COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2026 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2026 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2026-07-17
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Denmark, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, freedom of the press, human rights, independence of the judiciary, pluralism in the media, rule of law, whistleblowing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 17.7.2026  SWD(2026) 904 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2026 Rule of Law Report              Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Denmark Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 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) 905 final} - {SWD(2026) 906 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 

The level  of perceived judicial  independence in  Denmark  continues to  be very high  among 
both the general public and companies. Human and financial resources allocated to the justice 
system  continue  to  increase  progressively  in  line  with  the  2024-2027  multi-year  financial 
agreement.  The  review  of  the  legal  aid  system  is  still  pending,  with  the  Judicial  Council 
expected to complete it by summer 2026. The inquiry committee appointed to report on the 
organisation, structure and tasks of the courts continues its work, with a view to submitting 
its report by the beginning of 2027. The level of digitalisation of the justice system remains 
overall  good,  and  the  multi-year  IT  project  for  processing  criminal  and  probate  cases 
continues to advance. While the average case handling time has decreased overall, challenges 
remain for certain categories of cases. 

The perception among experts, citizens and business executives is that Denmark is one of the 
least  corrupt  countries  in the world.  The authorities are preparing a strategy to  improve the 
prevention and prosecution of foreign bribery which is expected to be adopted in 2027. The 
new four-year budget framework for the Danish Police provides new resources and prioritises 
the fight against economic crime. There are no plans to introduce rules on ‘revolving doors’ 
for  ministers  and  on  lobbying,  and  to  ensure  the  adequate  control  of  asset  declarations 
submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions. New rules have been adopted to 
ban donations from abroad to political parties, while a broader reform of the rules on private 
funding  of  political  parties  has  not  yet  been  completed.  The  authorities  consider  that  the 
implementation  of  the  rules  on  whistleblowing  is  accomplished  and  there  are  no  further 
actions  planned  in  this  regard.  While  there  is  no  overarching  process  in  place  to  identify 
sectors  with  a  high  risk  of  corruption,  the  authorities  continue  to  implement  measures 
concerning foreign bribery. 

The  mandate  and  responsibilities  of  the  media  regulatory  authorities  have  expanded.  The 
establishment of a new Media Ombudsman was agreed following the recommendations of the 
Media  Liability  Committee.  Recent  reforms  introduce  a  new  competence-based  model  for 
appointing  Danmarks  Radio’s  board,  alongside  the  adoption  of  a  new  corporate  strategy 
through  2030.  Denmark  has  taken  steps  to  modernise  its  media  policy  framework  ahead  of 
the  negotiations  of  the  new  multi-year  media  agreement.  Work  on  proposals  for  a  revised 
Access to Public Administration Files Act is still ongoing. The safety of journalists remains 
high in Denmark.  

The  legislative  process  remains  inclusive  overall.  The  Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights 
continues to carry out its mandate independently and highlights the importance of providing 
adequate resources to  effectively  fulfil its tasks.  A new funding  model for civil  society has 
been agreed at the political level in 2025. 

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,  the  Commission  concludes  the 
following:  

•  Limited progress has been made on the recommendation to finalise the review of the legal 
aid  system,  as  the  Judicial  Council  continues  its  work.  It  is  therefore  recommended  to 
Denmark  to  step  up  efforts  to  complete  this  review,  taking  into  account  European 
standards on legal aid. 

•  No progress has been made to introduce rules on ‘revolving doors’ for ministers and on 
lobbying and ensure adequate control of asset declarations submitted by persons entrusted 
with top executive functions, with no plans to introduce such rules nor to improve control 
of  asset  declarations.  Therefore,  it  is  recommended  to  Denmark  to  introduce  rules  on 
‘revolving  doors’  for  ministers  and  on  lobbying  and  ensure  adequate  control  of  asset 
declarations submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions. 

•  Some further progress has been made on the recommendation to advance with the reform 
of the Access to Public Administrative Documents Act as the expert committee continued 
its work with a view to such a reform, but no legislative proposal has been presented yet. 
Therefore,  it  is  recommended  to  Denmark  to  step  up  efforts  to  move  forward  with  the 
reform  of  the  Access  to  Public  Administrative  Documents  Act,  taking  into  account 
European standards on access to official documents.   

2 

 
 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  in  Denmark  continues  to  be  very  high 
among both the general public and companies. Overall, 88% of the general population and 
87% of companies perceived the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or 
very good’ in 20262. The level of perceived judicial independence among the general public 
has significantly increased in comparison with 2025 (81%) and has increased in comparison 
with  2022  (84%).  The  level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  among  companies  has 
increased  in  comparison  with  2025  (82%)  and  has  remained  at  the  same  level  as  in  2022 
(87%).   

Quality  

Human  and  financial  resources  allocated  to  the  justice  system  continue  to  increase 
progressively in line with the 2024-2027 multi-year financial agreement. The framework 
provides  for  a  total  of  approximately  EUR  308  million  (DKK  2.3  billion)  in  additional 
funding over the period compared with 2023 levels, aimed both at maintaining current levels 
of  judicial  activity  and  implementing  the  initiatives  set  out  in  the  agreement3.  Under  the 
current multi-year financial agreement, 28 of the 30 envisaged new judges have already been 
placed.  In  addition,  23  deputy  judges  were  recruited  in  2025,  bringing  the  total  number  of 
deputy judges appointed under the current multi-year financial agreement to 404. Resources 
under the agreement have also been allocated to expanding courtroom capacity and the court 
infrastructure  portfolio,  including  investments  in  different  courts  and  aligning  the  judicial 
systems  of  Greenland  and  the  Faroe  Islands  with  that  of  Denmark5.  The  Danish  Court 
Administration  has  welcomed  these  additional  resources,  highlighting  their  contribution  to 
improving courts’ efficiency6.  

