists’ Association, written input, p. 28. 
136   Country  visit  Croatia,  Ministry  of  Culture.  The  plan  focuses  on  improving  the  status  of  the  journalistic 
profession  and  the  media  sector  while  encouraging  pluralism.  It  lists  activities  to  strengthen  the  media 
statute as a self-regulatory act at the editorial level, representing an internal agreement between the editorial 
board and the publisher on mechanisms to protect editorial and professional journalistic autonomy. 
137   Country visit Croatia, Croatian Journalists’ Association, the Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 21. 
138  Council of Europe  Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2026). The 
Government has replied to four such alerts, while has not replied to two alerts (there were classified as non-
state threat). In case of one of the alerts the reply is expected by July 2026. 

139  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (2026). 

17 

 
 
 
authorities  reported  that,  in  all  cases,  cooperation  took  place  under  the  Cooperation 
Agreement  concluded  in  September  2023  between  the  Ministry  of  the  Interior  and  the 
Croatian Journalists’ Association and the Trade Union of Croatian Journalists140. The MPM 
underlines  the  medium-high  risk  as  regards  the  journalistic  profession,  standards  and 
protection141. Against this background, the  Government  in  2025  organised  training sessions 
within  the  largest  media  outlets,  involving  over  180  sector  professionals,  to  stimulate  and 
maintain a secure environment142, while the workshops continued in 2026143. The Protocol on 
the  conduct  of  police,  journalists  and  other  media  professionals  during  public  gatherings 
continues to serve as a valuable tool for addressing safety concerns144.  

There  was  some  further  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  address  the  issue  of 
strategic lawsuits against public participation targeting journalists, as  the anti-SLAPP 
law  entered  into  force145.  As  mentioned  in  previous  Rule  of  Law  Reports  and  stated  by 
stakeholders, the strategic lawsuits against public participation are an issue both in numbers 
and  seriousness146.  The  analysis  of  the  Government,  which  is  based  on  a  different 
methodology, presented a lower number of cases147. On 19 June 2026, Parliament adopted the 
Law  on  the  Protection  of  Persons  Involved  in  Public  Activities,  designed  to  transpose  the 
Anti-SLAPP Directive, and it entered into force on 7 July 2026148. The consultations on this 
draft  law  were  prepared  through  an  inter-institutional  framework  involving  relevant 
government ministries, the judiciary, and media stakeholders, though stakeholders mentioned 
shortcomings  in  the  inclusiveness  of  the  consultation  process149.  On  substance,  the  scope 
covered includes both domestic and cross-border civil law cases, excluding however criminal 
cases150. This is of concern for stakeholders, who point out that most of SLAPP cases faced 
by  journalists  are  launched  on  grounds  of  criminal  defamation  or  insult151.  CSO 

140  Croatian Government (2026b), additional written input, p. 24. 
141  The Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 13. 
142   In 2025, four-day training sessions (were carried out in journalistic newsrooms of Croatia’s largest media 
outlets, directly involving more than 180 journalists; Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 24. In 
2026  one-day  workshops  continued  to  be  implemented  at  the  local  level,  including  training  activities  for 
police officers, journalists, and other media professionals, Croatian Government (2026a), additional written 
input, p. 25. 

143   Croatian Government (2026b), additional written input, p. 27. 
144   In 2025, police applied the Protocol in one case; Croatian Government (2026), written input, p. 24. 
145   The 2025 Rule of Law  Report recommended Croatia  to “continue efforts to address the issue  of strategic 
lawsuits against public participation targeted at journalists, including by reviewing the legal provisions on 
defamation and encouraging wider use of procedural rules that allow dismissing groundless lawsuits, taking 
into  account  the  European  standards  on  the  protection  of  journalists”.  Some  progress  was  previously 
assessed on this recommendation in 2025, 2024 and 2023. 

146   The 2025 Report reported that a survey conducted by the Croatian Journalists’ Association had counted that 
as of May 2025 at least 696 active lawsuits against journalists and media outlets were recorded, 2025 Rule 
of Law Report, Croatia, pp. 15-16; Country visit Croatia, Ombudsperson, Croatian Journalists’ Association, 
Trade Union of Journalists and Centre for Democracy and Law Miko Tripalo.   

