COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2026 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Estonia 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: Estonia, 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) 906 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2026 Rule of Law Report              Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Estonia 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) 907 final} - {SWD(2026) 908 final} - {SWD(2026) 909 final} - {SWD(2026) 910 final} - {SWD(2026) 911 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 

Estonia continues innovating as regards the digitalisation of its justice system, including by 
introducing a virtual AI assistant in the court’s digital case file. The reform of the Council for 
the Administration of Courts was adopted maintaining the same structure for the Council as 
reported  in  the  previous  year,  which  does  not  take  account  of  European  standards.  The 
proposed reform to merge all courts of the same instance has been withdrawn. The indexation 
for judges’ salaries remains frozen, while court cases contesting the measure are still pending. 
The  high  workload  within  the  judiciary  remains  a  challenge.  Courts  continue  to  perform 
efficiently, while a trend of increasing disposition time can be observed. Draft laws aiming to 
further improve efficiency of justice have been tabled at Parliament. A new draft law further 
increases the court fees in certain civil proceedings. 

The  new  strategic  framework  on  anti-corruption  is  expected  to  be  completed  by  the  end  of 
2026. A comprehensive revision of the Anti-Corruption Act is planned to be completed in the 
next  four  years.  With  additional  resources  allocated  to  the  Ministry  of  Justice  and  Digital 
Affairs,  new  initiatives  to  prevent  corruption  are  planned.  Corruption  cases  continue  to  be 
handled  efficiently.  Challenges  remain  in  the  detection  and  enforcement  of  foreign  bribery 
cases.  Introduction  of  legal  rules  on  lobbying  for  both  government  officials  and  for 
Parliament is being considered in the framework of the revision of the Anti-Corruption Act. 
The Advisory Centre is expected to support the implementation of the whistleblowing rules. 
The amendments to the Political Parties Act have been approved by Parliament. The high-risk 
areas for corruption are  being  monitored by the authorities and the first assessment of anti-
corruption efforts at the local level delivered positive results. 

The regulator for audiovisual media services continues to operate independently. The budget 
of  the  Estonian  public  service  media  broadcaster  has  again  been  affected  by  procedures  to 
constrain  public  spending.  Estonia  provides  a  high  level  of  transparency  regarding  media 
ownership  structures  but  still  does  not  have  a  law  on  media  market  concentration,  while 
market  plurality  remains  the  biggest  challenge.  There  have  been  positive  developments  to 
improve  the  implementation  of  the  right  of  access  to  information.  The  safety  of  journalists 
continues  to  be  high  and  SLAPP  threats  towards  journalists  decreased,  although  the  online 
threat environment is deteriorating.  

The  Government  is  preparing  concrete  steps  to  improve  the  public  consultation  process. 
Some independent authorities have received more tasks, while additional resources have not 
been allocated. The Strategic partnership funding programme for civil society organisations 
entered into force. 

1 

 
 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS  

Overall,  based  on  the  recommendations  in  the  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report,  and  considering 
other developments that took place in the period of reference, the Commission concludes the 
following:  

•  Limited  progress  has  been  made  to  continue  the  efforts  to  reform  the  Council  for  the 
Administration of Courts. Therefore, it is recommended to Estonia to take steps to adapt 
the  composition  of  the  Council  for  the  Administration  of  Courts,  taking  into  account 
European standards on Councils for the Judiciary.  

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

•  The  recommendation  to  further  advance  with  efforts  to  ensure  consistent  and  effective 
implementation  of  the  right  of  access  to  information  taking  into  account  European 
standards on access  to official  documents has been fully implemented, as the reform of 
the Public Information Act will enhance access to and the reuse of open data.  

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Estonia continues to be average among 
the  general  public  and  is  now  high  among  companies.  Overall,  59%  of  the  general 
population and 71% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to 
be  ‘fairly  or  very  good’  in  20262.  The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  the  general 
public remains at the same level as in 2025 (59%), and has slightly decreased in comparison 
with  2022  (60%).  The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  companies  has  significantly 
increased in comparison with 2025 (47%), as well as in comparison with 2022 (47%).  

There has been limited progress on the recommendation to reform the Council for the 
Administration of Courts taking into account European standards3. On 19 March 2026, 
after  public  consultations,  the  Government  tabled  a  new  draft  Courts  Act  at  Parliament 
following the withdrawal of the previous one. The new draft, similarly to the one presented 
last year, still proposes to transfer powers from the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs to 
the Council for the Administration of Courts, to make the Council a permanent body and to 
amend  its  composition4.  The  draft  law  also  maintains  the  same  structure  for  the  reformed 
Council as in the legislative intent5 and it envisages a composition of 11 members, including 
five peer-elected judges and at least two active politicians6. This is the same composition as 
the one referred to in the previous report, meaning that it does not take into account European 
standards, which recommend that at least half the members of the Council should be judges 
chosen by their peers, and that there should be no active politicians with the right to vote in 
such councils7. On 17 June 2026, the Parliament adopted the law and the final composition of 
the Council remained unchanged8. Given that the reform was adopted but the composition of 
the  Council  remains  the  same  as  during  the  previous  reporting  period,  limited  progress  has 
been made on this recommendation.  

1   An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be found 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   The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended Estonia to ‘[c]ontinue the efforts to reform the Council for the 
Administration of Courts, taking into account European Standards on councils for the judiciary’, 2025 Rule 
of Law Report, Estonia, p. 2. Some progress was previously assessed on this recommendation in 2025. 