There has been limited progress on the recommendation to complete the review of the 
legal aid system, with the Judicial  Council continuing its work in accordance with the 
timeline  for  presenting  results  by  summer  20267.  In  December  2024,  the  Ministry  of 
Justice  had  requested  the  Judicial  Council,  a  permanent  advisory  body  for  the  Ministry  of 
Justice  regarding  civil  justice,  to  review  the  legal  aid  system  in  Denmark8.  The  Judicial 
Council  has  continued  its  work  on  this  review,  with  recommendations  expected  to  be 
presented by summer 20269 . Some stakeholders have expressed concerns regarding the pace 

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   2025 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 3.  
4  Danish government (2026a), additional written input. 
5   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration.  
6   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration. 
7   The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended to Denmark to “step up efforts to complete the review of the 
legal  aid  system,  taking  into  account  European  standards  on  legal  aid.”  Limited  progress  was  previously 
assessed on this recommendation in 2025. 

8   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 
9   Danish Government (2026), written input, p. 1, Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice.  

3 

 
 
 
at which the review is being conducted10. As the review is still ongoing, overall progress on 
the recommendation to complete the assessment of the legal aid system remains limited. 

The inquiry committee appointed to report on the organisation, structure and tasks of 
the courts continues its work, with a view to submitting its report by the beginning of 
202711.  In  March  2025,  an  inquiry  committee  was  established  to  examine  the  structural 
conditions  of  the  courts.  This  follows  the  multi-year  agreement  on  the  financing  of  the 
judiciary for the period 2024-2027. The committee is tasked with reviewing the organisation 
and  structure  of  the  courts,  their  specialisation,  and  the  courts’  buildings  portfolio.  Its 
mandate specifies that any proposed reorganisation or structural changes should ensure user 
focus,  nation-wide  accessibility,  short  case-handling  times,  uniformity,  and  efficient,  high-
quality  solutions12.  The  committee  is  expected  to  submit  its  final  report,  including  specific 
recommendations, by the beginning of 202713. 

The level of digitalisation of the justice system remains overall good, and the multi-year 
IT  project  for  processing  criminal  and  probate  cases  continues  to  progress,  with 
completion  expected  by  the  end  of  2026.  The  use  of  digital  technology  by  courts  and 
prosecution services is overall good, with key developments including full digital handling of 
criminal cases between the police, prosecution services and courts;  a new case-management 
system for estate proceedings was launched in selected pilot courts to allow the system to be 
tested and stabilized before a nationwide roll-out expected for mid-202614. As of 1 January 
2026,  four  system  releases  have  been  deployed,  covering  probate  cases,  fine  review, 
compulsory  liquidation,  and  preliminary  criminal  case  management,  with  future  releases  to 
cover  remaining  estate  probate  and  criminal  cases15.  The  staggered  rolling  out  of  an  IT 
system for processing criminal and probate cases is entering its final implementation phase, 
with  both  types  of  cases  anticipated  to  fully  migrate  from  legacy  systems  by  the  end  of 
202616.  The  Courts  of  Denmark’s  online  database  of  judgments  (“Domsdatabasen”)  was 
expanded  in  2025  to  approximately  7 850  decisions17.  Digitalisation  efforts  extend  to 
Greenland  and  the  Faroe  Islands18,  taking  into  account  statutory  and  legal  differences  that 
prevent fully standardised deployment19.  

Efficiency   

10   Country  visit  Denmark,  Danish  Judges  Association,  Danish  Bar  and  Law  Society.  As  noted  in  the  2025 
Rule of Law Report, a pre-legislative committee had already been set up with a mandate broadly similar to 
that  of  the  Judicial  Council,  though  there  were  important  differences.  Notably,  the  Judicial  Council’s 
mandate does not require it to assess possibilities for strengthening information about the Danish legal aid 
model, nor does it obligate the Council to incorporate recommendations from previous reports, unlike the 
pre-legislative committee. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 4.  

11   2025 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 4. 
12   Country visit Denmark, Danish Judges Association. 
13   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration.  
14   Figures 41, 42 and 43, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
15   Danish Government (2026), written input, p. 5, Country visit Denmark, Danish Ministry of Justice. 
16   Danish Government (2026), written input, pp. 4-5, Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration. 
17   Danish Government (2026), written input, p. 5, Country visit Denmark, Danish Ministry of Justice. 
18   There  are  ongoing  efforts  under  the  North  Atlantic  Programme  to  ensure  that  the  Faroe  Islands  and 
Greenland gain digital access to key areas in the judiciary equivalent to what is available in Denmark. The 
aim  of  the  programme  is  to  establish  equal  digital  support  across  the  enforcement,  civil,  criminal,  and 
probate domains, while also accommodating the linguistic, legal, and organizational conditions specific to 
Greenland and the Faroe Islands.  

19   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration. 

4 

 
 
 
While  the  average  case  handling  time  has  decreased  overall,  challenges  remain  for 
certain categories of cases. Additional budgetary resources have been made available to the 
courts  in  support  of  the  efforts  to  reduce  case-handling  times20.The  number  of  incoming 
litigious civil  and commercial cases at  first  instance remained stable in  2024 (0.9 cases  per 
100 inhabitants). The estimated time needed to resolve litigious civil and commercial cases at 
first instance has declined (265 in 2023 compared with 250 in 2024), while the clearance rate 
for  such  cases  increased  significantly  (93%  in  2023  and  99%  in  2024)21.  According  to  the 
Danish Court Administration, the average case-handling time decreased from 2024 to 202522. 
At  the  same  time,  the  average  case-processing  time  for  criminal  cases  with  lay  judges  at 
district  court  level  (“Domsmandssager”)  slightly  increased  between  2024  and  202523. 
Stakeholders  have  linked  the  increase  in  the  average  processing  time  of  criminal  cases  at 
district court level to a rise in the average length of pre-trial detention, which increased from 
approximately three months in 2018 to six months in 202424. In response, the Administration 
of Justice Act was amended in 2026 with the introduction of new initiatives to promote the 
use  of  non-custodial  alternatives  to  detention  and  to  reduce  the  duration  of  pre-trial 
detention25. 

