EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 17.7.2026

SWD(2026) 922 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

2026 Rule of Law Report





























Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Portugal

Accompanying the document

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions

2026 Rule of Law Report





























The rule of law situation in the European Union

{COM(2026) 900 final} - {SWD(2026) 901 final} - {SWD(2026) 902 final} - {SWD(2026) 903 final} - {SWD(2026) 904 final} - {SWD(2026) 905 final} - {SWD(2026) 906 final} - {SWD(2026) 907 final} - {SWD(2026) 908 final} - {SWD(2026) 909 final} - {SWD(2026) 910 final} - {SWD(2026) 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) 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}

I.Justice System 1  

Independence

The level of perceived judicial independence in Portugal continues to be average among the general public and is now average also among companies. Overall, 45% of the general population and 51% of companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ in 2026 2 . The perceived judicial independence among the general public has significantly decreased in comparison with 2025 (58%) and has slightly decreased in comparison with 2022 (47%). The perceived judicial independence among companies has significantly increased in comparison with 2025 (32%) as well as in comparison with 2022 (39%). 

In light of ongoing discussions on strengthening its legal framework, the High Council for the Judiciary has adopted a Code of Conduct for its members, aiming at safeguarding its impartiality and independence. Earlier calls by the Council for changes to the legislative framework governing its organisation and functioning, in particular regarding its administrative and financial autonomy, have not been followed up yet 3 . While the Council continued to raise concerns with regard to the risks of possible political influence in internal decisions due to its composition, as well as stressing the need to ensure stability of political appointees, no legislative measures have been announced to address such concerns 4 . In the absence of legislative changes, the Supreme Court of Justice and the Council have maintained institutional contacts to raise the appointing authorities’ awareness of the importance of ensuring a majority of judges in the composition of the Council 5 . Moreover, the Council adopted a Code of Conduct for its members, with a set of standards specifically designed to safeguard the independence and credibility of the Council 6 .

Parliament appointed new judges to the Constitutional Court, following delays which had an impact on the court’s regular functioning. The term of office of three judges of the Constitutional Court expired in September 2025, and on 12 May 2026 the President of the Constitutional Court announced his resignation 7 , though he announced his intention to remain in function until the appointment of his replacement. After several postponements, in June 2026 the parliamentary groups came to an agreement to launch the procedure for the appointment of new judges in the Parliament, and new judges were appointed on 12 June 2026 8 . In October 2025, two of the judges whose terms had expired renounced to their post 9 , while another one remained in function ad interim. Consequently, the full composition of the Constitutional Court was not ensured for a prolonged period, which constrained the Court’s work, due to the increased workload of judges, and limitations in the distribution of cases 10 . While there was no legal deadline to initiate the appointment procedure, proceeding with ensuring the full composition of the Court was an important step 11 .

Targeted changes to make the case allocation system more operational have been implemented. Legislative amendments to the system of allocation of cases were introduced in July 2025 and came into force in October 2025 12 . The amendments aim at simplifying the process, in particular by lowering the administrative burden attributed to courts. Stakeholders were involved in the preparation of these changes 13 , and consider that they address the concerns they had previously voiced 14 . The changes do not alter the electronic case allocation system, which continues to be applied 15 .

Quality

New recruitments for judicial and prosecutorial posts are underway, whereas concerns remain regarding the high number of vacant judicial clerks’ posts and the workload of judges and prosecutors. In 2025, 55 new judges for ordinary courts and 53 new prosecutors were recruited 16 . Following changes to the rules on access to the judiciary, new training courses for judges and prosecutors were initiated in December 2025 17 , and in January 2026, the Government launched a new procedure for the initial training of magistrates 18 . A new centralised pool for legal and technical advisors was also created 19 . While these recruitment efforts are broadly welcomed, stakeholders continue to call for further reinforcements 20 . Particular concerns remain regarding the workload attributed to judges – especially in second instance Administrative and Tax Courts 21 – and prosecutors 22 . In July 2025, new rules came into force regarding the system of appointments to the Supreme Court of Justice, broadening the pool of eligible candidates and promoting specialisation, which were positively assessed by stakeholders 23 . Regarding judicial clerks, despite changes to their Statute, concerns remain regarding the lack of attractiveness of the career, which also leads to judicial clerks leaving the system following their recruitment 24 . Moreover, despite 550 recruitments in July 2025 25 , stakeholders highlight serious concerns regarding shortage of clerks, which is having an impact on the efficiency of the justice system 26 .

While the expenditure in the justice system has been increasing, concerns regarding deteriorating conditions and security in court and prosecution premises continue affecting the functioning of courts. The High Councils for the Judiciary and for Public Prosecution have mapped the infrastructure and equipment in court and prosecution buildings, which identified systemic issues 27 . Stakeholders report that the situation has further worsened in 2026, with concrete risks to the integrity of court staff and other users 28 . The situation is leading to adjournments of hearings 29 . Personal security of staff – including due to lack of designated areas for detainees and defendants, as well as of security staff and metal detectors – remains a concern 30 , and lawyers continue to raise attention to the lack of conditions to guarantee professional secrecy 31 . While the expenditure in the justice system has been increasing, it remains one of the lowest in the EU 32 . According to European standards, States should allocate adequate resources, facilities and equipment to courts to enable them to work efficiently 33 .

Steps are being taken to improve online access to judgments, which remains limited, and concerns are emerging regarding the new case management system used in courts. The use of digital technologies by courts and prosecution remains generally widespread, while the digital solutions in criminal cases remain comparably more limited 34 . Since October 2025, all procedural acts in courts and prosecution must be performed electronically, and a new “Digital Strategy for Justice” has been adopted 35 . The High Council for the Judiciary is working on the anonymisation of judicial decisions and updating of its online database 36 , which is seen as an essential step to ensure broader online access to judicial decisions, which however remains among the lowest in the EU 37 . The creation of a single case management system for all courts is facing logistical problems, creating significant constraints for users and is having an impact on efficiency 38 . Stakeholders raise concerns that the management of the electronic platforms used in the justice system remain under the control of the executive branch 39 .