4   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 2. 
5   The legislative intent is the first step of the legislative process.  
6   Five  peer-elected  judges from  first  and  second  instance  courts;  two  members  of  Parliament;  one  member 
either the Minister of Justice  and Digital Affairs or an elected representative; one member elected by the 
Estonian Bar Association; one member either the Chancellor of Justice or an elected representative; and the 
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who would be an ex officio member. Country visit Estonia, Ministry of 
Justice and Digital Affairs, Supreme Court, Estonian Judges Association. The Venice Commission already 
clarified  that  ex  officio  Council  members  do  not  count  as  part  of  the  peer-elected  judges,  see  Venice 
Commission (2020), para. 44, also referenced in Venice Commission (2023), para. 47. 

7   Committee of Ministers (2010), paras. 26-29, which recommends that “Not less than half the members of 
such councils should be judges chosen by their peers from all levels of the judiciary and with respect for 
pluralism inside the judiciary”. See also CCJE (2021), p. 4, B. b): “prospective members, whether judges or 
not, […] should not be active politicians or members of the executive or the legislature.” 

8   Stakeholders informed that they were given a short deadline to comment on the draft before it was sent to 
Parliament, therefore, they would provide their comments and suggestions before the  Parliament. Country 
visit, Estonia, Supreme Court and Estonian Judges Association.  

3 

 
 
 
Quality  

The  reform  to  merge  all  courts  of  the  same  instance  has  been  withdrawn,  and  the 
establishment of a new governing body within every court is being proposed. In the same 
draft law tabled on 19 March 2026, the Government abandoned its plan to merge all same-tier 
courts  into  single  national  entities.  This  decision  followed  input  from  judges,  legal 
academics, and stakeholders who argued that it was potentially unconstitutional, lacked clear 
benefits for efficiency, and risked distancing the court system from the public9. The draft law 
also  dropped  the  idea  of  mandatory  specialised  chambers  in  each  court  and  proposes  the 
specialisation of judges as well as new provisions regarding the creation of a Court Presidium 
in  each  court.  The  latter  would  overtake  the  powers  of  the  plenary  of  the  Court  in  certain 
matters, such as the work distribution plans and the structure of the  court  (e.g. establishing 
new  chambers).  It  would  be  composed  of  the  President  of  the  Court,  the  Presidents  of 
Chambers and an equal number of judges elected by the Plenary of the Court10. The objective 
of this new body would be to streamline the decision-making within the courts, while taking 
away powers from the Plenary of the Court.  

Estonia  continues  innovating  in  the  digitalisation  of  the  justice  system,  including  by 
introducing a virtual AI assistant in the court’s digital case file. At the end of 2025, the 
Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs added a virtual assistant to the court’s digital case file. 
This virtual assistant enables users of the case file to analyse the contents of the file, generate 
summaries, and produce translations. In addition, the Ministry is currently developing further 
interoperability  between  the  Court  Information  System,  and  the  population  register  for 
automatic  transfers  of  court  decisions11.  The  justice  system  remains  among  the  most 
digitalised in the EU and keeps innovating even though there is already a wide availability of 
digital  solutions  to  conduct  and  follow  court  proceedings,  and  to  communicate  securely 
within and outside of the justice system12.  

The  indexation  for  judges’  salaries  remains  frozen  while  court  cases  contesting  the 
measure are pending. As reported in the 2025 Rule of Law Report, the draft law unfreezing 
the salaries was withdrawn13. Challenges to the initial law freezing the indexation were filed 
before  the  Administrative  Court,  which  ruled  that  the  reduction  in  judges’  salaries  was 
lawful, did not violate the principle of judicial independence and was in accordance with the 
Constitution.  However,  the  court  warned  that  although  the  temporary  salary  cut  for  2024-
2027 was permissible, the dignity of the judicial office must be preserved and must continue 
to be monitored. The court decision is not final as it has been challenged before the Circuit 
Court  of  Appeal,  while  a  separate  decision  on  the  constitutionality  of  the  measure  is  still 
pending before the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Review Chamber14.  

9   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 5. 
10   Country visit, Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs.  
11   Estonian Government (2026), written input, pp. 6-7. 
12   Figures 41 to 45, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
13   2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, pp. 4-5. 
14   Estonian  Government  (2026),  written  input,  p.  6.  See  also  Estonian  Judges  Association  (2026),  written 
input,  p.  10.  Estonian  Bar  Association  (2026),  written  input,  p.  12.  According  to  European  standards, 
judges’ remuneration should be commensurate with their profession and responsibilities and be sufficient to 
shield them from inducement aimed at influencing their decisions. Committee of Ministers (2010), para. 54, 
and Court of Justice, case C-64/16, para. 45, and Joined Cases C-146/23 and C-374/23, paras. 62, 71-75. 
When  a  Member  State  adopts  budgetary  restriction  measures  affecting  its  officials  and public  servants,  it 
may decide to apply those measures also to national judges, while the preservation of judicial independence 
4 

 
 
 
The  workload  within  the  judiciary  remains  a  challenge,  while  competitions  to  fill-in 
vacancies have been announced. As mentioned in the 2025 Rule of Law Report15, the high 
workload of judges has been identified as a source of concern. According to the Chief Justice 
of the Supreme Court, judges are  facing high  workloads, growing backlogs, and increasing 
complaints  about  long  proceedings,  all  of  which  are  contributing  to  a  risk  of  stress  and 
burnout16. The causes for the high workload remain the same, in particular certain procedural 
provisions17  in  combination  with  increasing  caseload  and  budget  cuts18.  An  additional 
challenge  that  has  been  identified  by  stakeholders  is  the  14  vacant  judicial  positions  in  the 
last  year19  representing  about  6%  of  all  judges’  positions  in  the  country.  As  of  2026, 
competitions have been announced for 18 vacant judicial positions, which are still ongoing. 
Moreover, in the next five years, 53 out of 261 judges will be eligible for retirement.  