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  perception  among  experts,  citizens  and  business  executives  is  that  the  level  of 
corruption in the public sector remains low. In the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index by 
Transparency International, Denmark scores 89/100 and ranks 1st in the European Union and 
1st globally26. This perception is relatively stable over the past five years27. The 2026 Special 
Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 25% of respondents consider corruption widespread 
in  their  country  (EU  average  71%)  and  4%  of  respondents  feel  personally  affected  by 
corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 18% of companies 
consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 65%) and 7% consider that corruption is 
a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  37%).  Furthermore,  30%  of  respondents  find 
that  there  are  enough  successful  prosecutions  to  deter  people  from  corrupt  practices  (EU 

20  As  part  of  the  2024-2027  multi-year  financial  agreement,  approximately  DKK  700  million  has  been 
allocated  over  the  agreement  period  to  reduce  case  processing  times  in  the  courts,  Danish  government 
(2026a), additional written input. 

21   Figures 2, 5 and 10, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
22   While  increased  resources  and  procedural  changes  initially  led  to  a  temporary  rise  in  average  case-
processing  times  in  the  short  term,  recent  data  suggests  a  more  positive  trend.  According  to  the  Danish 
Court  Administration,  the  case  processing  time  decreased  from  11.5  months  at  the  end  of  2024  to  9.5 
months at the end of the third quarter of 2025.  

23   Country visit Denmark, Danish Court Administration. 
24   Justitia (2026), written input, p. 11, Danish Bar and Law Society (2026), written input, pp. 13-14. 
25  The act contains 4 initiatives with the aim to promote the use of non-custodial alternatives to detention and 
to reduce the duration of pre-trial detention: (1) increased use of electronic monitoring as an alternative less 
invasive  measure;  (2)  the  introduction  of  a  new  time  limit  of  four  weeks  as  a  starting  point  from  the 
Prosecution  Service’s  bringing  of  charges  before  the  court  to  the  commencement  of  the  trial,  when  the 
suspect  is  held  on  remand;  (3)  shorter  maximum  time  limits  for  continuous  periods  of  pre-trial  detention 
before  stricter  requirements  for  continued  detention  apply;  and  (4)  easier  access  to  court  hearings  on  the 
preservation of evidence which may have a bearing on the lifting of pre-trial detention, Danish government 
(2026a), additional written input. 

26   The level of perceived corruption is categorised as follows: low (above 79); relatively low (between 79-60), 

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

27   In 2021, the score was 88, while in 2025, the score is 89. The score significantly increases/decreases when 
it changes more than five points; improves/deteriorates (changes between 4-5 points) and is relatively stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years.  

5 

 
 
 
average 38%), while 45% of companies believe that people and businesses caught for bribing 
a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 31%)28. 

The authorities are preparing a strategy to improve the  prevention and prosecution of 
foreign bribery which is expected to be adopted in 2027. The strategy is part of an action 
plan29 aiming to address the OECD’s recommendations30. The strategy will inter alia focus on 
sanctions for money-laundering and false accounting offences, the confiscation of bribes, and 
small  facilitation  payments31.  The  authorities  continue  to  consider  that  a  strategy  going 
beyond  foreign  bribery  or  a  specialised  agency  dealing  with  anti-corruption  issues 
unnecessary as, in their view, no additional  strategy and agency are needed given the trust-
based  political  culture32.  Within  the  government,  coordination  of  anti-corruption  matters 
continues  to  be  carried  out  on  a  case-by-case  basis  by  the  Ministry  of  Justice.  The  anti-
corruption forum created in  2014 has not  met over the past  three years33. Civil  society and 
academia  continue  to  challenge  the  lack  of  a  strategic  framework34.  According  to  GRECO, 
the Danish anti-corruption system puts a strong focus on criminal conduct while not paying 
enough attention to integrity risks35.  

The new four-year budget framework for the Danish Police provides new resources for 
the  fight  against  economic  crime,  potentially  benefiting  the  fight  against  corruption. 
Additional  funds  of  over  EUR  130  million  (DKK  1  billion)  are  envisaged  to  support  the 
recruitment of more investigators and prosecutors in the broader area of economic crime for 
the  years  2026  to  2030,  which  might  also  contribute  positively  to  the  fight  against 
corruption36. The National Special Crime Unit (SCU) and the State Prosecutor for the Special 
Crime Unit (SPSCU), which were put in place under the previous budget framework (2021-
2025), are expected to continue their work under the new framework focusing on complex or 

28   Data from Special Eurobarometer 573 (2026) and Flash Eurobarometer 582 (2026).  
29   A  follow-up  implementation  plan  to  the  action  plan  that  was  submitted  in  November  2025  has  been 
submitted  to  the  OECD  in  June  2026.  A  revised  action  plan  is  expected  to  be  submitted  later  this  year, 
Danish government (2026a), additional written input. 

30   A first OECD report has been published in 2023. In the follow-up report, published in 2025, the Working 
Group  concludes  that  Denmark  has  fully  implemented  6  recommendations,  partially  implemented  12 
recommendations, and not implemented 37 recommendations. Significant gaps and weaknesses concern, in 
particular,  small  facilitation  payments,  whistleblower  protection,  sanctions  for  false  accounting  offences 
and  money  laundering,  as  well  as  the  overall  detection,  investigation  and  prosecution  of  foreign  bribery. 
OECD (2025), p. 4. 

31   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 
32   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice.  
33   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 
34   Country visit Denmark, Transparency International Denmark and Magtudredningen 2.0. Under the relevant 
OECD  public  integrity  indicators,  Denmark  scores  below  the  EU  average  on  the  coverage  of  strategic 
framework (1 out of 7). 

35   GRECO  concludes  that  Denmark  has  dealt  in  a  satisfactory  manner  with  only  two  of  the  fourteen 
recommendations contained in the Fifth Round Evaluation Report. In that context, GRECO also notes that 
the recommendation to develop a strategy for the integrity of persons with top executive functions remains 
not implemented. GRECO (2025), pp. 2-3. 

36   None  of  these  funds  have  however  been  specifically  earmarked  for  the  fight  against  corruption.  Country 

visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice, and National Special Crime Unit.  

6 

 
 
 
cross-border cases37. The overall number of investigations and judgments for corruption cases 
remains at a similar level as in 202438.  