Efficiency

There has been no further progress on the recommendation to improve the efficiency of Administrative and Tax Courts, as the disposition time and backlog at first instance have further deteriorated, and the creation of an additional second instance court remains pending 40 . The efficiency of the first instance Administrative and Tax Courts has significantly deteriorated, with the disposition time reaching 861 days, and the clearance rate dropping to 48% in 2024 41 . These data are in part linked to the very high number of urgent cases to compel the administration to decide in asylum and migration cases. The new rules on the admissibility of these cases, introduced in October 2025, contributed to lowering the number of new incoming cases 42 . However, the case backlog remains very high 43 . To address these issues, the High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts seconded 28 judges to deal with the backlog, in addition to the cases already assigned to them, and created a special chamber for this type of cases 44 . In second instance, an average of 1 045 days is needed to resolve a case, the highest disposition time in the EU, despite the decrease compared to previous years 45 . The measures aimed at increasing the efficiency of these courts that had been proposed by the High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts to the Ministry of Justice have not been followed up yet 46 . While the creation of a new second instance court is provided for by law and taken into account in the State budget for 2026, its implementation remains pending 47 . Efficiency remains higher in civil and commercial cases, with an average disposition time of 263 days in first instance. At the same time, the clearance rate remains below 100% and the case backlog increased further 48 . Stakeholders continue to flag efficiency shortcomings in the justice system, especially in Administrative and Tax Courts, as a long-term obstacle to investment and the business environment 49 . Portugal remains under enhanced supervision by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for the excessive length of proceedings before both civil and administrative jurisdictions 50 . Given that the situation has significantly worsened in first instance and serious concerns remain regarding second instance, there has been no further progress in improving the efficiency of Administrative and Tax Courts.

Significant progress has been achieved on the recommendation to ensure the adequacy of the general criminal procedure legislation to efficiently deal with complex criminal proceedings, as new measures are under discussion in Parliament 51 . In December 2025, the Government approved measures aiming to improve efficiency in criminal procedures, and in particular the so-called ‘mega procedures’ 52 . A legislative proposal to strengthen the efficiency of criminal proceedings was approved on 20 February 2026 53 . These measures essentially follow the proposals presented by the High Council for the Judiciary in 2025 54 , and envisage the introduction of fines for attempted procedural delays, the reinforcement of the procedural management powers of judges to allow the refusal of unnecessary or abusive acts, and the revision of procedural deadlines in case of exceptionally complex cases, among others. The legislative changes required to implement these measures are pending in Parliament, having been approved in first reading, but not yet adopted. The judiciary has welcomed the proposed measures, while the Bar has raised targeted concerns and presented alternative proposals 55 . Furthermore, the Government created a working group to proceed with a deeper revision of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Given the steps taken, there has been significant progress on this recommendation.

II.Anti-Corruption Framework

The perception among experts, citizens and business executives is that the level of corruption in the public sector remains relatively high. In the 2025 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International, Portugal scores 56/100 and ranks 16th in the European Union and 46th globally 56 . This perception has significantly increased over the past five years 57 . The 2026 Special Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 94% of respondents consider corruption widespread in their country (EU average 71%) and 59% of respondents feel personally affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 88% of companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 65%) and 44% consider that corruption is a problem when doing business (EU average 37%). Furthermore, 38% of respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from corrupt practices (EU average 38%), while 21% of companies believe that people and businesses caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 31%) 58 .

Work on a new National Anti-Corruption Strategy is ongoing, while the 2020-2024 Strategy remains to be evaluated. While no formal evaluation was published regarding the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (2020–2024) 59 , the authorities indicated that the degree of its implementation was assessed for the purpose of issuing the Anti-Corruption Agenda 60 . On 14 April 2026, the Portuguese Government published a public report on the progress of the implementation of the Anti-Corruption Agenda. The Government is now expected to adopt a new National Anti-Corruption Strategy with a respective Action Plan, as well as a corruption risk prevention plan for executive positions 61 . The new strategic framework, planned for adoption by the end of 2026, is expected to build on the priorities of the Anti-Corruption Agenda and translate them into specific actions 62 .

The scope of the identified high-risk areas for corruption was broadened in 2025, while a proposed reform of the Court of Auditors is subject to debate as regards its impact on preventing irregularities, including those related to corruption. Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU show that 21% of companies in Portugal (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 years 97 . 40% of businesses perceive the level of independence of the public procurement review body (Administrative and Tax Courts) as very or fairly good which has significantly decreased in comparison with 2025 (68%) 98 . The Single Market and Competitiveness Scoreboard on access to public procurement in Portugal reports 42% of single bids for 2023 (EU average 27%). In 2025, healthcare and public procurement in the management of EU funds 99  were added to the high-risk areas for corruption, in addition to public procurement 100 , urban planning, territorial management, and local and regional authorities 101 . A draft proposal including changes to the functioning of the Court of Audit has been submitted to Parliament 102 . If adopted in the current form, the proposal would limit the Court of Auditors’ system of preventive audit for public contracts in certain conditions to contracts with a value of EUR 10 million or above, including for all projects funded or co-funded with EU funds, with the aim to focus this instrument on strategic high value contracts 103 . According to the Government, preventive audits should not replace administrative and political decision-making, hence more weight is given to ex post mechanisms, while reinforcing the Court of Auditor’s ex post control capabilities by increasing the number of judges and auditors that are allocated to this role. 104 . The Court of Auditors 105 considers the existing internal ex post control systems to be insufficient, and highlights limited evidence supporting the reform 106 . On 16 April 2026, the Council of Ministers approved in first reading the revision of the code of public procurement, which was then submitted to public consultation and is pending final approval by the Council of Ministers. 

III.Media Pluralism and Media Freedom

The direct availability of financial resources for the Media Regulatory Authority has been resolved, but difficulties linked to the uncertainty and continuing decrease of the yearly amount provided persist. Since 7 January 2026, a Ministerial Implementing Order provides for the direct transfer to the Regulatory Authority for the Media (ERC) 107 of part of the net profit of the national regulatory authority for postal and electronic communications (ICP-ANACOM) 108 . This legislative amendment removes the intermediary role of the State Treasury 109 and was noted in the 2025 Rule of Law Report as a necessary improvement to stabilise the regulator’s funding model, ensure greater predictability and respond to operational needs more quickly and efficiently 110 . Nevertheless, ERC notes that structural constraints impacting the full exercise of its mandate remain, notably with regard to strategic planning, due to the yearly fluctuation and uncertainty regarding the exact amount received (depending on the annual results of ICP-ANACOM) and its significant decrease in recent years 111 . Due to this fluctuation, in 2025 ERC had to find alternative sources of funding to meet approved expenditure targets. ERC further raised concerns regarding the long-term sustainability of its mixed financing model, which includes around 40% to 60% of State funds. The 2026 MPM for Portugal considers that ERC’s overall budget is inadequate to enable the regulator to perform its functions, safeguard its independence and protect it from coercive budgetary pressures 112 .