147   The Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation’s analysis identified 32 cases (25 
civil and 7 criminal) that in their assessment “could potentially qualify as SLAPP”. Moreover, as reported 
by the Government, through an analysis conducted via the eSpis court management system, they identified 
20  civil  court  cases  in  2025  that  could  potentially  qualify  as  SLAPP  proceedings,  of  which  9  were 
concluded with final judgments, Croatian Government (2026b), additional written input, p. 28. 

148   https://esavjetovanja.gov.hr/ECon/MainScreen?entityId=32524 
149   Only one CSO representative was included in the legislative working group after public pressure. 
150  While the anti-SLAPP Directive does not cover claims brought under criminal procedure, the anti-SLAPP 
Recommendation called on Member States to take a number of steps to provide protections in this regard. 

151   Country visit Croatia, Croatian Journalists’ Association and Ombudsperson. 

18 

 
 
 
representatives  raised  that  SLAPP  cases  often  remain  unreported152.  Considering  that 
legislative  amendments  entered  into  force,  there  was  some  further  progress  on  the 
implementation of the recommendation.  

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Local  and  regional  authorities  started  publishing  draft  regulations  on  the  public 
consultation  portal,  and  the  regularity  of  impact  assessments  and  evaluations  of  laws 
increased. Application of SME tests and the administrative burden reduction on businesses 
continued153.  Local  and  regional  self-government  units  started  using  the  e-Consultations 
portal  for  consultations  on  the  draft  regulations  under  their  competence  in  2025154.  There 
were  809  consultations  conducted  on  the  portal  at  national  level  in  2025155.  The  length  of 
consultations  again  improved.  The  share  of  comments  received  that  remained  unanswered 
slightly  increased156.  The number of regulatory impact  assessments  at  national  level  further 
increased  to  nearly  half  of  all  2025  proposals157.  In  August  2025,  the  Government’s 
Legislation  Office  completed  the  Technical  Support  Instrument  Project  ‘Strengthening  the 
Implementation of Ex-post Evaluation in Croatia’. In this two-year project, a total of five ex-
post evaluations were carried out158. In October 2025, an additional regulatory evaluation was 
launched by a ministerial decision159.  

More  than  half  of  the  companies  surveyed  in  Croatia  express  confidence  in  the 
effectiveness of investment protection. 57% of companies are very or fairly confident that 
investments are protected by law and courts, a figure which has increased in comparison with 
2025  (53%)160.  As  regards  authorities  relevant  for  economic  operators,  35%  perceive  the 
level  of  independence  of  the  national  competition  authority  (The  Croatian  Competition 
Agency)  as  very  or  fairly  good,  a  figure  which  has  slightly  increased  in  comparison  with 
2025  (32%)161.  The  High  Administrative  Court  has  jurisdiction  in  several  business-related 
cases, including in cases related to public procurement, public concessions, public contracts 

152   European Federation of Journalists (2026), written input, p. 22. As reported by the Information Commission 

general trends in appeal cases remain comparable with previous years. 

153   Croatia  applies  the  SME  test  at  both  legislative  and  secondary  legislation  levels,  with  the  objective  of 

preventing the introduction of new costs and administrative burdens for entrepreneurs. 

154   Until  January  2026,  there  were  27  such  consultations  at  local  level.  Country  visit  Croatia,  Government‘s 

Legislation Office. 

155   There were 896 consultations in 2024 and 1 028 in 2022. Country visit Croatia, Government’s Legislation 

Office. 

156   The length of consultations was 24 days on average (22 in 2024). The share of unanswered comments was 
15%  (13%  in  2024).  In  2025,  a  total  of  6 911  individuals  and  legal  entities  participated  (4 735  in  2024). 
Croatian Government (2026a). 

157   In  2025,  regulatory  impact  assessments  were  conducted  for  85  draft  laws,  representing  46%  of  all 

proposals. Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 16. 

158   In the areas of state aid for research and development projects, sustainability of pensions, agricultural land 
consolidation, decarbonisation of buildings and renewable energy sources. Croatian Government (2026b), 
written input, p. 16. 