There  has  been  no  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  introduce  rules  on  ‘revolving 
doors’  for  ministers,  on  lobbying  and  on  the  adequate  control  of  asset  declarations 
submitted by persons entrusted with top executive functions39. Concerns of stakeholders40 
remain regarding corruption risks relating to the lack of rules on integrity for ministers and 
top  executive  functions41,  as  well  as  on  lobbying  and  revolving  doors,  while  there  are  no 
plans to introduce rules in these areas42. While the authorities do not plan to introduce rules 
on lobbying, associations representing the public affairs sector plan to establish a voluntary 
lobbying  register  for  all  entities  engaging  in  interest  representation  (including  the  private 
sector,  CSOs,  and  trade  unions)43.  As  a  result,  there  has  been  no  progress  on  this 
recommendation.    

New rules have been adopted to ban donations from abroad to political parties, while a 
broader  reform  of  the  rules  on  private  funding  of  political  parties  has  not  yet  been 
completed. A revision of the law on private financing of political parties bans donations from 
abroad  to  Danish  political  parties  and  candidates44.  Stakeholders  indicate  that  the  overall 
level  of  transparency  of  private  donations  to  political  parties  remains  low  given  the  high 
threshold below which donations may be made anonymously, the use of indirect donations, 
the  absence  of  a  centralised  overview  of  donations  received  by  each  party,  and  the  lack  of 
sanctions for breaching the rules45. Negotiations on a broader reform to address these issues 
started in 2023 but were not completed in the previous legislative term46.  

The  authorities  consider  that  the  implementation  of  the  rules  on  whistleblowing  is 
accomplished  and  there  are  no  further  actions  planned in  this  regard.  The  authorities 
report  that  the  rules  on  whistleblowing  have  been  implemented  well47.  In  2025,  282 

37   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice and National Special Crime Unit.  
38   In 2025, the police registered 92 reports of bribery in the public sector and 1 in the private sector, compared 
to 68 and 0 respectively in 2024. There were 69 judgments on bribery-related charges in 2025 compared to 
129 in 2024. State of play for January 2026. Danish Government (2026), written input, pp. 10-11.   

39   The  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Denmark  to  ‘introduce  rules  on  “revolving  doors”  for 
ministers and on lobbying and ensure adequate control of asset declarations submitted by persons entrusted 
with  top  executive  functions’.  No  progress  was  previously assessed  on  this  recommendation  in  2025  and 
2024, 2023. 

40   Country  visit  Denmark,  Nyt  Europa,  and  Transparency  International  Denmark.  Binderkrantz,  Anne 
Skorkjær,  Pedersen,  Lene  Holm,  and  Michael  Bang  Petersen  (2025),  pp.  61-63.  In  the  addendum  to  the 
second  compliance  report,  GRECO  concludes  that  “Denmark  has  thus  far  dealt  in  a  satisfactory  manner 
with  only  two  of  the  fourteen  recommendations  contained  in  the  Fifth  Evaluation  Report”  and  that  no 
progress has been made on any of the recommendations. GRECO (2025), p. 10.  

41    Integrity  rules  are  also  lacking  for  Parliament,  as  there  is  no  code  of  conduct  in  place  and  no  system  to 
register  external  activities  and  financial  interest  of  Members  of  Parliament.  GRECO  noted  that  12  years 
after  the  adoption  of  the  Fourth  Round  Evaluation  Report,  none  of  the  recommendations  addressed  to 
members of parliament have been fully met. GRECO (2026). 

42    Danish Government (2026), written input, pp. 7-8.  
43   Country visit Denmark, Magtudregningen 2.0, Transparency International Denmark, Danish Industry.  
44   A  few  exemptions  exist,  notably  for  EU  grants  and  donations  from  EU  political  parties,  Members  of  the 
European Parliament and the Member of the European  Commission nominated by Denmark. The  revised 
law entered into force in July 2025. Law No 721 of 20/06/2025.  

45   2025, Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p. 7. Nyt Europa (2026), written input, p.18. Country visit Denmark, 

Transparency International Denmark.  
46   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Interior.  
47   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 

7 

 
 
 
whistleblowing  reports  were  received  by  the  general  external  reporting  channel  established 
within  the  Danish  Data  Protection  Agency48.  273  reports  were  processed  by  the  authorities 
out of which 89 were forwarded to other public authorities for investigation, including 3 to 
the  police.  According  to  a  study  published  by  Transparency  International  Denmark,  the 
number  of  whistleblowing  reports  submitted  via  internal  reporting  channels  continues  to 
rise49. At the same time, the number of reports that have been rejected, mostly because they 
were deemed out of scope, remains high (64%)50.  

While  there  is  no  overarching  process  in  place  to  identify  sectors  with  a  high  risk  of 
corruption, the authorities continue to implement measures concerning foreign bribery. 
Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU show that 22% of companies in Denmark 
(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 years51. 44% of companies perceive 
the level of independence of the public procurement review body (the Complaints Board for 
Public  Procurement)  as  very  or  fairly  good52.  The  Single  Market  and  Competitiveness 
Scoreboard on access to public procurement in Denmark reports 23% of single bids for 2025 
(27% EU average). Overall, the authorities do not consider corruption a major risk53. At the 
same time, they highlight an increased exposure to corruption risks in the defence sector due 
to  larger  financial  flows and increased speed in  procurement  procedures54. Besides existing 
rules  on  conflicts  of  interest  and  gifts,  actions  to  mitigate  these  risks  focus  on  awareness-
raising activities among staff55. A strategy on foreign bribery and a national risk assessment 
on  money  laundering  –  which  may  also  address  corruption  risks  –  are  also  being  prepared. 
Stakeholders also highlight corruption risks in the pharmaceutical sector56.  

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

The  mandate  and  responsibilities  of  the  media  regulatory  authorities  were  expanded. 
The Danish Radio and Television Board was designated as the national regulatory authority 
for the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), resulting in an expansion of its mandate and 
supervisory responsibilities57. Following amendments to the Radio and Television Act58, the 

48  The  number  of  reports  received  in  2025  was  51%  higher  compared  to  2024.  Country  visit  Denmark, 

Ministry of Justice.  