A  new  draft  law  further  increases  the  court  fees  in  certain  civil  proceedings.  On  1 
January  2026,  the  state  fee  for  submitting  claims  in  public  procurement  cases  doubled, 
making it the highest fee for administrative cases in the country20. The aforementioned new 
draft  Courts  Act  includes  a  third  increase  of  court  fees  over  the  last  three  years21.  This 
increase, which in some cases could reach up to 50% of the existing court fee22 would affect 
civil and commercial proceedings. Nonetheless, under the current legal framework any party 
to  a  case  may  challenge  court  fee  rates  before  the  Constitutional  Review  Chamber  of  the 
Supreme Court23. 

Efficiency 

Courts  continue  to  perform  efficiently,  while  a  trend  of  increasing  disposition  time, 
including  in  civil  and  commercial  cases,  can  be  observed.  According  to  the  2026  EU 
Justice  Scoreboard,  the  length  of  proceedings  in  disposition  time  in  2024  continues  to  be 
among the shortest in the EU24. For 2025, the average length of civil proceedings is similar to 
previous  years,  but  the  upward  trend  in  the  time  required  to  resolve  cases  continues25.  In 
criminal cases, the length of proceedings also remained stable, with slight improvements26. In 

requires  that  the  level  of  remuneration  of  judges  is  always  commensurate  with  the  importance  of  the 
functions they carry out. 

15   2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, p. 5. 
16   Supreme Court (2025), Country visit, Estonia, Estonian Judges Association, Supreme Court. 
17   These  include  provisions  regarding  the  replacement  of  a  defence  attorney  and  provisions  expanding  the 

possibilities for judicial exchanges in situations where the accused is absent from court. 

18   2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, p. 5.  
19   See Estonian Judges Association (2026), written input, p. 10 and Estonian Bar Association (2026), written 

input, p. 12.  

20   Estonian Bar Association (2026), written input, p. 12. The fees are between 1280 and 2560 EUR depending 
on the value of the contract. The reasoning behind the increase of the fee was case overload in the review 
committee (and courts). 

21   Estonian Bar Association (2026), written input, p. 11. Country visit, Estonia,  Estonian Judges Association, 
Supreme Court, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, pp. 5-6. 

22   Country visit, Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
23   See Art. 15, para 1, second sentence and Art. 152 of the Constitution. 
24   Figures 6-14, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
25   For 2025, 129 days, for 2024, 123 days on average; for 2023, 108 days on average; for 2022, 102 days on 

average. 

26   For  2025,  263  days  in  general  criminal  proceedings,  38  days  in  simplified  proceedings  and  47  days  in 
misdemeanour cases. for 2024, 298 days in general criminal proceedings, 47 days in simplified proceedings 
and  43  days  in  misdemeanour  cases;  for  2023  310  days  in  general  criminal  proceedings,  34  days  in 
simplified  proceedings  and  44  days  in  misdemeanour  cases;  for  2022,  245  days  in  general  criminal 
proceedings, 33 days in simplified proceedings, and 44 days in misdemeanour cases.  

5 

 
 
 
the  first  instance  courts,  the  length  of  administrative  proceedings  further  decreased, 
improving  efficiency27.  The  number  of  pending  cases  is  increasing,  and  compared  to  2024, 
the  clearance  rate  remained  stable  at  110%  in  civil  and  commercial  cases;  this  means  that 
courts continue to be able to cope with incoming cases28.  

Draft  laws  aiming  to  improve  the  efficiency  of  the  justice  system  have  been  tabled  in 
Parliament. The new draft law of 15 January 2026 contains amendments to the Code of Civil 
Procedure  and  the  Code  of  Administrative  Court  Procedure.  These  amendments  aim  to 
reduce the workload of courts by improving the efficiency of civil and administrative court 
proceedings29. They will streamline the procedures identified as being one of the causes for a 
high  workload,  including  by  reducing  the  number  of  judges  sitting  in  certain  panels  from 
three to one, and by reducing the number of steps in appeal procedures in certain cases30.  

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  perception  among  experts,  citizens  and  business  executives  is  that  the  level  of 
corruption in the public sector remains relatively low. In the 2025 Corruption Perceptions 
Index  by  Transparency  International,  Estonia  scores  76/100  and  ranks  7th  in  the  European 
Union  and  12th  globally31.  This  perception  has  been  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five 
years32.  The  2026  Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  53%  of  respondents 
consider corruption widespread in their country (EU average 71%) and 25% of respondents 
feel  personally  affected  by  corruption  in  their  daily  lives  (EU  average  30%).  As  regards 
businesses, 33% of companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 65%) and 
13%  consider  that  corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  37%). 
Furthermore, 41% of respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter 
people  from  corrupt  practices  (EU  average  38%),  while  51%  of  companies  believe  that 
people  and  businesses  caught  for  bribing  a  senior  official  are  appropriately  punished  (EU 
average 31%)33. 

The new strategic framework on anti-corruption is expected to be completed by the end 
of  2026.  While  the  Anti-Corruption  Action  Plan  2021–2025  is  yet  to  be  evaluated, 
consultations  on  the  upcoming  strategic  framework  are  ongoing34.  In  this  process,  various 
stakeholders, including  the Anti-Corruption Network, are consulted with  the aim to  finalise 
the new Anti-Corruption Action Plan by the end of 2026. Some of the expected target areas 
include awareness raising, transparency in decision-making and stakeholder involvement35. 