159   It examined how the Law on the Management and Maintenance of Buildings is being implemented. In the 
National School for Public Administration, the Government’s Legislation Office regularly holds workshops 
in the field of better regulation policy instruments. Croatian Government (2026b), written input, p. 16. 
160   Figures  52  and  53,  2026  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  22%  and  20%  of  the  surveyed  investors  respectively 
perceive concerns about quality, efficiency or independence of justice and frequent changes in legislation or 
concerns about the quality of the law-making process as a reason for the lack of confidence in investment 
protection. 

161   Figure 60, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

19 

 
 
 
 
and  economic  regulation.  A  number  of  judicial  mechanisms  to  improve  efficiency  are 
available in these cases, including the possibility to apply for interim measures162. 

On  1  January  2026,  Croatia  had  33  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, an increase of three compared to the previous 
year163. At that time, Croatia’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that had been 
implemented  was  at  63%  (compared  to  68%  in  2025;  37%  remained  pending),  and  the 
average  time  that  the  judgments  had  been  pending  implementation  was  two  years  and  five 
months (compared to two years and three months in 2025)164. The oldest leading judgment, 
pending  implementation  for  more  than  nine  years  concerns  violations  of  the  right  to  a  fair 
trial165. As regards the respect of payment deadlines, on 31 December 2025 there were seven 
cases  in  total  awaiting  confirmation  of  payments  (compared  to  12  in  2024)166.  On  17  June 
2026, the number of leading judgments pending implementation had decreased to 30167. 

Government authorities further  improved the implementation of recommendations by 
the  Ombudsperson.  The  Ombudsperson  fulfils  the  role  of  the  National  Human  Rights 
Institution and is accredited with A-status168. In 2025, the Ombudsperson’s human resources 
increased, and its financial resources increased significantly169. The Government’s Office for 
Human Rights and Minority Rights continued with its practice of collecting information from 
all  relevant  authorities  about  the  implementation  of  the  recommendations  from  the  last 
Ombudsperson’s  report.  In  2025,  according  to  the  Ombudsperson,  the  implementation  of 
recommendations  again  improved,  as  around  65.2%  of  all  recommendations  given  in  2024 
have  either  been  already  implemented  or  are  in  the  process  of  being  implemented  (61%  of 
those  issued  in  2023  were  implemented  in  2024)170.  According  to  the  Government,  the 
analysis has shown that 72% of recommendations issued in 2024 have been implemented, are 
being  implemented,  or  are  in  the  implementation  plan  (in  comparison  to  73.3%  of  those 
issued  in  2023).  As  regards  access  to  information,  the  Ombudsperson  did  not  report  any 
significant  challenges.  As  previously  reported,  the  Parliament  has  still  not  discussed  the 
recent  annual  reports  of  the  Ombudsperson,  which  the  Ombudsperson  characterised  as  an 
obstacle to its effective work171. In 2025, the number of complaints from citizens received by 
the Ombudsperson increased by 21% compared to 2024172. 

162   Figures 66 and 67, 2026 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. 

163   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.   
164   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 2026. EIN (2026), written input, p. 2. 

165   Judgment of the ECtHR, 7183/11, Letinčić v. Croatia, pending implementation since 2016.  
166   Council of Europe (2026), p. 162.   
167   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
168   According  to  the  Principles  relating  to  the  Status  of  National  Human  Rights  Institutions  (The  Paris 

Principles). 

169  The  number of  employees  increased  to  65  (62  in 2024)  and  financial  resources  increased  significantly  to 

EUR 3.3 million (EUR 1.5 million in 2024). Croatian Government (2026b), written input, pp. 9-10.  

170   Ombudsperson (2026), pp. 8-9. 
171   The  Ombudsperson’s  report  for  2022  was  discussed  in  Parliament  only  in  2025;  in  May  2026,  the 
Ombudsperson’s  reports  for  2023  and  2024  were  awaiting  debate  in  the  plenary  of  Parliament,  with  the 
Government  still  to  adopt  its  opinions  on  them.  Ombudsperson  (2026),  p.  9.  Ombudsperson  (2025)  and 
Liberties (2026), pp. 176-177. 