49   Transparency International Denmark (2026), written input, p. 4.   
50   Ibidem. Civil society noted that further awareness raising campaigns or trainings could help to improve the 
understanding of the whistleblowing framework. Currently, the authorities do not plan such activities as the 
number  of  whistleblowing  reports  received  continues  to  increase.  The  authorities  also  refer  to  existing 
guidance documents and a telephone hotline. Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice and Transparency 
International Denmark.  

51   Flash  Eurobarometer  582  on  Businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  in  the  EU  (2026).  This  is  8 

percentage points below the EU average. 
52   Figure 59, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
53   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice.  
54   This  assessment  is  shared  by  stakeholders.  Country  visit  Denmark,  Danish  Industry  and  Transparency 

International Denmark. Børsen (2025). Berlingske (2025).  

55   Ministry  of  Defence  Acquisition  and  Logistics  Organisation  (2026),  written  contribution.  The  authorities 
highlight that all public employees, irrespective  of their area of work, are required to follow the Code of 
conduct in the public sector. Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 

56   Country visit Denmark, Danish Industry and Transparency International Denmark.  
57  Act No 741 of 20 June 2025 amending the Radio and Television Broadcasting Act and the Media Support 
Act  (establishment  of  supervision  and  supplementary  provisions  for  compliance  with  Regulation  (EU) 
2022/2065  (Digital  Services  Act),  Regulation  (EU)  on  transparency  and  targeting  of  political  advertising 
and Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 (European Media Freedom Act)). 

8 

 
 
 
Board has been granted the necessary financial, human and technical  resources to carry out 
its tasks under both instruments. In this context, the composition of the Board has also been 
updated, and it now consists of 12 members59. The Danish Press Council similarly reported 
that its resources were strengthened last year and considers these resources currently adequate 
to manage its workload. This assessment comes despite an increasing number and complexity 
of  complaints,  as  the  higher  level  of  activity  has  also  generated  additional  pressure  on 
procedures  and  processing  times.  Many  concern  allegations  that  impact  individuals  or 
companies.  These  complaints  fall  within  the  Press  Council’s  mandate  to  assess  compliance 
with  press  ethics  standards  and  often  concern,  for  example,  whether  media  outlets  have 
sufficiently  verified  facts  and  substantiated  allegations  prior  to  publication,  particularly  in 
cases affecting individuals or companies60. 

The  establishment  of  a  new  Media  Ombudsman  was  agreed  following  the 
recommendations  of  the  Media  Liability  Committee.  In  December  2025,  the  Danish 
Government,  and  two  parliamentary  parties  agreed  on  follow-up  actions  on  the  Media 
Liability  Committee  recommendations,  including  the  establishment  of  a  new  independent 
institution  for  handling  complaints  and  assessing  compliance  with  publishing  ethics  among 
non-traditional  media  actors  (such  as  influencers,  bloggers  and  podcasters),  not  covered  by 
existing  press  self-regulation  mechanisms.  The  Media  Ombudsman  will  also  be  able  to 
conduct  criminal  proceedings  and  intervene  in  civil  cases  against  non-traditional  media 
actors.  In  terms  of  division  of  competences,  traditional  media  will  remain  under  the  Press 
Council’s  authority  for  matters  of  journalistic  and  press  ethics,  though  the  Media 
Ombudsman will be able to refer cases related to mass media to the Press Council for them to 
handle61. A draft bill was published for public consultation in early 2026. General elections 
took  place  in  Spring,  which  led  to  the  reform  being  put  on  hold.  According  to  the  new 
Government's  platform,  it  intends  to proceed with  the  implementation  of  the  agreement 62. 
Some  stakeholders  highlighted  the  importance  of  ensuring  that  the  forthcoming  Media 
Ombudsman  preserves  the  existing  self-regulatory  system,  which  is  considered  to  function 
well, and does not introduce different editorial standards or parallel regulatory approaches for 
different types of media actors63. 

Recent  reforms  introduce  a  new  competence-based  model  for  appointing  the  board  of 
Danmarks  Radio  (DR),  alongside  the  adoption  of  a  new  corporate  strategy  through 
2030. The 2026 Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) finds a low risk for the independence of the 
public service media in Denmark, which are primarily constituted by DR and TV 264. In July 
2025,  amendments  to  the  Radio  and  Television  Broadcasting  Act  introduced  a  new 
competence-based model for appointing members to DR’s board, expected to enter into force 
in  2027.  DR  has  also  adopted  a  new  corporate  strategy  for  the  period  until  203065.  DR 
considers  the  existing  legal  framework  to  provide  sufficient  safeguards  for  editorial 

58   With a  view to alignment with the EMFA which entered into force on 8 August 2025, Denmark adopted 
national implementing measures, including amendments to the Radio and  Television Act (in force from 1 
July  2025)  and  an  executive order of 8  August  2025  laying  down  supplementary rules on  the role of  the 
national media regulator, media ownership transparency, market concentration and state advertising. 

59   Danish Government (2026), written input, p. 12. 
60   Country visit Denmark, Danish Press Council.  
61   Danish Government (2026), written input, pp. 12-13. 
62  Government of Denmark (2026), Det politiske grundlag for firkløverregeringen, June 2026, p. 57. 
63   Country visit Denmark, DR and Danske Medier; NYT (2026), written input, p. 22; European Federation of 

Journalists (2026), written input, pp. 16-17. 

64   2026 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Denmark, p. 32. 
65   Different together' with DR's strategic benchmarks towards 2030.  

9 

 
 
 
independence66.  In  December  2025  the  Danish  Committee  on  the  Evaluation  of  the  TV  2 
Regions  published  a  report  concerning  the  future  organisation  of  regional  public  service 
broadcasters.  The  follow-up  to  these  recommendations  is  expected  to  be  part  of  the 
negotiations on the next multi-year media agreement67. The agreement will be a key element 
of  the  decision-making  process,  setting  the  overall  scope  and  strategic  direction  of  Danish 
media  policy,  including  public  service  media,  media  support  schemes  and  market 
regulation68. 