A comprehensive revision of the Anti-Corruption Act is planned to be completed in the 
next  four  years.  While  the  Anti-Corruption  Act  establishes  rules  to  prevent  conflicts  of 
interest36, the Parliament is currently in the process of amending some of its technical aspects 

27   For 2025, 142 days, for 2024, 153 days; for 2023, 162 days; for 2022, 149 days.  
28   Figures 11-16, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
29   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 8. 
30   Country visit, Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
31   The level of perceived corruption is categorized as follows: low (above 79); relatively low (between 79-60), 

relatively high (between 59-50), high (below 50). 

32   In 2021 the score was 74, while, in 2025, the score is 76. 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. 

33   Data from Special Eurobarometer 573 (2026) and Flash Eurobarometer 582 (2026).  
34   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
35   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
36   RT I, 29.06.2012, 1, as amended by RT I, 13.04.2021. 

6 

 
 
 
in view of clarifying and harmonising them37. In parallel, the authorities started discussions 
regarding  an  overall  revision  of  the  Anti-Corruption  Act,  which  is  expected  to  bring 
significant  changes  to  the  current  rules  on  integrity  over  the  next  four  years.  In  particular, 
current rules are expected to be streamlined, and some soft law is intended to be integrated 
into the legislative framework38. 

With additional resources allocated to the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs, new 
initiatives  to  prevent  corruption  are  planned.  Following  additional  resources  in  the 
Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs for anti-corruption measures dedicated to both staffing 
and  activities,  new  initiatives  are  being  launched.  The  authorities  are  currently  developing 
tools  to  help  identify  and  prevent  corruption  risks  across  different  sectors.  Beyond  the 
revision  of  the  Anti-Corruption  Act,  the  e-learning  course  on  conflict  of  interest  and 
corruption prevention is to be updated by July 2026, alongside the expected establishment of 
a new asset declaration register39. The authorities are also developing an e-learning course for 
law enforcement, with a focus on corruption in the private and financial sectors40. 

Corruption cases continue to be handled efficiently. In 2025, the Police and Border Guard 
Board initiated a total of 13 criminal cases41, while the EPPO reported no cases42. Three cases 
on high-level corruption were ongoing in 2025, and one is still ongoing. In September 2025, 
the Tallinn Circuit Court handed down a conviction for embezzlement. Between 1 July 2025 
and 7 April 2026, cases of passive and active bribery, trading in influence and arranging the 
receipt of gratitudes continued to be investigated and prosecuted, with multiple statements of 
charges sent to the courts.43. 

Legislative  changes  were  introduced  in  the  foreign  bribery  legal  framework,  while 
challenges  remain  in  the  detection  and  enforcement  of  foreign  bribery  cases.  Despite 
advancing  in  reforms,  including  by  clarifying  the  definition  of  the  foreign  bribery  offence, 
revising the criminal corporate liability framework and significantly increasing the sanctions 
for legal persons44, Estonia has not detected, investigated or prosecuted a foreign bribery case 
since 201445. The  OECD  considers that detection  and enforcement of foreign bribery cases 
should be further enhanced46.  

Introduction of legal rules on lobbying for both government officials and for Parliament 
is  being  considered  in  the  framework  of  the  revision  of  the  Anti-Corruption  Act. 

37   Act on Amendments to the Anti-Corruption Act, the Penal Code and the Taxation Act 442 SE. 2025 Rule of 

Law Report, Estonia, p.8.  

38   This concerns, among others, rules on post-employment activities with a cooling-off period for guidelines 

were issued by the Civil Service Ethics Council in 2025. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, pp. 8-9. 

39   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
40   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
41   This  includes  one  bribery  case,  three  cases  on  official  forgery,  four  cases  on  the  violation  of  public 
procurement  requirements  and  five  cases  on  violation  of  procedural  restrictions.  Estonian  Government 
(2026a), written input. 

42   EPPO (2026), p. 23. 
43   Prosecutor’s Office, written input.  
44   OECD (2025). 
45   Despite one conviction on foreign bribery in 2018, OECD (2025). 
46   The  OECD  recommended,  among  other  measures,  a  systematic  assessment  of  the  foreign  bribery  risk 
profile,  increased  detection  of  foreign  bribery,  and  clarification  of  the  availability  of  whistleblower 
protections for reporting foreign bribery. In its view, the absence of a systematic and comprehensive risk 
assessment  may  limit  the  extent  to  which  foreign  bribery  risks  faced  by  Estonian  businesses  are  fully 
identified and assessed. OECD (2025). 

7 

 
 
 
According  to  the  analysis  of  the  Ministry  of  Justice  and  Digital  Affairs  and  Transparency 
International  Estonia,  978  lobby  meetings  with  government  officials  were  registered  in 
202547. While lobbying rules for the government officials are currently covered by soft law, 
the same rules in relation to Parliament remain non-existent despite past discussions48 on the 
publication of information about meetings with lobbyists on its website.  In accordance with 
the GRECO recommendation49, the introduction of legal  rules on lobbying is  considered in 
the context of the future revision of the Anti-Corruption Act50. 

The  Advisory  Centre  is  expected  to  support  the  implementation  of  the  whistleblowing 
rules. As of January 2026, the Ministry of Justice and Digital  Affairs concluded a contract 
with  Transparency  International  Estonia,  which  is  expected  to  provide  whistleblowing 
advisory services over the next four years, both to reporting persons and to public authorities 
and companies that are mandated to receive reports51. Civil society noted that currently, due 
to the narrow scope of the whistleblowing rules52, there are no cases within the scope of the 
whistleblowing  law,  therefore,  the  tasks  of  the  Centre  are  expected  to  focus  more  on 
awareness raising53.  