The implementation of some measures of the Government’s Media Action Plan have started, notably relating to combatting “news deserts”. The implementation of some of the 30 measures of the Media Action Plan presented by the Government in October 2024 was delayed due to the parliamentary elections of May 2025, while some measures on newspaper distribution in low density areas are being implemented 113 . Stakeholders point to the insufficiency of measures implemented so far to ensure the sector’s long-term sustainability and reverse the “news deserts” trend affecting the country’s interior regions. This is further exacerbated by the economic vulnerability of local and regional media 114 . They also highlight the risks and uncertainty arising from having only one newspaper distributor in the country. To address these issues, the Government has launched an international tender for the distribution of newspapers across the national territory, in addition to other complementary measures 115 . A proposal to update and codify media legislation with a view to aligning the national framework with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) 116 is expected to be presented to the Council of Ministers still in 2026, a point of the Action Plan welcomed by stakeholders 117 . The measures in the Media Action Plan aimed at supporting recruitment of more journalists by media outlets and creating more jobs with permanent contracts for all media have not yet been implemented. Stakeholders also continue to report low salaries, precarious contracts and staff reductions in regional outlets as specific structural difficulties in view of an increasingly competitive and digitalised media market 118 .

There are challenges regarding the funding of public service media while the restructuring of its staff continues. The Board of Directors of Rádio e Televisão de Portugal (RTP) considers that the RTP’s current resources are insufficient to fulfil its public service mission and carry out technological and workforce renewal 119 . In particular, it reported that the inflation adjustment of the audiovisual tax foreseen in the State budget has not been carried out in practice since 2017, in addition to its decreasing amount over the last few years, thus hindering the predictability of RTP’s financing model. However, according to the Government, the overall revenue from the tax contribution has continued to grow due to the increase in the number of electricity supply contracts to which it is linked and additional public funding measures and investment of over EUR 20 million to support RTP’s modernisation and sustainability 120 . The existing legal limitations on the commercial practices of television operators, coupled with the increasing costs in a highly competitive and evolving media market, are noted by RTP as additional challenges. RTP has also expressed concerns about how the possibility announced by the Government to reallocate part of the audiovisual tax for purposes other than financing RTP, as well as the investments needed for the latter’s strategic digital transition plan, may compromise the long-term sustainability of the public service media’s financing model. The staff restructuring of RTP announced in the Media Action Plan in view of requalifying the workforce skills continues, although its next steps are yet to be defined 121 .

The LUSA News Agency is now fully owned by the state and its capital increased, while the revision of its statutes has been criticised. Following its acquisition of 100% of the share capital of LUSA, the Government has approved a capital increase of EUR 5 million in view of LUSA’s modernisation and put in place a new governance model by reviewing its statutes 122 . The capital increase has been perceived positively by stakeholders in terms of the required technological and human resources. Nevertheless, there is some expectation by stakeholders concerning the pricing policy for the agency’s services, to be provided either for free or with a significant discount, since it remains to be clarified by the Government and is regarded as a crucial element for the overall sustainability of the media sector, namely for smaller media outlets 123 . The revised statutes create a new Advisory Council tasked with overseeing the compliance with the public interest service contract and issuing non-binding opinions and revises the rules governing the appointment and dismissal of the Board of Directors’ members. In particular, the new framework introduces procedural safeguards, including predefined eligibility criteria, prior consultation of an advisory body, enhanced transparency requirements and the specification of objective grounds for dismissal. In addition, the government and the Board of Directors are preparing a revision of LUSA’s public service contract seeking to reinforce its funding framework. LUSA’s workforce, the Journalists’ Union and other stakeholders express concerns over the revision of LUSA’s statutes and its impact on the agency’s editorial independence 124 . Concretely, issues raised are the increase in the number of executive members of the Board of Directors (appointed by the Government as sole shareholder after prior consultation of the Advisory Council) from 1 to 3, the fact that several members of the Advisory Council are appointed by the Parliament (and only 2 representing respectively LUSA’s editorial board and workers council) 125 and the unprecedented possibility for the agency’s editor-in-chief to be regularly summoned before the Parliament, although such possibility was already foreseen in law with regard to RTP. Although the 2026 MPM for Portugal classifies independence of public service media at very low risk, it highlights the risk that the new LUSA statutes poses to its editorial autonomy and the subsequent need to closely monitors its governance model given its central role as a public service 126 .

The ERC launched a public consultation regarding the Media Transparency Law. The monitoring of transparency of media ownership is an area under the responsibility of the ERC 127 . Following the presentation to the Government and the Parliament of a set of proposals to amend the Media Transparency Law, 128  which governs the transparency of the main sources of financing and the annual corporate governance report of media entities, the ERC launched a public consultation on the revision of its implementation act in December 2025 129 . The revision aims to introduce the specific obligation to disclose the amounts of State advertising funds and advertising revenue received from public authorities or entities of third countries, with a view to aligning the national framework with the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). This is expected to be part of the update and codification of media legislation mentioned above 130 .

Work based on the National Action Plan for the Safety of Journalists is ongoing, while some concerns about attacks against journalists and online harassment have emerged. The Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists has registered one alert since the adoption of the 2025 Rule of Law Report relating to the physical attack of a reporter 131 . The Media Freedom Rapid Response monitor for Portugal reported 12 alerts since July 2025 (two more than in the previous reporting period) relating to physical attacks, obstruction of access and legal intimidation 132 . Based on the National Plan for the Safety of Journalists adopted by the Government 133 , the strengthening of cooperation between security services and journalists continues, in addition to continuous training of the police with a special focus on the protection of fundamental rights, such as freedom of expression 134 . In this context, a National Committee for the Safety of Journalists has been established by the Government and has started operating, bringing together relevant institutional and sectoral stakeholders to support coordination, monitoring and implementation of the plan. While no SLAPP cases were reported since the publication of the 2025 Rule of Law Report, the Journalists’ Union expressed concerns about cases of online harassment and increasing violence against journalists covering sports events, as well as negative narratives against mainstream media during electoral periods 135 . The Government is preparing a draft law to transpose the anti-SLAPP directive, which will then be submitted to Parliament.