Denmark  has  taken  steps  to  modernise  its  media  policy  framework  ahead  of  the 
negotiations  of  the  new  multi-year  media  agreement.  In  October  2025,  the  Danish 
Committee  on  Future  Media  Support  presented  recommendations  for  a  new  media  support 
model,  including  the  consolidation  of  existing  schemes  into  a  single  editorial  production 
support  scheme  for  news  media69.  Stakeholders  expressed  strong  support  for  the  proposals, 
describing  them  as  a  well-considered  basis  for  a  more  coherent  and  future-proof  funding 
framework70.  Some  stakeholders  further  indicated  that  media  ownership  structures  in 
Denmark  remain  relatively  transparent,  while  noting  a  trend  towards  increased  market 
concentration  in  recent  years,  reflected  in  a  decline  in  independent  Danish-owned  media 
groups  following  acquisitions  involving  foreign  media  groups71.  This  tendency  is  also 
highlighted by the MPM 2026, which reports a very high risk to market plurality72. 

There  has  been  some  further  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  advance  with  the 
reform of the Access to Public Administrative Documents Act, with work on proposals 
for  a  revised  Act  still  ongoing73.  Access  to  official  documents  remains  governed  by  the 
Access to Public Administration Files Act, and a revision of the framework is currently under 
preparation. An expert committee established in February 2024 is working on proposals for a 
revised Act74. According to the new Government's policy programme, the Government will 
consider whether the  forthcoming recommendations  from  the expert committee working  on 
proposals for a revised Access to Public Administration Files Act should lead to legislative 
proposals75. Some stakeholders indicated that, in practice, access to documents continues to 
be affected by broad use of exceptions and delays in  processing requests  and noted that no 
concrete outcomes have yet emerged from the ongoing review process76. Given that the work 

66   Country visit Denmark, DR.  
67   Danish Government (2026), written input, pp. 13-14.  
68   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Culture.  
69   Danish Government (2026), written input, p. 13: “[…]  The Committee has proposed eight criteria that, in 
combination,  defines  whether  an  individual  news  media  title  qualifies  for  support,  including  criteria  on 
editorial identity and responsibility, independence and editorial resources, among others. Furthermore, the 
Committee  has proposed a modernized innovation support scheme that is more flexible, risk-tolerant and 
efficient. The scheme applies the same eligibility criteria for individual news media titles as those set out in 
the new basic media support model […].” 

70   Country visit Denmark, Danske Medier. 
71   Country visit Denmark, Press Council. 
72   2026 Media Pluralism Monitor, country report for Denmark, p. 21. 
73   The  2025  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Denmark  to:  ‘continue  to  advance  with  the  process  to 
reform  the  Access  to  Public  Administrative  Documents  Act  in  order  to  strengthen  the  right  to  access 
documents, in particular by limiting the grounds for rejection of disclosure requests, taking into account the 
European standards on access to official documents. Some further progress was previously assessed on this 
recommendation in 2025.’. 

74   Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice. 
75  Government of Denmark,  Det politiske grundlag for firkløverregeringen (The Political Programme of the 

Four-Party Government), June 2026, p. 58. 

76   Country visit Denmark, Danske Medier and Press Council. 

10 

 
 
 
of  the  expert  committee  is  ongoing,  there  has  been  some  further  progress  on  last  year’s 
recommendation.  

The  safety  of  journalists  remains  high  in  Denmark.  Journalists  in  Denmark  generally 
operate in a safe environment and are able to work freely without significant interference. A 
national action plan for journalists’ safety77 aims to strengthen protection through measures 
such  as  monitoring  incidents,  facilitating  dialogue  among  stakeholders  and  promoting 
international cooperation78. Monitoring of threats and harassment is primarily carried out by 
journalists’  organisations,  which  collect  reports  from  journalists  and  media  outlets. 
Stakeholders reported a perceived increase in threats and hostile reactions towards journalists, 
although  no  major  or  systemic  incidents  were  identified  and  the  overall  situation  was 
described as stable79. In 2025, there were concrete instances of threats and harassment against 
journalists in Denmark, including online threats against a journalist and vandalism targeting 
media  premises  in  Copenhagen.  These  incidents  are  documented  in  the  Mapping  Media 
Freedom database, and, in the case of the online threats, by the Council of Europe’s Platform 
to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists.  The  Danish  Union  of 
Journalists  has  continued  to  encourage  reporting,  indicating  that  such  risks  remain  present 
and  are  being  systematically  addressed80.  In  addition  to  the  two  abovementioned  incidents, 
four new alerts have been registered in the Media Freedom Rapid Response. Two of the alerts 
concern  discredit  of  the  press,  one  concerns  withdrawing  financial  support  for  a  local 
newspaper,  and  the  last  one  addresses  the  Government’s  plan  to  introduce  a  Media 
Ombudsman81. 

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCE 

The  legislative  process  remains  inclusive  overall.  Fast-track  legislative  procedures  have 
been used for 4% of the adopted bills during the parliamentary year 2025-2026 so far82. As 
regards public consultations, stakeholders generally found consultations to  be inclusive  and 
carried out within adequate deadlines, although in certain cases the consultation periods were 
perceived as too short83. Since the last report, 175 public consultations have taken place, of 
which  24  were  shorter  than  the  recommended  four-week  consultation  period84.  Some 
stakeholders furthermore believe that limited integration of feedback on public consultations 
may reduce the scope for meaningful participation in the legislative process85.  

The  Danish  Institute  for  Human  Rights  continues  to  carry  out  its  mandate 
independently  and  highlights  the  importance  of  providing  adequate  resources  to 
effectively  fulfil  the  tasks  assigned  to  it.  Following  its  re-accreditation  with  ‘A’  status  by 
the  Global  Alliance  of  National  Human  Rights  Institutions  (GANHRI)  and  its  Sub-
Committee  on  Accreditation  in  October  2024  and  the  recommendations  issued  in  that 
context,  the  Institute  has  begun  with  follow-up  actions.  On  1  December  2025,  the  Institute 
issued a consultation response to a draft law amending its founding Act in the context of the 

77   Denmark  has  adopted  a  national  action  plan  to  enhance  the  safety  of  journalists,  in  line  with  UN  and 
Council of Europe recommendations. The plan establishes a coordinated mechanism involving authorities 
and  media  stakeholders,  focusing  on  monitoring  threats,  supporting  victims,  strengthening  institutional 
cooperation, and promoting international exchange. The Danish action plan for the safety of journalists was 
agreed in 2021 and has been implemented since January 2022. 