The amendments to the Political Parties Act have been approved by Parliament. On 6 
May  2026,  the  Parliament  adopted  the  revision  of  the  Political  Parties  Act54  which  was 
published on 27 May 2026 in the State Gazette. In particular, the new rules address the issue 
of  illegal  donations  specifying  the  relevant  definition  and  the  catalogue  of  prohibited 
donations, amending the consequences applicable to the acceptance of a prohibited donation55 
as well as setting a deadline to returning the donation56. In addition, the new rules extended 
the  investigative  powers  of  the  Party  Financing  Supervision  Committee57,  clarified  the 

47   1045  in  2022;  1057  in  2023;  1193  in  2024.  Ministry  of  Justice  and  Digital  Affairs,  Register  of  Lobby 

Meetings. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, p. 8.  

48   2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, p. 8.  
49   GRECO 2026, point 89. GRECO recommended that lobbying should be regulated at the national (central) 
level through a clear legal framework to ensure transparency of  interactions between lobbyists and public 
officeholders, manage conflicts of interest and enable meaningful public scrutiny. 

50   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs. 
51   GRECO  (2026).  GRECO  recommended  that  the  national  (central)  authorities  to  support  the  effective 
implementation of the whistleblower protection framework by providing practical guidance and training to 
relevant  actors,  ensuring  access  to  confidential  advice  for  potential  whistleblowers,  clarifying  the  scope, 
roles and procedures within the framework, and establishing regular evaluation of the law’s effectiveness 
through data collection and analysis with a view to identifying any need for future amendments.  

52   The new  law on whistleblower protection entered into force on 1  January 2025. The law does not extend 

protection beyond reports on breaches relating to the areas of EU law. 

53   Transparency  International  –  Estonia  (2026),  written  input.  The  Transparency  International  Estonia's 
Advocacy  and  Legal  Advice  Centre  (ALAC),  established  in  view  of  providing  advice  to  potential 
whistleblowers under the whistleblowers law, also provides advice to whistleblowers reporting other cases 
of  misconduct  occurred  in  the  workplace,  falling  outside  the  application  of  the  rules  of  whistleblowing. 
2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, p.9.  

54  Act on Amendments to the Political Parties Act and the Credit Institutions Act (585 SE). 
55  Donations from foreigners, with the exception of citizens of the European Union permanently residing in 
Estonia,  are  prohibited.  Funds  intended  for  the  exercise  of  the  mandate  of  a  member  of  the  European 
Parliament or a member of the Parliament or for supporting the activities of European-level political parties 
and political foundations are not considered as donations from a legal person. Furthermore, they cannot be 
used for an election campaign. 

56  Upon expiry of the 30-day deadline when the donation can be returned to the donor, the prohibited donation 
is transferred to state revenue. An exception is a prohibited donation made from the funds of the European 
Parliament, which must be returned to the European Parliament. 

57  Among others, it created the possibility of obliging the affiliated organisation of a political party and third 

parties to submit documents, information and explanations to the commission. 

8 

 
 
 
financial reporting obligations of political parties58 and expanded the definition of the party 
affiliate59. 

The high-risk areas for corruption are being monitored by the authorities and the first 
assessment  of  anti-corruption  efforts  at  the  local  level  delivered  positive  results. 
Businesses’ attitudes  towards corruption in  the EU show that 19% of companies in  Estonia 
(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 years60. 60% of businesses perceive 
the  level  of  independence  of  the  public  procurement  review  body  (Public  Procurement 
Review Committee) as  very or fairly good  which has significantly increased in  comparison 
with  2025  (31%)61.The  Single  Market  and  Competitiveness  Scoreboard  on  access  to  public 
procurement  in  Estonia  reports  30%  of  single  bids  for  2023  (EU  average  27%).  Business 
stakeholders  consider  that  corruption  does  not  constitute  an  obstacle  to  doing  business  in 
Estonia62. In 2025, in addition to the previously identified63 high-risk areas for corruption, the 
authorities  add  also  defence64.  Public  procurement  remains  highly  digitalised65  with 
increasing  competition66. At the sub-national  level,  GRECO67  found that Estonia has put in 
place  a  robust  anti-corruption  and  integrity  system  at  the  municipal  level.  In  this  context, 
GRECO highlighted several good practices68. It also issued a number of recommendations to 
address outstanding challenges69.  

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

The  regulator  for  audiovisual  media  services,  the  Consumer  Protection  and  Technical 
Regulatory  Authority  (CPTRA),  continues  to  operate  independently.  The  CPTRA  has 
become  a  competent  authority  under  the  Regulation  on  the  transparency  and  targeting  of 
political advertising. Its human and financial resources remain unchanged since 202570, while 
the  need  for  additional  resources  to  fully  address  its  expanding  tasks  has  been 

58  Parties are expected to disclose also the costs of research and data collection under political expenses. 
59  A party affiliate is a foundation or non-profit organisation of which the party is the founder or member and 

whose activities are aimed at achieving the party's political goals. 

60   Flash  Eurobarometer  557  on  Businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  in  the  EU  (2025).  This  is  11 

percentage point above the EU average.  
61   Figure 59, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
62   Estonian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (2026), written input. 
63   Those  being:  healthcare,  the  local  government,  political  party  financing,  public  procurement,  obtaining 
residence  and  work  permits, EU  funding,  energy,  construction,  and  corruption  in  the private  sector. 2025 
Rule of Law Report, Estonia, pp. 9-10. 
64   Public Prosecutor’s Office, written input. 
65   Overall, 98% of public procurement is carried out as e-procurement. Estonian Government (2026), written 

input, p. 9. 

66   The  average  number  of  bidders  rose  from  3.6  in  2023  to  4.4  in  2024  and  reached  4.8  by  April  2025. 

Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 9. 

67   GRECO (2026). 
68   This concerns various areas, including public procurement, value-based organisational culture, e-trainings, 

access to information, and participatory budgeting. GRECO (2026). 

