The 2026 Rule of Law Report records continued threats, smear campaigns and SLAPPs against journalists, while showing that their safety cannot be separated from the independence of media institutions, ownership concentration, public financing and access to information.
Tirana, 17 July 2026 – The European Commission’s 2026 Rule of Law Report – Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Albania finds that persistent weaknesses continue to affect media freedom, pluralism and the safety of journalists.
The document forms part of the Commission’s annual Rule of Law cycle. It is distinct from the annual Enlargement Package, although Albania is one of four enlargement countries included in the exercise alongside Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia. The assessment covers developments under four rule-of-law pillars: the justice system, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism and freedom, and institutional checks and balances. The Commission also clarifies that the country chapters are not exhaustive accounts, but assessments of significant developments since the previous edition.
Threats against journalists remain part of a wider pattern
Under the media freedom and pluralism pillar, the Albania chapter states that cases of verbal and physical threats, smear campaigns and strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs, targeting journalists continued during the reporting period.
The importance of this finding lies not only in the continued occurrence of individual incidents. It confirms that pressure against journalists remains embedded in a broader environment in which legal, political, economic and reputational tools can all be used to make scrutiny of power more difficult.
The EC Rule of Law Report quotes directly the SafeJournalists Network monitoring, that recorded 42 cases affecting journalists and media actors in Albania during 2025, including threats, intimidation, online harassment and other forms of pressure associated with journalistic work. These figures should not be read simply as an annual count. They illustrate the variety of pressures that journalists may face and the distance that can remain between formal legal safeguards and their protection in practice.
The Rule of Law Report therefore places journalists’ safety within the assessment of whether institutions operate independently, rights are effectively protected and those scrutinising public power can work without intimidation or retaliation.
Institutional and economic conditions also shape journalists’ safety
The Commission’s assessment goes beyond attacks and threats. It identifies continuing concerns about the independence of Albania’s media regulatory authority, linked to the procedure for nominating board members and their political affiliation. The limited independence of the public service broadcaster is also described as a concern.
Although some steps have been taken to improve media ownership transparency, the report concludes that media concentration and the penetration of the market by business groups with political links remain serious problems. It also notes some movement towards establishing an audience-measurement system, while finding that the fair allocation of state advertising and other state resources is still not ensured.
Shortcomings in the effective exercise of the right of access to information also persist.
These issues are directly connected to the conditions in which journalism is practised. Concentrated ownership can narrow editorial autonomy. Politically connected commercial interests can influence which issues are investigated and how they are covered. Opaque or uneven distribution of public resources can reward compliant media and disadvantage critical outlets. Restricted access to official information makes evidence-based reporting more difficult and leaves journalists more exposed when challenging official accounts.
Safety, in this context, cannot be reduced to protection from physical violence. It also concerns whether journalists can obtain information, retain editorial independence, withstand economic pressure and participate in public debate without being subjected to organised delegitimation or disproportionate litigation.
Partial decriminalisation does not complete the reform
The Rule of Law Report also records the introduction of partial decriminalisation of defamation for registered journalists. The Commission’s wording is significant: it presents the change as partial rather than as the completion of Albania’s reform commitments.
Limiting the exemption to a category of “registered journalists” leaves unresolved questions about who qualifies for protection in a media environment where journalism is practised by staff reporters, freelancers, investigative organisations, digital publishers and other public-interest communicators. It also leaves criminal provisions applicable beyond the protected category.
This assessment must be distinguished from, but read alongside, the requirements established through Albania’s EU accession process. In the Interim European Union Common Position on Cluster 1, the EU recalls the need to repeal the remaining criminal provisions on insult and defamation without further delay, align civil defamation law with European standards and achieve full and swift alignment with the EU Anti-SLAPP Directive.
The full repeal of criminal provisions on defamation and the alignment of civil defamation rules with European standards are also incorporated into the closing benchmark concerning freedom of expression and media freedom.
The distinction is important. The Rule of Law Report describes where Albania currently stands. The accession benchmark defines the result that the country is expected to achieve. Partial and status-based decriminalisation is therefore an intermediate measure, not the completion of the commitment to full reform.
From formal safeguards to protection in practice
The central message of the 2026 country chapter is that media freedom cannot be assessed through legislative changes alone. New provisions, protocols and institutional mechanisms matter, but their value depends on whether they produce tangible changes in the everyday work of journalists.
The relevant rule-of-law test is whether threats and attacks receive timely and effective institutional follow-up; whether SLAPPs cease to impose disproportionate financial and professional costs; whether independent media can compete without discriminatory economic pressure; whether journalists can obtain public information; and whether regulatory and public media institutions can perform their functions without political dependence.
The EU’s Interim Common Position makes the same connection between formal measures and outcomes. It notes that follow-up by designated focal points in the police and prosecution services is needed so that safeguards translate into concrete improvements in journalists’ safety and working environment.
As Albania moves into the next phase of its accession negotiations, the credibility of progress will increasingly depend on implementation: whether independent and public-interest journalism can operate not only with formal recognition, but with effective protection.