IV.Other Institutional Issues related to Checks and Balances

Some progress was made on the recommendation to finalise the reforms to improve the transparency of law-making, as new measures are being implemented by Parliament 136 . The Parliament’s tool for citizens’ participation in the legislative procedure, launched in March 2025 137 , has been in use since the beginning of the new legislature in June 2025, registering a high level of use. The tool allows all legislative proposals to be submitted to online public consultation and contains information on all steps of the legislative procedure, including the votes and the approved documents, allowing also access to all the contributions, even after the public consultation period is closed 138 . The Parliament is also planning the digitalisation of the legislative procedure, and the results of this project will feed into the work on the Parliament’s legal drafting technical guide, which remains outstanding 139 . As regards the legislative processes led by the Government, a new division was created within the Secretariat-General of the Government to oversee the implementation of the future system of ‘legislative footprint’ 140 . Once active, the system is expected to ensure the creation of a registry documenting all interactions with internal and external entities, as well as the consultations carried out, ensuring the traceability of contributions to the Government’s legislative process, but there is currently no clear timeline for its roll-out 141 . Ex-post impact assessments remain limited to selected acts 142 . According to the OECD, stakeholder engagement in Government legislative initiatives still tends to only take place at later-stages of the policymaking process, and the level of stakeholder engagement in the legislative process remains below the EU average 143 . While CSOs continue to be able to participate in legislative and policy‑making processes and are actively involved in consultative and participatory bodies, there are some concerns 144 . According to European standards, the legislative process needs to be efficient, transparent, inclusive and democratic 145 . Overall, given that new measures are being implemented by Parliament while steps are still pending for the implementation of the ‘legislative footprint’ system, and stakeholder engagement in Government legislative initiatives and ex post impact assessments remain limited, some progress has been made to improve the transparency of law-making.

Less than half of companies surveyed in Portugal express confidence in the effectiveness of investment protection. 45% 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 (44%) 146 . The main reason among companies for their lack of confidence is the unpredictable, non-transparent administrative conduct (30%) 147 . As regards authorities relevant for economic operators, 46% of companies perceive the level of independence of the national competition authority (Portuguese Competition Authority) as very or fairly good, a figure which has significantly decreased in comparison with 2025 (70%) 148 . The Supreme Administrative 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 and the consolidation of multiple appeals 149 .

On 1 January 2026, Portugal had 18 leading judgments of the European Court of Human Rights pending implementation, a decrease of one compared to the previous year 150 . At that time, Portugal’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that had been implemented was at 55% (compared to 48% in 2025; 45% remained pending), and the average time that the judgments had been pending implementation was 5 years and 10 months (compared to 5 years and 6 months in 2025) 151 . The oldest leading judgment, pending implementation for over 14 years, concerns the fairness of criminal proceedings 152 . As regards the respect of payment deadlines, on 31 December 2025 there were 10 cases in total awaiting confirmation of payments (compared to 8 in 2024) 153 . By 17 June 2026, the number of leading judgments pending implementation had remained at 18 154 .

A new Ombudsperson was appointed in July 2026, following delays in the appointment procedure. Following the resignation of the former Ombudsperson in June 2025, the post of Ombudsperson, which is a single-member body and is the national human rights institution, accredited with ‘A’ status 155 , remained vacant until July 2026. While the law sets out that a new appointment shall be done within 30 days by the Parliament 156 , parliamentary groups could not reach an agreement. The appointment followed two previous parliamentary votes, in April and June 2026, where the proposed candidates could not gather the necessary votes 157 . Despite these delays and a high number of citizens’ complaints, the institution reports that it was possible to continue to exercise the majority of its functions, such as the assessment of citizens’ complaints and participation to parliamentary hearings, and that the rate of follow-up to recommendations has not been affected 158 . At the same time, important competences which are personally entrusted to the Ombudsperson could not be exercised during the period when the post remained vacant 159 . While the number of complaints regarding long processing times of residence permits has declined 160 , complaints from foreign nationals related to the impact of the lack of residence permit on access to social rights are increasing 161 . In the context of an Ombudsperson’s investigation on alleged violations of the principles of the rule of law and human dignity, it was recommended to improve practices in the planning of police operations, in order to ensure their predictability, rationality, and proportionality 162 .

The civic space remains open, while stakeholders report increasing cases of attacks to members of civil society organisations. Civil society organisations (CSOs) continue to operate without constraints, and the civil society space continues to be rated as ‘open’ by Civicus 163 . At the same time, stakeholders report increasing instances of verbal and physical violence against activists and civil society volunteers 164 , as well as an increase in negative rhetoric targeting civil society, including by elected officials 165 . While the rights of human rights defenders continue to be well protected under general laws, they call for targeted mechanisms to protect civil society 166 .

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 be found at  https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2026-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation_en .

Assembly of the Republic (2025), Analysis of annual reports on external reporting channels.

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Portugal, https://monitor.civicus.org/country/portugal/ .

Constitutional Court (2025), Press release of 1 October 2025, TC > Arquivo > Arquivo de Atualidades. Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) (2026), Contribution from the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) for 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: Committee of Ministers (2025), Supervision of the execution of judgments and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, 18th Annual Report of the Committee of Ministers, https://rm.coe.int/gbr-2001-18e-rapport-annuel-2024/1680b4d77d .

Council of Europe : European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) (2025), ECRI Report on Portugal (sixth monitoring cycle).

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2025), Updated compilation of Venice Commission opinions and reports relating to qualified majorities and anti-deadlock mechanisms in relation to the election by parliament of constitutional and supreme court judges/presidents, prosecutors general, members of judicial and prosecutorial councils, independent/non-political bodies and ombudspersons.

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2025a), Updated Rule of Law Checklist.

Council of Europe (2026x), 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 .

Court of Auditors (2026), December 2025 monthly bulletin.

Eco (2026a), Quer saber quem financia os candidatos à Presidência? Não pode. Entidade das Contas oculta identidade dos doadores, https://eco.sapo.pt/2026/01/14/quer-saber-quem-financia-os-candidatos-a-presidencia-nao-pode-entidade-das-contas-oculta-identidade-dos-doadores/ . 

Eco (2026b), Reforma do Governo para TdC faz disparar alertas de organizações internacionais, https://eco.sapo.pt/2026/05/22/reforma-do-governo-para-tdc-faz-disparar-alertas-de-organizacoes-internacionais/

Entity for Accounts and Political Financing (2025), Relatório de Atividades 2024, https://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/file/Relat%F3rio%20de%20atividades%202024%20ECFP.pdf?src=1&mid=8648&bid=7300

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response Mechanism – Portugal (2025), Press Freedom Violations Monitoring .

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

European Commission (2026), 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Commission (2026), Flash Eurobarometer 582 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU.

European Commission (2026), Special Eurobarometer 573 on Corruption.

European Commission (2026), Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on the economic, social, employment, structural and budgetary policies of Portugal {SWD(2026) 222 final}.