78   Danish Government (2026), written input, pp. 16-18. 
79   Country visit Denmark, Press Council. 
80  Council  of  Europe,  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists;  European 
Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Mapping Media Freedom. The Government responded to both alerts.   

81   European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Mapping Media Freedom. 

11 

 
 
 
implementation  of  the  EU  Directive  on  equality  bodies86.  In  its  response,  the  Institute  also 
noted that a number of GANHRI's re-accreditation recommendations require amendments to 
the  institute’s  founding  act  which  were  eventually  not  taken  up  by  the  Government87.  The 
Institute also stressed the need for sufficient resources to effectively discharge its expanded 
functions.  It  considers  that  its  responsibilities  –  including  those  relating  to  Greenland88,  as 
well  as  its  enhanced  role  as  a  national  equality  body  covering  religion  or  belief,  age,  and 
disability – have increased without a commensurate rise in funding89. The Institute reported 
no structural challenges to its independence.   

More  than  two  thirds  of  companies  surveyed  in  Denmark  express  confidence  in  the 
effectiveness of investment protection. 78% of companies are very or fairly confident that 
investments  are  protected  by  law  and  courts,  a  figure  which  has  slightly  increased  in 
comparison with 2025 (76%)90. As regards authorities relevant for economic operators, 73% 
of  companies  perceive  the  level  of  independence  of  the  national  competition  authority 
(Danish  Competition  and  Consumer  Authority)  as  very  or  fairly  good,  a  figure  which  has 
significantly increased in comparison with 2025 (60%)91. The Supreme Court has jurisdiction 
in  several  business-related  cases,  including  in  cases  related  to  public  procurement,  public 
concessions, public contracts and economic regulation. 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 appeals92. 

82   In a fast-track procedure, the period between submission to Parliament and the final reading would be less 
than  40  days.  The  percentage  of  bills  which  have  been  adopted  with  fast-track  procedure  in  the 
parliamentary  year  2025-2026  were  based  on  data  from  5  January  2026,  Danish  Government  (2026), 
written  input,  p.  19.  Country  visit  Denmark,  Secretariat  of  the  Standing  Orders  Committee  of  the 
Parliament.  

83   Country  visit  Denmark,  Danish  National  Human  Rights  Institution,  Justitia.  Under  the  relevant  OECD 
Indicators  of  Regulatory  Policy  and  Governance  (iREG),  while  Denmark  systematically  engages 
stakeholders in the later stages of rulemaking, it scores below the EU average on stakeholder engagement. 
84   The numbers regarding public  consultations  were  retrieved  on  9  February  2026.  Danish  Government 

(2026a), additional written input. 

85   Country visit Denmark, Justitia, OECD Indicators of Regulatory Policy and Governance (iREG). 
86   The proposed amendments extend the Institute’s role as a national equality body to cover sexual orientation, 

religion, belief, age and disability.   

87   These  legislative  changes,  which  finally  were  not  taken  up  in  the  final  draft  law,  included  explicitly 
providing in the Act for its ability to recommend the ratification of international  conventions, safeguarding 
immunity  for  its  staff,  and  strengthening  provisions  reflecting  its  full  mandate.  Country  visit  Denmark, 
Danish Institute for Human Rights. 

88  The  Danish Institute for Human Rights was appointed as the NHRI in Greenland in 2014 and has become 
increasingly more resourceful to fulfil the mandate in Greenland, nonetheless no permanent funding for this 
work has been allocated.  ENNHRI, 2026 Denmark country report. 

89   Denmark  provides  financial  support  to  both  the  national  and  international  work  of  the  Institute.  DIHR’s 
national  work  is  financed  by  the  Appropriation  Act  of  2026  with  an  allocation  of  DKK  43.8  million  in 
2026.  Further,  DIHR  receives  an  annual  grant  to  support  its  international  work  (DKK  50.0  million  are 
planned for 2026). In addition, DIHR receives a number of grants and funding for its international activities 
from the European Commission and several bilateral donors inside and outside of the EU. 

90   Figures 52 and 53, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. Only 9% and 8% 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.  

91   Figure 60, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.  
92   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. 

12 

 
 
 
the 

that 

time 

On  1  January  2026,  Denmark had 5 leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights pending implementation, an increase of 2 as compared with the previous 
year93. At  that  time, Denmark’s rate  of  leading  judgments  from  the  past  10  years that had 
been implemented was  at 50% (compared to 57% in 2025; 50% remained pending), and the 
implementation was 1 year 
judgments  had  been  pending 
average 
and 10 months (compared to two years and  three  months in  2025)94.  The  oldest  leading 
judgment has been pending implementation for more than five years95 As regards the respect 
of  payment  deadlines,  on  31  December  2025 there  was no case  awaiting  confirmation  of 
payments (the same as in 2024)96 On 17 June 2026, the number of leading judgments pending 
implementation  remained  at  five97.  The  Government  has  appointed  an  Ambassador  for 
Conventions tasked with reviewing and clarifying Denmark’s obligations under the European 
Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)98. The Government-appointed working group tasked 
with examining Denmark's obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights had 
not yet completed its work when parliamentary elections were held in Denmark on 24 March 
202699. The continuation of the study depends on whether the newly appointed Government 
decides to reappoint the working group100.  

A new funding model for civil society has been agreed at the political level in 2025. Civic 
space in Denmark continues to be rated as ‘open’ by Civicus101. In October 2025, the Danish 
Government,  together  with  a  broad  cross-party  majority  in  Parliament,  agreed  on  a  new 
model for state funding of civil society organisations operating in the fields of social affairs, 
health,  employment,  equality,  immigration  and  integration102.  The  new  model  aims  to 
enhance the transparency, predictability and stability of public funding for civil  society. As 
part of the reform, a new board composed of civil society representatives will be established 
to  act  as  the  granting  authority.  The  implementation  process  has  begun,  including  the 
development of grant criteria, governance arrangements and operational modalities. The new 
model  is  expected  to  become  fully  operational  in  2028103.  Civil  society  organisations  are 
included in the ongoing preparatory work to ensure that their expertise and experience inform 
the design of the final  grant  criteria. Some stakeholders have raised concerns regarding the 
selectivity and conditionality of the new funding model, noting that its impact will depend on 
the operational rollout104. Stakeholders also pointed out that for organisations not covered by 
the  new  model,  funding  arrangements  would  benefit  from  more  predictability  and 
neutrality105. 