69   These  address  a  range  of  issues,  including  the  appointment  of  supervisory  board  members  of  municipal 
companies and foundations, the development of guidance on procedural restrictions, and the formulation of 
guidance on secondary activities. These also cover the establishment of a system for risk-based verification 
of  declarations  of  assets  and  interests,  the  assessment  of  citizens’  participation  in  the  decision-making 
process,  the  regulation  of  lobbying,  the  reinforcement  of  Internal  Audit  Services,  the  rotation  of  external 
audit firms, and the strengthening of the whistleblower protection law. GRECO (2026). 

70   Country visit Estonia, CPTRA. 

9 

 
 
 
acknowledged71. The CPTRA continues to monitor the media market and websites providing 
access to media services., In cooperation with the Estonian Financial Intelligence Unit, it has 
notified  Estonian  telecommunications  providers  of  75  TV  channels  and  320  websites  for 
which  there  is  evidence  that  the  media  service  or  members  of  its  management  body  are 
sanctioned  in  the  EU72.  The  2026  Media  Pluralism  Monitor  (MPM)  continues  to  report  a 
medium-low risk as for the independence and effectiveness of the CPTRA73. 

The  Estonian  public  service  broadcaster  (ERR)  operates  independently.  Efforts  are 
ongoing  to  enhance  the  independence  and  financial  stability  of  public  service  media  in  the 
long  term.  While  the  ERR’s  general  budget  was  frozen  at  the  2024  level,  the  Ministry  of 
Culture  provided  some  additional  funds  for  the  increase  of  journalists’  salaries74.  The 
practical impact of the freeze is the difficulty to produce programmes and exercise editorial 
responsibility  in  allocating  resources75.  The  Government  is  finalising  amendments  to  the 
Estonian Public Broadcasting Act  to  introduce  a  four-year  framework agreement model for 
stable,  predictable  and  transparent  financing  of  ERR,  aimed  at  strengthening  institutional 
independence and with a view to the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) requirements on 
public  service  media  funding76.  While  the  2026  MPM  continues  to  note  a  low  risk  for 
independence  of  public  service  media,  it  highlights  that  the  budget  freeze  constitutes  a 
difficulty  for  the  day-to-day  operation  of  ERR77.  The  lack  of  sufficient  funding  to  exercise 
editorial independence remains the biggest challenge for ERR. 

legislative  amendments, 

While Estonia has a high level of transparency of media ownership structures, the law 
on media market concentrations is still under preparation and market plurality remains 
the main challenge. Information on media ownership is widely available and the beneficial 
ownership data is accessible, supported by a complaint mechanism78. At the same time, the 
Government  has  not  yet  finalised 
including  measures  on 
concentration-related  assessments  and  related  procedural  safeguards,  with  a  view  to  the 
implementation  of  EMFA79.  For  the  time  being,  there  are  no  media-specific  concentration 
rules  beyond  general  competition  law80.  The  amendment  to  the  competition  law  is  under 
discussion  by  the  Government81.  According  to  the  Estonian  Association  of  Journalists,  the 
concentration  of  the  newspaper  market  is very  high with  only  one  printed  daily  newspaper 
left, apart from tabloid printed press82. Large online platforms remain dominant in the digital 
market  of  Estonia,  capturing  a  significant  share  of  digital  advertising  revenues  and  thereby 
reducing the income available to domestic media outlets83. However, stakeholders note that 
the loss of revenues from advertising to Estonian media houses is compensated by the rising 

71   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 10. 
72   Country visit Estonia, CPTRA.  
73   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 14. 
74   Country visit Estonia, ERR. 
75   For  example,  budget  constraints  can  limit  decisions  when  it  comes  to  hiring  foreign  correspondents 

(Country visit Estonia, ERR). 

76   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 11.  
77   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), pp. 30-31 
78   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 10. 
79   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Culture. 
80   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 10 
81   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Culture. 
82   Country visit Estonia, Estonian Association of Journalists. 
83   Country visit Estonia, Ministry of Culture, Estonian Association of Journalists. 

10 

 
 
 
number of paid subscriptions84. In the assessment of 2026 MPM, market plurality remains the 
main problematic area for Estonia, assessed at medium-high risk85. 

There  has  been  significant  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  ensure  consistent  and 
effective  implementation  of  the  right  of  access  to  information86.  Changes  to  the  Public 
Information  Act87,  which  entered  into  force  in  March  2026,  have  been  made  to  improve 
access  to  information.  A  data  consent  system,  enabling  individuals  to  grant,  manage,  and 
revoke  their  consent,  an  authorisation  management  system,  allowing  businesses  to  manage 
permissions, and a Translation Gateway to enhance transparency and language support have 
been introduced. These amendments are considered to  enhance access to and reuse of open 
data.  Stakeholders  do  not  report  particular  difficulties  with  the  application  of  the  law  on 
access to official information by journalists and highlight that much information is provided 
online  without  a  need  for  requests88.  Furthermore,  the  Government  has  submitted  two 
legislative proposals for public consultation: one to mandate data trackers in state information 
systems, enhancing transparency by enabling individuals to monitor access to their personal 
data,  and  another  to  modernise  database  requirements,  ensuring  lawful  data  processing  and 
providing stakeholders with an accurate overview of state-held data while addressing current 
inefficiencies. Hence, significant progress has been made on the recommendation to further 
advance with efforts to ensure consistent and effective implementation of the right of access 
to information taking into account European standards on access to official documents.  