172   According  to  the  Ombudsperson  this  is  the  highest  number  of  complaints  in  the  last  30  years.  In  2025, 

Ombudsperson opened 4 491 new cases, with most in the area of health (525). Ombudsperson (2026), p. 2. 

20 

 
 
 
 
The opportunities for multiannual funding of civil society organisations expanded. The 
civic space in Croatia is considered by Civicus to be ‘narrowed’173. As reported in 2025, the 
Government Working Group completed the technical drafting process of its National Plan for 
Creating an Enabling Environment, and the internal governmental consultation is pending174. 
Civil  society  organisations  (CSOs)  stated  that  delays  in  the  adoption  of  the  national  plan 
present a challenge for the predictability of the operating space for civil society175. The trend 
in  funding  moving  from  short-term  support  towards  multiannual  systematic  and  continuous 
financing, welcomed by CSOs176, was maintained with several multi-year financing projects, 
and  the  Government  indicated  its  plans  to  expand  this  approach  to  all  funding  in  future177. 
However, CSOs also raised insufficient funding as a challenge178.  

173   The score is 71/100. Ratings by Civicus are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, 

repressed and closed. 

174   Country  visit  Croatia,  Government’s  Office  for  Cooperation  with  the  NGOs.  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report 

Croatia, p. 18. 

175   Country visit Croatia, Human Rights House. 
176   Country visit Croatia, Human Rights House and Centre for Peace Studies. 
177   Country visit Croatia, Government’s Office for Cooperation with the NGOs. 
178   Liberties (2026), pp. 142, 175, and Country visit Croatia, Centre for Peace Studies. 

21 

 
 
 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2026 Rule of Law Report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2026-rule-law-report-targeted-
found 
stakeholder-consultation_en . 

be 

at 

Association of Croatian Judges (2026), Announcement concerning the election of the President of the 
Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia, 8 January 2026 https://uhs.hr/archives/43952.  

Commission for the Resolution of Conflicts of Interest (2025a),  Final Decision – CLASS UP/I-034-
02/25-01/13,  15  December  2025,  https://www.sukobinteresa.hr/hr/odluke/nina-obuljen-korzinek-
klasa-upi-034-0225-0113-konacna-odluka  

Commission for the Resolution of Conflicts of Interest (2025b),  Final Decision – CLASS UP/I-034-
02/24-01/25,  25  November  2025,  https://www.sukobinteresa.hr/hr/odluke/oleg-butkovic-klasa-upi-
034-0224-0125-konacna-odluka.  

Commission  for  the  Resolution  of  Conflicts  of  Interest  (2026),  Final  decision  -  CLASS:  UP/I-034-
02/25-01/102,  12  February  2026  https://www.sukobinteresa.hr/hr/odluke/vili-beros-klasa-upi-034-
0225-01102-konacna-odluka.  

Croatian  Government  (2021),  Corruption  Prevention  Strategy 
https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2021_11_120_2069.html.  

for 

the  period  2021-2030, 

for 

Croatian  Government  (2025),  Action  Plan  for  the  period  from  2025  to  2027  accompanying  the 
Strategy 
2025, 
corruption 
https://mpudt.gov.hr/UserDocsImages/dokumenti/Antikorupcija/Akcijski%20plan%20za%20razdoblj
e%20od%202025.%20do%202027.%20uz%20Strategiju%20sprje%C4%8Davanja%20korupcije%20
za%20razdoblje%20od%202021.%20do%202030.%20godine%20(1).pdf  

2021-2030, 

29  May 

prevention 

the 

for 

of 

Croatian  Government  (2026a),  Annual  Report  on  the  Implementation  of  Public  Consultations  for 
2025, 1 April 2026 https://vlada.gov.hr/157-sjednica-vlade-republike-hrvatske-46455/46455. 

Croatian Government (2026b), Input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report, and additional written input. 