93   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.  
94   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. 

95   Judgment of the ECtHR, 45439/18, Aggerholm v. Denmark, pending implementation since 2020.   
96   Council of Europe (2026), p. 162.    
97   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
98   Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2025).  
99   2025 Rule of Law Report, Denmark, p.12. 
100   Danish  Government  (2026a),  additional  written  input.  Stakeholders  have  expressed  concerns  about  the 
potential  impact  on  these  measures  on  the  implementation  of  ECHR  judgments  and  case  law  in  practice, 
Justitia,  Nyt  Europa  (2026),  written  input.  Country  visit  Denmark,  Danish  National  Human  Rights 
Institution.   

101   Denmark’s  score  is  89/100.  Ratings  by  Civicus  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed, 

obstructed, repressed and closed.  

102   Danish Government (2026), written input pp. 26-27, Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice.  
103   Danish Government (2026), written input p. 27, Country visit Denmark, Ministry of Justice.  
104   Country visit Denmark, Nyt Europa, Globalt Fokus. 
105   Country visit Denmark, Globalt Fokus, Nyt Europe (2026), written input, p. 6. 

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-
found 
stakeholder-consultation_en.   

be 

at 

lytter 

forsvarsminister 

Berlingske  (2025),  Responsive  Defense  Minister  Listens  to  Warning  of  Scandals  with  Serenity 
(Lydhør 
sindsro), 
https://www.berlingske.dk/politik/lydhoer-forsvarsminister-lytter-til-advarsel-om-skandaler-med-
sindsro?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqd3BsFi8iptPOeuCbXBhA1macPFtB-
5dyiJ5SZQeWlV7M5zoP_G_ik_y10Mxy0%3D&gaa_ts=6953f76b&gaa_sig=8IG1NJS_L3PVe120JC
KUQ9-Y9F0KDDVSr9v6-vxvfOCM6njHA2DAmrFuN8rWwGI6DdSNRDAzEz-
hyKM8gq6_CQ%3D%3D. 

skandaler 

advarsel 

med 

om 

til 

Børsen (2025), Assignment worth DKK 435 million awarded without a tender – could now be worth 
DKK  5  billion  (Opgave  til  435  mio.  kr.  tildelt  uden  udbud  –  kan  nu  blive  5  mia.  kr.  Værd), 
https://borsen.dk/nyheder/virksomheder/opgave-til-435-mio-kr-tildelt-uden-udbud-kan-nu-blive-5-
mia-kr-vaerd?b_source=transparency&b_medium=row_1&b_campaign=list_13. 

Binderkrantz,  Anne  Skorkjær,  Pedersen,  Lene  Holm,  and  Michael  Bang  Petersen  (2025),  The 
challenges 
udfordringe), 
https://unipress.dk/media/jgffgarj/det-danske-demokratis-udfordringer-epdf.pdf.  

Democracy 

demokratis 

Danish 

danske 

(Det 

of 

Council of Europe (2026), Supervision of the execution of judgments decisions of the European Court 
of  Human  Rights  –  19th  Annual  Report  of 
the  Committee  of  Ministers  –  2025, 
https://rm.coe.int/2025-annual-report/48802b1633. 

Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2026), 
https://fom.coe.int/en/pays/detail/11709504. Danish Bar and Law Society (2026), Input for the 2026 
Rule of Law Report. 

Danish Government (2026), Input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Danish Government (2026a) additional written contribution for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 

Danish  Ministry  of  Foreign  Affairs  (2025),  “Regeringen  udnævner  konventionsambassadør  og 
igangsætter  udredning  om  forpligtelser  og  muligheder  i  forbindelse  med  Den  Europæiske 
Menneskerettighedskonvention, 
Udenrigsministeriet”, 
https://via.ritzau.dk/pressemeddelelse/14274682/regeringen-udnaevner-konventionsambassador-og-
igangsaetter-udredning-om-forpligtelser-og-muligheder-i-forbindelse-med-den-europaeiske-
menneskerettighedskonvention?publisherId=2012662&lang=da.   

ENNHRI (2026), 2026 Denmark country report. 

European Commission (2026), 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2024), 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

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

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (2026), Mapping Media Freedom, Denmark country 
profile, https://www.mappingmediafreedom.org/.  

European Implementation Network (2026),  written input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. GRECO 
the  second  compliance  report,  Denmark, 
to 
(2025),  Fifth  Evaluation  Round,  addendum 
https://rm.coe.int/grecorc5-2025-14-final-eng-add-to-the-second-compliance-report-
denmark/488027f1db. 

GRECO  (2026),  Fourth  Evaluation  Round,  fifth  interim  compliance  report,  Denmark,  (not  yet 
published). 

14 

 
 
Government of Denmark (2026), Det politiske grundlag for firkløverregeringen, June 2026, available 
at: https://regeringen.dk/aktuelt/publikationer-og-aftaletekster/det-politiske-grundlag-for-
firkloeverregeringen/ 

Justitia (2026), Input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 

Media Pluralism Report (2026), country report for Denmark, published by the independent Centre for 
Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF). 

Nyt Europe (2026), Input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report. 

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

OECD  (2025),  OECD  Anti-Bribery  Convention,  Phase  4  Follow-Up  Report  on  Demark, 
https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2025/07/oecd-anti-bribery-
convention-phase-4-follow-up-report-on-denmark_91ca2afd/f0a83018-en.pdf. 

OECD (2026), Indicators of Regulatory Policy and Governance (iREG). 

Transparency 
https://transparency.dk/whistleblowers/.  

International  Denmark 

(2026), 

2025  Whistleblowing 

in  Denmark, 

15 

 
 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Denmark 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in February 2026 with: 

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

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

•  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