The safety of journalists is  generally high in Estonia, the online threat environment is 
deteriorating.  The  Parliament  has  recently  adopted  amendments  to  the  Code  of  Civil 
Procedure and the Law of Obligations Act, which aim to transpose the Anti-SLAPP Directive 
into national  law89.  The new amendments  cover both  cross-border  and domestic cases.  The 
Estonian  Journalists  Association  has  been  designated  as  the  anti-SLAPP  national  contact 
point90.  According  to  stakeholders,  no  cases  of  physical  violence  towards  journalists  were 
reported.  At  the  same  time,  the  safety  of  journalists  online  is  reportedly  deteriorating,  and 
threats  of  violence  are  increasing91.  Since  the  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report,  no  new  alerts  for 
Estonia have been published on the Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection 
of journalism and safety of journalists92, nor on the Mapping Media Freedom Platform93. The 
2026 MPM notes SLAPP cases are very rare94. 

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

The Government is preparing concrete steps to improve the public consultation process 
for  legislation.  Following  last  years’  reflection  process,  which  led  to  identifying  areas  for 

84   Country visit Estonia, Estonian Association of Journalists. Ministry of Culture. 
85   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 7. 
86   The  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Estonia  to  “Further  advance  with  efforts  to  ensure 
consistent and effective implementation of the right of access to information taking into account European 
standards on access to official documents.” Some progress was previously assessed on this recommendation 
in 2023, 2024 and 2025. 

87   2025 Rule of Law Report, p. 12. 
88   Country visit Estonia, Estonian Association of Journalists, Estonian Press Council. ERR. 
89   Estonian Government (2026). 
90   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 11. 
91   Country visit Estonia, Estonian Association of Journalists, Estonian Press Council. 
92   Council of Europe’s Safety of Journalists Platform.   
93   Mapping Media Freedom Platform. 
94   Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 11. 

11 

 
 
 
further improvement in the consultation process for legislation95, the Government is working 
on concrete proposals that would improve the inclusive nature of law-making. As part of their 
2025-2029 Open Government Action Plan, the Government will prioritise enhancing public 
sector  openness  through  skills  development  and  strengthening  data-driven  governance.  The 
Ministry  of  Justice  and  Digital  Affairs  reformed  legislative  drafting  rules  by  streamlining 
legislative intent requirements to focus on substantive analysis and flexibility. The length of 
consultation  periods  was  identified  as  requiring  further  improvement.  A  three-phase 
regulatory  revision  was  undertaken.  It  resulted  in  the  removal  of  more  than  300  obsolete 
regulations,  a  ministerial  review  of  burdensome  rules,  and  an  ongoing  inter-agency 
bureaucracy reduction96. Despite these improvements, some stakeholders have criticised the 
lack  of  inclusiveness  of  the  law-making  process  and  the  shorter  consultation  deadlines  for 
certain pieces of draft legislation97. 

Some independent authorities have received more tasks, while additional resources have 
not  been  allocated.  Over  the  last  years  the  workload  of  the  equality  body  (the  Gender 
Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner) has been increasing, and this trend is expected 
to  continue  as  the  Government  is  planning  to  extend  the  list  of  tasks  and  mandates  of  the 
Commissioner. However, no additional budget is foreseen to fulfil these tasks. Moreover, in 
2025  the  Government  continued  to  implement  austerity  measures,  where  public  sector 
institutions  are  expected  to  cut  their  budgets  10%  over  three  years98,  leading  to  cuts  in  the 
budget  of  the  Commissioner’s  office.  At  the  same  time,  implementing  new  legislation  for 
more financial independence, the budget of the Chancellor for Justice99, which is the National 
Human  Rights  Institution  accredited  with  A-Status,  was  directly  reviewed  by  the  Finance 
Committee  of  the  Parliament.  The  Chancellor’s  budget  in  2026  increases  only  by  the 
resources allocated for the performance of additional tasks and does not take into account the 
increase in workload in other areas100. 

Less than half of companies surveyed in Estonia express confidence in the effectiveness 
of investment protection. 47% of companies are very or fairly confident that investments are 
protected by law and courts, a figure which has increased in comparison with 2025 (43%) 101. 
The main reason  among companies for their lack of confidence is  the difficulty to  obtain a 
fair compensation to protect property (27%) 102. As regards authorities relevant for economic 
operators, 63% of companies perceive the level of independence of the national competition 
authority (The Competition Authority) as very or fairly good, a figure which has significantly 
increased  in  comparison  with  2025  (37%)103.  Stakeholders  also  assess  the  work  of  the 
oversight bodies as positive, while noting that businesses occasionally point out to regulatory 

95   2025 Rule of Law Report, Estonia, p. 13. 
96   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 13. 
97   Civil Liberties Union for Europe, Liberties Rule of Law Report 2026, Estonia, p. 18. Country visit, Estonia, 
Human Rights Centre and Open Estonia Foundation. See also a reference in pillar I regarding the draft law 
for the reform of the Council for the Administration of Courts.  

98   Estonian Government (2026), written input, p. 14. Countr visit, Estonia, Open Estonia Foundation.  
99   The  Chancellor  of  Justice,  which  is  the  National  Human  Rights  Institution  (NHRI),  has  an  A-status 

accreditation by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI). 

100   ENNHRI (2026), p. 122 or 416.  
101   Figure 52, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
102   Figure 53, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 20% and only 17% of the surveyed investors respectively perceive 
the  frequent changes in legislation or concerns about the quality of the law-making process and  concerns 
about  quality,  efficiency  or  independence  of  justice  as  a  reason  for  the  lack  of  confidence  in  investment 
protection.  

103   Figure 60, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.  

12 

 
 
 
interpretations and consistent enforcement practices as areas for improvement. The Supreme 
Court  has  jurisdiction  in  several  business-related  cases,  including  in  cases  related  to  public 
procurement, public concessions, public contracts and economic regulation104. A number of 
judicial  mechanisms  to  improve  efficiency  are  available  in  these  cases,  including  the 
possibility to apply interim measures, joint examination of similar cases and the consolidation 
of multiple appeals 105. 