European Implementation Network (2026), Input from the European Implementation Network for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (2026), Input from the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI) (2026), Contribution from the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI) for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

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

European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) (2026), Contribution from EPPO for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) (2024), Report and Recommendations of the Session of the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), Online, 26-28 March 2024 Geneva, 29 April-3 May 2024.

High Council for the Administrative and Tax Courts (CSTAF) (2026), 28 judges appointed to reinforce AIMA cases,  https://cstaf.pt/nomeados-28-juizes-para-reforco-dos-processos-aima/ .

High Council for the Judiciary (2026), Deliberation approving the Code of Conduct applicable to the members of the High Council for the Judiciary, diariodarepublica.pt/dr/detalhe/deliberacao-extrato/3-2026-993315663 .

Journalists’ Professional License Committee (2026), Input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

Judiciary Police (2026), Press release – “Operation brotherhood”: criminal association that practiced hate crimes has been dismantled, https://www.policiajudiciaria.pt/operacao-irmandade-desmantelada-associacao-criminosa-que-praticava-crimes-de-odio/.

Magistrats Européens pour la Démocracie et les Libertés (MEDEL) (2026), Contribution from Magistrats Européens pour la Démocracie et les Libertés (MEDEL) – Portugal for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), Portugal country report.

MENAC (National Anti-corruption Mechanism) (2026), Annual Anticorruption Report 2025, https://mec-anticorrupcao.pt/relatorio-anual-anticorrupcao-2025-2/ .

Portuguese Government (2025), Press release – Celerity measures in judicial procedures and to combat domestic violence have been adopted, https://portugal.gov.pt/gc25/comunicacao/noticias/aprovadas-medidas-de-celeridade-nos-processos-judiciais-e-combate-a-violencia-domestica .

Portuguese Government (2026), Input from Portugal for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

Portuguese Government (2026a), Press release – 215 new vacancies for the training of magistrates, https://portugal.gov.pt/gc25/comunicacao/noticias/criadas-215-novas-vagas-para-formacao-de-magistrados .

Provedoria de Justiça (Office of the Ombudsperson) (2025), Press release – Office of the Ombudsperson suggests to PSP improvements in the planning of police operations, https://www.provedor-jus.pt/provedoria-de-justica-sugere-a-psp-melhorias-no-planeamento-de-operacoes-policiais/ .

Público (2026), Oposição quer nova lei para saber quem financia partidos; PSD ainda sem posição formal, https://www.publico.pt/2026/04/28/politica/noticia/oposicao-quer-nova-lei-saber-financia-partidos-psd-posicao-formal-2172442

Público (2026c), Uprising in the news-deprived interior: ‘The people who live here are also first-class Portuguese’, https://www.publico.pt/2025/12/06/economia/noticia/regulador-autarcas-preocupados-ameaca-reducao-distribuicao-jornais-2157268 

OECD (2025), Better regulation practices across the European Union 2025, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2025/09/better-regulation-practices-across-the-european-union-2025_a3dfd5e6/6f007516-en.pdf#page=174&zoom=100,83,57 .

Rádio e Televisão de Portugal (RTP) (2026), Input for the 2026 Rule of Law Report.

Transparency Entity (2024), Annual Activity Report 2024, https://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/ept/relatoriosdeatividade-y2024-9270.html .

Transparency Entity (2026), Annual Activity Report 2025, https://www.tribunalconstitucional.pt/tc/ept/relatoriosdeatividade.html.

Transparency International (2026), Corruption Perceptions Index 2025.

Transparency International – Portugal, Comunicado sobre a anunciada revisão da Lei do Tribunal de Contas, https://transparencia.pt/comunicado-sobre-a-anunciada-revisao-da-lei-do-tribunal-de-contas/

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists – Portugal, Alerts | Safety of journalists platform .

Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU (European Media Freedom Act).

Annex II: Country visit to Portugal

The Commission services held virtual meetings in February 2026 with:

·Association of Private Media

·Bar Association

·Central Department of criminal action and investigation (DCIAP)

·Constitutional Court

·Court of Auditors

·High Council for the Administrative and Tax Courts

·High Council for Public Prosecution

·High Council for the Judiciary

·ICNOVA – Nova University of Lisbon

·Inspectorate-General of Finance

·Journalists’ Professional License Committee

·Journalists’ Union

·Judiciary Police (Polícia Judiciária)

·Judges Union (ASJP)

·LUSA Agency

·Media Authority – Regulatory Entity for Social Communication

·MENAC (National Anti-corruption Mechanism)

·Ministry of Foreign Affairs

·Ministry of Justice

·Observatory of Economy and Fraud Management

·Office of the Prosecutor General

·Office of the Ombudsperson

·Platform of NGOD

·Political Accounts and Financing Entity

·Portugal MediaLab

·Prosecutors Union (SMMP)

·RTP – Radio and Television of Portugal

·Secretariat General of the Government

·Services of the Assembly of the Republic

·Supreme Administrative Court

·Supreme Court of Justice

·Transparency Entity

·Transparency International – Portugal

·Union of ‘Funcionários Judiciais’

·Union of ‘Oficiais de Justiça’

* 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

(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)      Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary; ENCJ (2026), written input, pp. 50 and 68. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 3. In July 2025, the Council of Europe’s Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) recalled its recommendation to Portugal that not less than half of the members of the Councils should be judges chosen by their peers (GRECO (2025), paras. 53-56). See also Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (2010), para. 27

(4)      Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary; ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 51. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 3.

(5)      The High Council for the Judiciary is currently de facto composed by a majority of judges, while only a minority has been appointed by their peers. Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary, Supreme Court of Justice.

(6)      High Council for the Judiciary (2026). The Code establishes principles of independence, impartiality, transparency, competence and responsibility, and co-operation and loyalty (ENCJ, written input, p. 21).

(7)      The Constitutional Court is composed of 10 judges selected and appointed by Parliament, and 3 judges co‑opted by the judges appointed by Parliament (Art. 12(1), of the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court). See also 2023 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 6; Figure 66, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(8)      A two-third majority is required for the election (Art. 16(4), of the Organic Law of the Constitutional Court).

(9)      Constitutional Court (2025).

(10)      In previous cases of protracted appointments, the full composition had remained ensured. Country visit Portugal, Constitutional Court. See also 2023 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 6.

(11)      The Venice Commission has highlighted that the procedure for the appointment of Constitutional Court judges directly impacts the preservation of a credible system of constitutional rule of law (Venice Commission (2025)).

(12)      Law No. 56/2025 and Order No. 350-A/2025/1. Portuguese Government, written input, pp. 8 and 9.

(13)      The High Council for the Judiciary proposals were taken into consideration by the Government and Parliament (Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary). ENCJ, written input, p. 68.

