What the 2026 EU Rule of Law Report Reveals About Albania's Judiciary: Progress on Paper, a Harder Test in Practice

The European Commission's annual Rule of Law Report, introduced in 2020, assesses judicial independence, anti-corruption efforts, media pluralism, and checks and balances — drawing on government submissions, civil society input, and country visits to build a country-by-country picture. Since 2024, that assessment has also extended to EU candidate countries like Albania, treating judicial reform as a core benchmark on the path to membership. Ukraine, pursuing the same candidate path, can expect similar screening and assessment of its judiciary in due course. The 2026 chapter on Albania offers a detailed, candid look at how far its decade-long justice reform has come, and how far it still has to go.

Albania's judiciary has been through a genuinely transformative few years. A sweeping reform launched in 2016 has now reached major milestones. In March 2026, the nine-year vetting process that re-evaluated - assets, integrity and professional skills - every sitting judge, prosecutor, and senior legal assistant in the country was formally concluded. New laws have been passed, new regulations adopted, new training curricula introduced. The 2026 EU Rule of Law report on Albania's judiciary documents all of this fairly and, on balance, credits the country with sustained momentum.

At the same time, the report is careful — and worth reading closely — because it repeatedly draws a distinction between reforms that exist in law or regulation, and reforms that have yet to change day-to-day practice. That gap, rather than any single shortcoming, is the most useful lens for thinking about where rule-of-law concerns may still arise.

1. Vetting Concluded, Follow-Through Still Developing

The scale of the vetting process is worth pausing on: of those evaluated, 456 were dismissed or removed and 348 were confirmed in office — a substantial reshaping of the judicial corps aimed at restoring public integrity and trust. The process reaching a formal conclusion after nearly a decade is itself a meaningful achievement for institutional accountability.

One area flagged for continued attention is the handling of cases where vetting revealed potential criminal conduct, such as corruption (under the assets check) and connection to organised crime (under the integrity check). Only two new cases were referred to prosecution in the reporting period, and the report notes that judicial follow-up on such referrals remains limited. This does not undercut the vetting achievement, but it does suggest that closing the vetting process is a milestone rather than an endpoint — the accountability chain only fully works if referrals translate into judicial outcomes, and that link is still maturing.

2. Filling the Bench: Steady Progress but Slower Than the Need

The report shows continued efforts to fill judicial vacancies alongside an acknowledgment that meaningful gaps remain. Roughly a quarter to a third of judge and prosecutor posts still remain unfilled nationally, and just over half of Court of Appeal seats are occupied. Albania requested 219 additional staff across justice institutions in 2025 and received approval for 100.

The recent appointments - 42 judges, 26 prosecutors and authorisation for 100 additional staff across justice institutions in 2025 - show that the direction of travel is positive, but the pace may not yet match the system's needs. As regards new magistrates, the High Judicial Council (HJC) and High Prosecutorial Council (HPC) have set the quotas for the coming academic year. The report notes that these quotas, while a step forward, may still fall short of what is required to fully address efficiency and quality concerns in the medium term. A comprehensive human resources plan across all staff categories (judges, judicial secretaries, judicial assistants) is still being developed — a sensible next step that would help align ambition with delivery.

3. Efficiency: Strong at First Instance, More Work Needed on Appeal

On this point the report's contrast is especially clear. First-instance courts are performing well, with clearance rates above 100% — meaning more cases are being resolved than are coming in, a genuinely positive efficiency signal. Appeals present a more mixed picture: clearance rates at the appeal instance range from 42% to 77% depending on case type, and disposition times for some categories remain very high. The High Court, meanwhile, has cut its backlog by more than half since 2022, a substantial and encouraging improvement, even though over 12,000 cases still remain pending.

The HJC - the self-governing body for the judiciary, safeguarding judicial independence, accountability and efficiency - has adopted a roadmap specifically to address backlogs and efficiency, and steps like expanded recruitment of judges and court staff and a planned AI-assisted case management rollout are promising signals of longer-term modernisation. Mediation services, though still underused relative to their potential, represent an underexploited opportunity rather than a failure — the training and awareness infrastructure is now in place, which is often the harder part of standing up a new practice.

4. Judicial Independence Under Pressure: From Report to Real Time

Perhaps the area where rule-of-law concerns are most directly raised is judicial independence in the face of political and security pressures. The report documents physical threats against prosecutors, including those at the Special Anti-Corruption Structure (SPAK), and the tragic murder of a Tirana Appeals Court judge during a hearing — a stark reminder of the real risks magistrates can face. It is encouraging that the HJC responded with a dedicated security strategy, coordination with the Ministries of Interior and Justice, and approval of additional security posts. The report notes, however, that visible physical upgrades to court premises, such as functional security screening, have not yet materialized, which is an area worth prioritising given the stakes.

The report also documents public friction between SPAK and political actors, following SPAK's requests to have the Deputy PM suspended and later for her immunity from prosecution to be lifted, which drew notable pushback from the executive and legislative branches. The judiciary's own institutions responded publicly to defend the principle of non-interference — a sign of institutional confidence, and a useful test of the European standard the report cites: that state powers should engage with each other in a climate of mutual respect.

That dynamic is not an abstract or closed chapter — it is being tested in real time. Since late May 2026, Albania has seen sustained protests, popularly known as the "Flamingo Revolution," triggered by a large luxury resort project planned for the protected Vjosa-Narta lagoon in South Albania. What began as an environmental campaign has broadened into a wider movement over transparency, land ownership, and institutional accountability, drawing in questions about media freedom and public consultation as well (see here and here). SPAK has since widened its inquiry into figures connected to the resort project itself, including a search-warrant authorisation tied to land sales for the development — the same institution, and the same pattern of political friction, playing out on a new front.

Taken together, the report's findings and the ongoing dynamics of the "Flamingo Revolution" protests point to the same open question: whether continued adherence to mutual respect between state powers will hold up under real political pressure, or whether the pattern of friction the report documents will keep escalating.

5. Reading the Report as a Whole: From Legal Framework to Lived Reality

Taken together, the report paints a picture of a state and its judicial institutions that have done substantial structural work — completing vetting, revising appointment rules, updating training, tightening transparency requirements — while pointing out that translating these frameworks into consistent day-to-day practice is still underway in several areas: criminal follow-up on vetting referrals, appellate efficiency, staffing levels, and the effective protection of judges and prosecutors against political interference.

None of these gaps are unusual for a justice system mid-reform, and the report's tone throughout is one of continued, monitored progress rather than alarm. The clearest takeaway is less about any single shortcoming and more about sequencing: Albania has built an impressive amount of the legal and institutional architecture for judicial independence and efficiency. The next phase — and the one rule-of-law observers will be watching most closely — is whether implementation catches up to that architecture at the same pace.