Croatian  Parliament  (2025),  Croatia  has  a  new  Ombudsperson  for  Children,  Conflict  of  Interest 
Commission  Chair, 
https://sabor.hr/en/press/news/croatia-has-new-
ombudsperson-children-conflict-interest-commission-chair.  

21  November 

2025 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2026),  Flash  Eurobarometer  582  on  Businesses’  attitudes 
towards corruption and businesses’ perception of the independence of national justice systems in the 
EU and in selected enlargement countries in 2026. 

Directorate-General  for  Communication  (2026),  Special  Eurobarometer  573  on  citizens’  attitudes 
towards corruption in the EU in 2026. 

EDUS Lexpera (2025), Commission: In practice, it has been shown that the Law on Lobbying needs 
to  be  revised,  22  September  2025  https://www.edusinfo.hr/aktualno/dnevne-novosti/povjerenstvo-u-
praksi-se-pokazalo-da-zakon-o-lobiranju-treba-doraditi-66371. 

EDUS  Lexpera  (2026),  The  Commission  for  conflict  of  interest  fined  MEP  Brnjac  800  Euro,  11 
February  2026  https://www.edusinfo.hr/aktualno/dnevne-novosti/povjerenstvo-za-sukob-interesa-
kaznilo-eurozastupnicu-brnjac-s-800-eura-67974.  

European Commission (2025), 2025 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Croatia. 

European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  (2026),  Contribution  from  the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s 
Office for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 
GRECO  (2020),  5th  Evaluation  Round  –  Evaluation  Report  on  Croatia,  24  March  2020 
https://rm.coe.int/fifth-round-evaluation-report-on-croatia-preventing-corruption-and-pro/16809cff22.  

22 

 
 
GRECO (2026), 5th Evaluation Round – Addendum to the Second Compliance Report on Croatia, 12 
January 
https://rm.coe.int/grecorc5-2025-18-final-eng-add-to-the-2nd-compliance-report-
croatia-pu/48802a2fb1.  

2026 

Ministry of Justice, Administration and Digital Transformation (2026b),  Minister Habijan presented 
legal  changes  that  will  speed  up  the  entry  of  judicial  officials  into  the  system,  4  February  2026 
https://mpudt.gov.hr/vijesti-8/ministar-habijan-predstavio-zakonske-izmjene-koje-ce-ubrzati-ulazak-
pravosudnih-duznosnika-u-sustav/30647.  

Ministry of Justice, Administration and Digital Transformation (2026a),  Minister Habijan's meeting 
with  court  presidents:  The  number  of  pending  cases  decreased  by  2.5%  compared  to  the  previous 
year,  25  February  2026  https://mpudt.gov.hr/vijesti-8/sastanak-ministra-habijana-s-predsjednicima-
sudova-broj-nerijesenih-predmeta-smanjen-za-2-5-u-odnosu-na-prethodnu-godinu/30695.  

OECD  (2024),  Public  Integrity  Indicators  –  Croatia,  Lobbying  safeguards  in  practice  https://oecd-
public-integrity-indicators.org/countries/hrv/indicators/1000097?subindicator=1000408 . 

OECD  (2024a),  Implementing  the  OECD  Anti-Bribery  Convention,  Phase  2  Report  on  Croatia,  19 
December  2024  https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2024/12/oecd-anti-
bribery-convention-phase-2-report-on-croatia_e5985bb9/675b0561-en.pdf.  

OECD  (2024b),  Recommendation  of  the  Council  on  Transparency  and  Integrity  in  Lobbying  and 
Influence, OECD/LEGAL/0379, 3 May 2024 https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-
LEGAL-0379. 

Integrity 

(2025),  Public 

OECD 
https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/topics/policy-sub-issues/public-integrity/country-fact-
sheets/OECD-Public-Integrity-Indicators-Croatia-Country-Fact-Sheet-
2025.pdf#:~:text=Verification%20approach:%20The%20Commission%20for%20Resolution%20of,v
erifies%20asset%20declarations%20submitted%20by%20public%20officials. 