(14)      Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary, Union of “Funcionários Judiciais”, Prosecutors’ Union. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 3 and 4.

(15)      The possible intervention and control by a judge are ensured (Portuguese Government, written input, p. 9).

(16)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 10.

(17)      Also, in December 2025, the period of training for new magistrates was reduced, which is expected to expedite their recruitment (Portuguese Government, written input, p. 10). See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 4-5, regarding the new rules on access to the judiciary.

(18)      The initial training is expected to begin in September 2026 (Portuguese Government (2026a)).

(19)      ENCJ, written input, p. 20.

(20)      In January 2026, the High Council for Public Prosecution requested to the Minister of Justice a minimum of 120 vacancies for prosecutors per training course, as well as an additional course for 100 new prosecutors.

(21)      In 2024, there were 70 judges serving in the second instance administrative and tax courts, with an average caseload of 254 cases (compared to 96 cases in ordinary courts). Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Administrative and Tax Courts.

(22)      Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary; High Council for Public Prosecution; High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts; Prosecutors’ Union; Judges’ Union.

(23)      Portuguese Government, written input, p. 8. Country visit Portugal, Supreme Court of Justice; MEDEL – Portugal, written input, p. 9. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 5.

(24)      2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 4-5. Despite the new remuneration tables and career progression being regulated in Decree-Law No. 85-A/2025, a reform promoted under the Portuguese Recovery and Resilience Plan, stakeholders flag that not all aspects covered are fully rolled out (Country visit Portugal, Union of “Oficiais de Justiça” and Union of “Funcionários Judiciais”). ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 21.

(25)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 10.

(26)      A deficit of 1669 clerks at the level of first instance courts is reported (Country visit Portugal, Union of “Funcionários Judiciais”). In some courts, vacant posts amount to 20%. ENCJ, written input, p. 21.

(27)      Including lack of basic security and health conditions; insufficient number and size of hearing rooms; absence of proper rooms for witnesses; failure to ensure accessibility for persons with reduced mobility; and structural problems (ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 36). Both Councils have presented proposals to the Ministry of Justice, which have not been addressed so far.

(28)      Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary, High Council for Public Prosecution, Judges’ Union, Prosecutors’ Union, Union of “Funcionários Judiciais”, Union of “Oficiais de Justiça”, Bar Association.

(29)      ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 36; MEDEL – Portugal (2026), written input, p. 12. Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 5.

(30)      Incidents in EPPO premises have also been reported (EPPO (2026), written input, p. 54). Country visit Portugal, Judges’ Union, Prosecutors’ Union.

(31)      Country visit Portugal, Bar Association. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 5.

(32)      Figure 33, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. However, the expenditure on law courts as a percentage of GDP has slightly decreased (Figure 34, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard).

(33)      Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (2010), para. 33.

(34)      Figures 42, 43 and 45, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(35)      Order No. 350-A/2025. Portuguese Government, written input, pp. 10-11.

(36)      ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 37. Country visit Portugal, Ministry of Justice.

(37)      Figure 46, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 6. A GRECO recommendation in this regard remains only partially implemented.

(38)      In October 2025, the system previously used in Tax and Administrative Courts (SITAF) was merged with the system used in ordinary courts (CITIUS) (Portuguese Government, written input, p. 5). Constraints in the system migration led to postponement of procedural acts, and impossibility to comply with the rules on digital procedures (ENCJ, written input, p. 37). It is also flagged that the new system is not fully adapted to the specificities of Administrative and Tax cases (Country visit Portugal, High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts).

(39)      ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 21.

(40)      The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended Portugal to: “[s]tep up efforts to improve the efficiency of the justice system, in particular of Administrative and Tax Courts”. Some further progress was previously assessed on this recommendation in 2025, 2024 and 2023.

(41)      Compared to 597 days and 120% in 2023. Figures 7 and11, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(42)      Country visit Portugal, Ministry of Justice.

(43)      In October 2025, it was estimated that 133 000 of these cases were pending before the Administrative and Tax Court of Lisbon. Stakeholders report that the delays on this type of cases also have an impact on the recruitment of workers for key areas for the Portuguese economy (Country visit to Portugal, European Semester).

(44)      CSTAF (2026). 22 of the 50 foreseen secondment posts remained vacant. Each judge will be assigned over 2 000 cases additional cases (Country visit Portugal, High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts).

(45)      Compared to 1 200 days in 2023. Figure 8, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(46)      Country visit Portugal, High Council for Administrative and Tax Courts. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 7.

(47)      Country visit Portugal, Ministry of Justice. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 6-7.

(48)      Figures 5, 10 and 13, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(49)      In the context of the European Semester, the Commission has proposed that the Council recommend that Portugal “Further increase the efficiency of administrative and tax courts, to decrease the length of proceedings”. European Commission (2026) 222 final, CSR 3.

(50)      Committee of Ministers (2025).

(51)      The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended Portugal to: “[t]ake forward measures to ensure the adequacy of the general criminal procedure legislation to efficiently deal with complex criminal proceedings”. Some progress was previously assessed on this recommendation in 2025.

(52)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 6. Portuguese Government (2025).

(53)    Law Proposal no. 54/XVII/1.

(54)      2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 7. ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 20.

(55)      ENCJ (2026), written input, p. 20; Country visit Portugal, High Council for the Judiciary, High Council for Public Prosecution. Country visit Portugal, Bar Association.

(56)      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).

(57)      In 2021 the score was 62, while, in 2025, the score is 56. 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.

(58)      Data from Special Eurobarometer 573 (2026) and Flash Eurobarometer 582 (2026).

(59)      Art. 215(2), 2024 State Budget Law, mandated that a public monitoring report on the National Anti-Corruption Strategy be disclosed by 30 November 2024.

(60)      Portuguese Government (2026a), written input. The Anti-Corruption Agenda was adopted on 20 June 2024, and it includes 32 measures based on four key pillars: effective punishment, procedural speed, public sector protection and prevention. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 8.

(61)

     Art. 233 of the Law approving the 2026 State Budget.

(62)      Country visit Portugal, Ministry of Justice.

(63)      Decree-Law No. 70/2025. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 8-9.

(64)      MENAC is expected to be subject to more flexible recruitment rules, no longer being restricted to staff from inspection careers and to workers in general careers under mobility arrangements. Country visit Portugal, MENAC. MENAC’s mandate is wide, going beyond overseeing compliance with the General Corruption Prevention Regime. It extends to creating a culture of integrity and transparency through educational and training measures, evidence-based analyses, tailored recommendations for sector-specific risks, compliance with the whistleblowers protection legislation, and, inter alia, guidance in view of the legislative reforms. 

