Brussels – A curtailed right to strike, snail‑paced trials, no conflict‑of‑interest law, frivolous lawsuits against journalists still routine, and no body tasked with defending human rights: Italy’s fundamental‑rights landscape still has a long way to go before it can claim to be a model. The European Commission’s report on the rule of law highlights the existing shortcomings of a national system that has made little and insufficient progress towards full respect for the law and comprehensive safeguards for all.
The first point the European Commission raises involves court proceedings: In Italy, “the positive trend in reduction of the disposition time continued, while the length of
judicial proceedings remains a serious issue,” according to the report. It acknowledges that “the recruitment of magistrates and administrative court staff continues at a good pace,” for example, through the launch of competitive examinations for the permanent recruitment of court staff, but all civil society stakeholders consulted agree that “continued efforts to fill judicial and administrative vacancies in the courts are necessary.”
For Italy, the problem of slow justice is structural, and it is no coincidence that the European Commission itself has once again called for judicial reform in the country-specific recommendations published just over a month ago. Slow trials have been dragging on for over a decade, during which the situation has not changed: there are many lawyers and few judges, and the difference is that while a lawyer is a self-employed professional, a judge is a civil servant. Hiring more judges would mean higher public spending, and Italy, with forecasts that its public debt in 2027 will be the highest in the eurozone and the European Union, cannot afford it.
On the subject of missing and failed reforms, the rule of law report highlights “shortcomings in some EU Member States” regarding conflicts of interest. Here, “the rules are incomplete, or reforms have been stalled,” and in this regard, “In Italy, for example, the draft law on conflicts of interest remains pending.” Italy is cited as a prime example of what not to do, with an explicit call for remedial action. Furthermore, the report notes that “n Italy, the national anti-corruption authority launched a digital portal increasing
the transparency of public procurement procedures, which remains a high-risk area.” Here too, regulations, the rule of law, and controls need to be strengthened.
In addition, Italy is cited as a negative example when the Commission’s experts address human rights protection. The report stresses that “Member States have not yet established a national human rights institution accredited
according to the UN Paris Principles.” Specifically, in Romania, a final decision on the accreditation of national human rights institutions is pending, while “in Italy and Malta, only initial preparatory
steps were made towards the establishment of a National Human Rights Institution.” Results that highlight the priorities shaping the political agenda, with the Meloni government called out and urged to introduce the necessary adjustments
But it is precisely the government’s actions that are coming under scrutiny, particularly the 2025 and 2026 security decrees. The 2025 Security Decree, subsequently enacted into law, introduces the criminal offence of blocking a road, punishable by imprisonment for between 6 months and 2 years, with a harsher sentence if the block is carried out by a group. The 2026 Security Decree, on the other hand, introduces preventive detention: law enforcement agencies may detain individuals deemed potentially dangerous for up to 12 hours for investigation. The Commission notes that, with regard to Italy, there are “concerns about developments related to restrictions on the right to protest and their possible impact on civic space and the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms.” This represents a step backwards, compounded by a lack of progress.
Press freedom: small praises for Meloni’s Italy, but the defamation problem remains
Italy is, however, credited with minor improvements regarding press freedom, and in particular the tabling of proposed amendments to introduce specific aggravating circumstances for offences against professional journalists. These initiatives have been welcomed because, as the European Commission points out, “Intimidation and pressure undermine the environment in which journalists work, and ensuring
their protection and safety is essential to safeguarding media freedom and a free and pluralistic
media environment.”
It is no coincidence that the report stresses that “in Italy, investigations continue on
the Paragon spyware case, including to identify those responsible for the use of the spyware
against Italian journalists, after the prosecutors’ offices found no evidence of operations by the
Italian intelligence services targeting journalists through the spyware”.
The praise is offset by criticism over the lack of measures to address vexatious lawsuits, an issue that has already earned the Meloni government a condemnation from the Council of Europe: “There has been no progress in the legislative process on the draft reform on defamation,
the protection of professional secrecy and journalistic sources.“ For this reason, it is recommended for Italy “to take forward the reform on defamation while guaranteeing press
freedom, taking into account European standards on the protection of journalists.”
Finally, a cautious approach has been adopted regarding RAI: in Bulgaria, Croatia, Ireland, Italy, Slovenia, Estonia, France, Poland, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Cyprus, “Reforms on the governance of public service broadcasters are ongoing or are in various stages
of preparation.” The European Commission takes note and awaits further developments.
Political funding: the EU calls for transparency
Among the recommendations for Italy is one relating to party funding. In its rule of law report, the European Commission explicitly calls for “the introduction of a single electronic register for party
and campaign finance information,” as “no progress has been made” to date.