On  1  January  2026,  Estonia  had  two  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, a decrease of three compared to the previous 
year106. At that time, Estonia’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that had been 
implemented  was  at  87%  (compared  to  74%  in  2025;  13%  remained  pending),  and  the 
average time that the judgments had been pending implementation was 4 years and 1 month 
(compared  to  1  year  and  10  months  in  2025)107.  The  oldest  leading  judgment  is  pending 
implementation  for  almost  5  years108.  As  regards  the  respect  of  payment  deadlines,  on  31 
December  2025  there  were  no  cases  awaiting  confirmation  of  payments  (the  same  as  in 
2024)109.  By  17  June  2026,  the  number  of  leading  judgments  pending  implementation  had 
remained at 2110.  

The  Strategic  partnership  funding  programme  for  civil  society  organisations  entered 
into  force.  The  funding  programme  entered  into  force  in  July  2025.  This  will  allow  the 
important  source  of  funding  for  civil  society  organisations  to  continue111  and  support  the 
civic  space  in  Estonia  which  is  rated  as  ‘open’  by  Civicus112.  Moreover,  the  Parliament 
adopted  amendments  to  the  State  Budget  Act  in  December  2025  which  limit  eligibility  for 
operating grants primarily to legal bodies of the central government, effectively leading civil 
society organisations towards project-based funding. The proposal is being justified by a need 
for  uniform  rules  and  oversight.  Civil  society  organisations  reported  not  having  been 
involved in the drafting of this part of the proposal113. 

104   Country visit, Estonia, the Chamber of Commerce.  
105   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. 

106   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.  
107   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. 3. 

108   Judgment of the ECtHR, 22597/16, R.B. v. Estonia, pending implementation since 2021.  
109   Council of Europe (2026), p. 162.  
110   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
111   Country visit, Estonia, Human Rights Centre.  
112   Estonia’s  score  is  96/100.  Ratings  by  Civicus  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed, 

obstructed, repressed and closed. 

113   Estonian Government (2026), written input, pp. 16-17. 

13 

 
 
 
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-
stakeholder-consultation_en. 

found 

be 

at 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Estonia, https://monitor.civicus.org/country/estonia/. 

Civil Liberties Union for Europe (2026), Written contribution for the prepartion of the 2026 Rule of 
Law Report.  

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. 

Council of Europe, Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) (2021), CCJE Opinion No. 24: 
Evolution  of  the  Councils  for  the  Judiciary  and  their  role  in  independent  and  impartial  judicial 
systems. 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2020), Bulgaria - Urgent interim opinion on the draft new 
constitution (CDL-AD(2020)035). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2023), Bulgaria - Opinion on the judicial system act (CDL-
AD(2023)039). 

Council of Europe, Safety of Journalists Platform, Estonia | Safety of journalists platform. 

Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union,  judgment  of  6  October  2021,  W.Z.,  C-487/19, 
ECLI:EU:C:2021:798.  

Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union,  Judgment  of  the  Court  (Grand  Chamber)  of  25  February 
2025, XL and Others v Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku and Lietuvos Respublika, Joined Cases C-146/23 
and C-374/23, ECLI:EU:C:2025:109. 

Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union,  judgment  of  27  February  2018,  Associação  Sindical  dos 
Juízes Portugueses, C-64/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:117. 

ENNHRI (2026), State of the Rule of Law in Europe, Report on Estonia. 

Estonian Bar Association (2026), written input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 

Estonian Government (2026), Input for the preparation of the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 

Estonian Judges Association (2026), written input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 

Estonian Office of the Chancellor for Justice (2025), Annual Report. 

Estonian  Supreme  Court  (2026),  Written  contribution  for  the  preparation  of  the  2026  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

Estonian Supreme Court (2025), Villu Kõve: kohtute töö vajab põhimõttelisi muudatusi, 5 June 2025. 

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

European Commission (2026), 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Public Prosecutor’s Office (2026), Annual Report 2025. 

GRECO (2026), Sixth Evaluation Round, Preventing corruption and promoting integrity at the sub-
https://rm.coe.int/grecoeval6rep-2025-1-final-eng-evaluation-report-estonia-
level, 
national 
public/48802b4b9a. 

Media Freedom Rapid Response, https://www.mappingmediafreedom.org/.  

Media Pluralism Monitor (2026). 

14 

 
 
OECD (2025), Anti-Bribery Convention Phase 4 Report on Estonia Implementing the Convention and 
Related  Legal 
Instruments,  https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-anti-bribery-convention-
phase-4-report-on-estonia_890a016f-en.html.  

Transparency International (2026), Corruption Perceptions Index 2025. 

15 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Estonia 

The Commission services held physical and virtual meetings in September 2025 and March 
2026 with: 

•  Anti-corruption Select Committee 
•  Consumer protection and Technical Regulatory Authority 
•  Constitutional Review Chamber of the Supreme Court 
•  Council for the Administration of Courts 
•  Estonian Association of Journalists 
•  Estonian Association of Judges 
•  Estonian Bar Association 
•  Estonian Internal Security Service 
•  Estonian Public Broadcasting 
•  Estonian Press Council 
•  Human Rights Center Estonia 
•  Ministry of Culture 
•  Ministry of Foreign Affairs 
•  Ministry of Interior 
•  Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs 
•  National Audit Office 
•  Office of the Chancellor of Justice 
•  Political Party Financing Surveillance Committee 
•  Police and Border Guard Board 
•  The Chamber of Commerce 
•  The Prosecutor’s Office 
•  The Supreme Court 
•  Transparency International – Estonia 

* 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 
•  Transparency International EU 

16