(65)       MENAC (2025), Recommendations 2/2025, 3/2025, 4/2025, 5/2025. MENAC, 2025 Annual Report, p. 22. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 9.

(66)      Of which 119 were anonymous. Overall, 13 complaints were dealt with by MENAC, 9 complaints were sent to the Attorney General's Office, 67 complaints were forwarded to the competent administrative body, and 177 complaints were closed. Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 19. Overall, the statistics for all external channels for 2024 show 171 reports received (in comparison with 156 in 2023), 7869 of received complaints (in comparison to 1875) and 1812 cases initiated (in comparison to 371 in 2023). Parliament (2025), Analysis of annual reports on external reporting channels.

(67)      The protocol provides, among others, sharing with MENAC of judicial decisions related to corruption offences as well as collaboration in their analysis. Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 12.

(68)      MENAC, 2025 Annual Report, p. 22. In December 2025, the National Institute of Administration (INA), in partnership with MENAC and the Centre for Judicial Studies (CEJ), launched a training course on the General Corruption Prevention Regime, aimed at managers and staff of the Public Administration.

(69)      Country visit Portugal, Observatory of Economy and Fraud Management, Transparency International – Portugal.

(70)      The overall number of inquiries of the Criminal Police has risen (by 12,67% when compared to 2024) and specifically with regard to addressing corruption (by 35,54% in comparison to 2024). Portuguese Government, additional written input. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 10.

(71)      In 2025, a call for 150 inspectors for the Judiciary Police was launched and new inspectors were recruited in IGF. In 2024, the Judiciary Police initiated 393 new corruption investigations (399 finalised; 684 ongoing). In 2024, 34 persons were convicted for corruption, while 35 final decisions in corruption cases were pronounced. Portuguese Government (2026), written input, pp. 12-13. Country visit Portugal, IGF and Judiciary Police. In 2025, the Judiciary Police initiated 467 new corruption investigations, finalised 423 and 723 are pending (data available in the Statistics Portal ).

(72)      Country visit Portugal, Observatory of Economy and Fraud Management, Transparency International – Portugal. EPPO (2026), written input, p. 52. 

(73)      EPPO (2025), p. 47. On 11 December 2025, the Council of Ministers, approved rules regulating the technical, administrative and logistical support to be provided to the EPPO. The EPPO has raised concerns that the limited resources allocated to it are not adequate to its workload. EPPO (2026), written input, pp. 52-55.

(74)      Currently, the workforce of the Transparency Entity is composed of 13 persons, including 3 senior technicians recruited in 2025. Ministerial Implementing Order No 213/2024. Portuguese Government (2026a), written input.

(75)      Transparency Entity (2026). 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p.11.

(76)      As a result, declarations of those with executive powers and parliamentary backbenchers were processed with priority. Country visit Portugal, Transparency Entity.

(77)       Country visit Portugal, Transparency Entity.

(78)      Entity for Accounts and Political Financing (2025), p. 6.

(79)      With 12 sanctions imposed close the limit of the statute of limitations. Entity for Accounts and Political Financing (2025), p. 18.

(80)      Country visit Portugal, Entity for Accounts and Political Financing. There are still two legislative elections (10 March 2024 and 18 May 2025), regional elections in Azores (4 February 2024) and in Madeira (26 May 2024 and 23 March 2025), local elections (12 October 2025), and two rounds of presidential elections (18 January and 8 February 2026), to be audited in chronological order.

(81)      In 2026, the Constitutional Court’s allocation increased less than 2%, to EUR 10.47 million.

(82)      Público (2026).

(83)      The non-disclosure of identity of private donors, motivated by constraints stemming from the data protection rules, has been facing criticism from civil society, in particular as donations from private parties are considered to be significant. ECO (2026a). Country visit Portugal, Observatory of Economy and Fraud Management, Transparency International – Portugal. Transparency International Portugal (2026).

(84)      The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended to Portugal to ‘[a]dopt rules on the regulation of lobbying, including the creation of a comprehensive public lobbying registry’.

(85)      Law No 5-A/2026.

(86)      According to Article 1, the Public and Mandatory Interest Representation Transparency Registry will be attached to the Parliament and publicly accessible through its online portal.

(87)      Furthermore, the Law establishes a three-year cooling-off period for political officeholders and senior public officeholders and a system of penalties, including suspension of registration and exclusion from public consultations. This relates to situation when they wish to engage in interest representation activities vis-à-vis the entities where they held office.

(88)      The Working Group on the Implementation of Law No 5-A/2026 was set up and started its activities in April 2026.

(89)      Article 21 set the date of entry into force for 180 days after its publication. Country visit Portugal, Secretariate-General of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Parliament.

(90)      Country visit Portugal, Observatory of Economy and Fraud Management, Transparency International – Portugal.

(91)      Order No 6738/2025 of 23 June.

(92)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 17.

(93)      Council of Ministers Resolution no. 103/2025, of 25 July.

(94)      Those are: public agenda, legislative footprint and lobbying law obligations (Art. 15(2), read with Art. 13 of Council of Ministers Resolution 103/2025).

(95)      According to the Article 19(1) the relevant public entities are obliged to publish their meetings after July 2026.

(96)      Country visit Portugal, Secretariate-General of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Parliament.

(97)      Flash Eurobarometer 557 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2025). This is 11 percentage point above the EU average.

(98)      Figure 59, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(99)      Country visit Portugal, Judiciary Police, MENAC.

(100)      MENAC, Recommendation No 5/2025. Overall, the activities of the state audit and inspection bodies are expected to be strengthened and IGF continues to carry out audits and others controls related to the local government. Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 13.

(101)      Portuguese Government, written input, p. 12. Country visit Portugal, MENAC.

(102)      Exemption from preliminary control is applied under the condition that public authorities must have strong internal control systems, certified according to international standards. Portuguese Government (2026), additional written input.

(103)      The ex ante control of the Court of Auditors over projects funded or co-funded from the EU funds was previously limited by the Law No. 43/2024. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 12-13.

(104)      2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 12-13. As a result, the projects are expected to be audited through the existing post-hoc mechanisms for public contracts, without any value limit.

(105)      The Court of Auditors, being a judicial body, without having been formally consulted on the reform, was of the opinion that the ex ante control should be maintained for contracts above EUR 5 million, due to the significant financial impact, as well as for contracts based on specific criteria and those of long duration. It considered that, for an efficient auditing, the post-hoc checks would need to be further reinforced. Country visit Portugal, Court of Auditors.