Indicators:  Croatia  Country  Fact 

Sheet 

2025 

Ombudsperson  (2025),  The  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the  Croatian  Parliament  Must  Ensure  Timely 
Debate  on  Reports  by  Independent  Institutions,  13  June  2025,  https://www.ombudsman.hr/en/the-
rules-of-procedure-of-the-croatian-parliament-must-ensure-timely-debate-on-reports-by-independent-
institutions/.  

Report 
Ombudsperson 
https://www.ombudsman.hr/hr/download/izvjesce-pucke-pravobraniteljice-za-2025-
godinu/?wpdmdl=23118&refresh=69fdf0e7c8edc1778249959.  

(2026), 

2025, 

for 

8 

April 

2026 

OSCE (2024), Early Parliamentary Elections 17 April 2024: ODIHR Election Assessment Mission – 
Final Report, https://www.osce.org/sites/default/files/f/documents/0/9/581524.pdf.  

OSCE  (2026),  Opinion  on  the  proposed  changes  to  the  legal  framework  governing  campaign  and 
ELE/CRO/578/2026, 
11 
political 
https://odihr.osce.org/sites/default/files/documents/official_documents/2026/06/CRO_ODIHR_Opini
on%20on%20CF%20Proposals_11.06.2026.pdf . 

Croatia, 

finance 

2026, 

June 

– 

State  Attorney’s  Office  (2026),  Report  for  2025,  7  May  2026  https://dorh.hr/hr/izvjesca-o-
radu/izvjesce-o-radu-drzavnih-odvjetnistava-u-2025-godini. 

Supreme  Court  (2026a),  Press  release:  Results  and  conclusions  of  the  supervision  of  the  proper 
performance  of  the  tasks  of  the  court  administration  of  the  Municipal  Court  in  Šibenik  and  the 
Municipal  Court  in  Zadar,  29  June  2026  https://www.vsrh.hr/poznati-rezultati-i-zakljucci-nadzora-
nad-urednim-obavljanjem-poslova-sudske-uprave-opcinskog-suda-u-sibeniku-i-opcinskog-suda-u-
zadru.aspx.  

Supreme Court (2026b), Press release: The Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia continuously 
jurisdiction,  20  January  2026 
performs  all 
https://www.vsrh.hr/vrhovni-sud-republike-hrvatske-kontinuirano-obavlja-sve-poslove-iz-svoje-
ustavne-i-zakonske-nadleznosti.aspx. 

its  constitutional  and 

tasks  within 

legal 

23 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Croatia 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in January 2026 with: 

•  Agency for Electronic Media  
•  American Chamber of Commerce - Croatia 
•  Association of Judges (Judge Damir Kontrec) 
•  Centre for Democracy and Law Miko Tripalo (Prof. Alan Uzelac) 
•  Centre for Peace Studies 
•  Commission for the Resolution of Conflicts of Interest 
•  Constitutional Court 
•  Croatian Journalists' Association 
•  Croatian Newspaper Publishers' Association 
•  Crosol - Croatian Platform for International Citizen Solidarity 
•  DKolektiv 
•  GONG 
•  Government’s Legislation Office 
•  Government’s Office for Cooperation with NGOs  
•  Government’s Office for Human Rights and Rights of National Minorities 
•  HRT – Croatian Radio and Television (Director General Robert Šveb) 
•  Human Rights House 
•  Ministry of Culture and Media 
•  Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation 
•  Ministry of the Interior 
•  Office of the Information Commissioner 
•  Office of the Ombudsperson 
•  PNUSKOK - specialised anti-corruption police 
•  State Attorney’s Council 
•  State  Attorney’s  Office  (including  State  Attorney  General  and  USKOK-specialised 

anti-corruption prosecution) 

•  State Audit Office 
•  State Commission for Supervision of Public Procurement Procedures 
•  Supreme Court (Vice-President Gordana Jalšovečki) 
•  Trade Union of Croatian Journalists 

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

•  Civil Liberties Union for Europe  
•  Civil Society Europe  
•  End FGM EU  
•  European Civic Forum  
•  European Partnership for Democracy  
•  Human Rights Watch  
• 
ILGA-Europe  
• 
International Federation for Human Rights  
•  Philea - Philanthropy Europe Association  

24 

 
 
•  Transparency International EU  

25