(106)      In 2025, around 40% of all contracts audited had irregularities detected and their value was EUR 4,19 billion. Some of these irregularities may be related to corruption. Court of Auditors (2026).Transparency International – Portugal (2026). Eco (2026b). See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, pp. 12-13.

(107)      Governed by the statutes established pursuant to Law No 53/2005.

(108)      The net profits of the share participation in the fees for the use of the radio spectrum paid to ICP-ANACOM as remuneration for use of a public asset.

(109)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 23.

(110)      See 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 13.

(111)      Country visit Portugal, ERC.

(112)      Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), p. 24.

(113)      Portuguese Government, written input, p. 26; Country visit Portugal, PT Media Lab. The Media Action Plan presented in October 2024 by the Portuguese Government included financial support for regional and local media, including reduced costs for access to LUSA’s services and other structural incentives. The adoption of Law-decree 41/2025 has increased from 40% to 80% the coverage of postal costs for the distribution of local newspapers by media outlets.

(114)      Country visit Portugal, Journalists’ Associations and Academic Experts (ICNOVA - Nova University of Lisbon, Journalists’ Professional License Committee, Journalists’ Union, Private Media Platform); Público (2026d)).

(115)      Portuguese Government, written input, p. 26. Tender published in:  https://ted.europa.eu/pt/notice/-/detail/376291-2026 .; Further measures include support to local media, such as election airtime allocation for local radio stations, as well as legal requirements mandating the publication of operations financed with European funds and the mandatory publication of municipal decisions in local or regional media.

(116)      Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU (European Media Freedom Act).

(117)      Country visit Portugal, Journalists’ Associations and Academic Experts (ICNOVA - Nova University of Lisbon, Journalists’ Professional License Committee, Journalists’ Union, Private Media Platform) and PT Media Lab.

(118)      Country visit Portugal, Journalists’ Associations and Academic Experts (ICNOVA - Nova University of Lisbon, Journalists’ Professional License Committee, Journalists’ Union); Journalists’ Professional License Committee (written input).

(119)      RTP (2026), written input.

(120)    Portuguese Government, additional written input.

(121)      Country visit Portugal, RTP.

(122)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 24.

(123)      Country visit Portugal, LUSA and Journalists’ Associations and Academic Experts (ICNOVA - Nova University of Lisbon, Journalists’ Professional License Committee, Journalists’ Union, Private Media Platform).

(124)      Country visit Portugal, LUSA, Journalists’ Associations and Academic Experts (ICNOVA - Nova University of Lisbon, Journalists’ Professional License Committee, Journalists’ Union); Journalists’ Professional License Committee (written input).

(125)      3 members appointed by the Parliament, 2 members appointed by the autonomous regions and one member appointed by the National Association of Portuguese Municipalities.

(126)      Media Pluralism Monitor (2026), pp. 42-43.

(127)      Law No. 78/2015 of July 29, which regulates the promotion of transparency of ownership, management, and financing of entities that carry out media activities. ERC collects and verifies the information reported by entities under the legal provisions of transparency and displays it in the Transparency Portal.

(128)      Country visit Portugal, ERC. Notably regarding the mechanism for the suspension of voting and property rights in cases of lack of transparency of ownership.

(129)      Portuguese Government, written input, p. 23.

(130)      Country visit Portugal, PT Media Lab.

(131)      The Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2025-2026).

(132)      Media Freedom Rapid Response monitor (2025-2026).

(133)      Approved by Council of Ministers Resolution No 51/2025 of 17 March.

(134)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 25; Country visit Portugal, PT Media Lab.

(135)      Union of Journalists (2026), written input; Journalists’ Professional License Committee (written input).

(136)      The 2025 Rule of Law Report recommended Portugal to: ‘[f]inalise the reforms to improve the transparency of law-making, particularly on the implementation of impact assessment tools’. No progress was previously assessed on this recommendation in 2025, while some further progress and significant progress had been assessed in 2024 and 2023, respectively.

(137)      2025 Country Report Portugal, p. 16.

(138)      A feature allowing for contributions to be sent to parliamentarians in the beginning of the discussion and voting process has not yet been implemented. Country visit Portugal, Technical services of the Assembly of the Republic.

(139)      Country visit Portugal, Technical services of the Assembly of the Republic. See also 2025 Country Report Portugal, p. 16.

(140)      Portuguese Government (2026), written input, p. 7. See also 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 16.

(141)      Country visit Portugal, Secretariat-General of the Government.

(142)      In line with the Rules of Procedure of the Government and Order No 1887/2025, the Centre for Public Policy Assessment and Planning draws up information on the legislative impact of government legislative acts and develops methodological support activities for assessing the impacts of legislative proposals and other public policy measures (Portuguese Government, written input, p. 7).

(143)      OECD (2025), pp. 172-173.

(144)      Mostly regarding the short timeframes and follow-up to public consultations. Country visit Portugal, Platform of NGOD.

(145)      Venice Commission, Updated Rule of Law Checklist (December 2025), para. 34.

(146)      Figure 52, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(147)      Figure 53, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard. 26% and 22% of the surveyed investors respectively perceive concerns about quality, efficiency or independence of justice and frequent changes in legislation or concerns about the quality of the law-making process as a reason for the lack of confidence in investment protection.

(148)      Figure 60, 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard.

(149)      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.

(150)      For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.

(151)      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. 7.

(152)      Judgment of the ECtHR, 19808/08, Moreira Ferreira v. Portugal, pending implementation since 2011.

(153)      Council of Europe (2026), p. 157.

(154)      Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC).

(155)      Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) (2024).

(156)      Art. 15(3), Law on the Statute of the Ombudsperson.

(157)      The Ombudsperson is elected by a two-third majority (Art. 5(1), Law on the Statute of the Ombudsperson).

(158)      Country visit Portugal, Office of the Ombudsperson.

(159)      Such as the exercise of the right to request the constitutional review of laws before the Constitutional Court, as well as the issuance of formal recommendations to Parliament, Government, or other public bodies (ENNHRI (2026)).

(160)      2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 17.

(161)      Country visit Portugal, Office of the Ombudsperson.

(162)      The investigation was triggered by complaints in the context of a large-scale police raid occurred in December 2024. 2025 Rule of Law Report, Portugal, p. 17. Provedoria de Justiça (2025).

(163)      Portugal’s score is 81/100.Ratings by CIVICUS are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed, obstructed, repressed and closed.

(164)      In particular targeting CSOs working on topics related to racism and xenophobia (ECRI, para. 49).

(165)      Civicus (2025).

(166)      Civicus (2025).