On 4 November, the European Commission released its Report within the 2025 European Union Enlargement Package, assessing Ukraine’s progress across all negotiation chapters, including the rule of law, the reform of the prosecution service, law enforcement agencies, anti-corruption policy, and the security sector. The EU notes Ukraine’s progress on its path towards European integration, yet calls for the acceleration of structural changes and the safeguarding of the independence of key institutions.
Experts from the Agency for Legislative Initiatives analysed the recommendations of international partners under Chapters 23 and 24, specifically, concerning judicial reform, the reform of the prosecution service, the fight against organised crime and related areas. Most recommendations echo the assessment provided by civil society organisations led by the Agency for Legislative Initiatives in the Shadow Report presented earlier.
The European Commission has clearly set out the main reform priorities for the year ahead. Specifically, Ukraine needs to take the following steps in implementing judicial reform:
- Adopt a medium-term strategy for the development of the justice system and constitutional adjudication, ensuring a coherent vision and the sustainability of reforms.
- Reinstate international experts on the Selection Commission for appointing members of the High Qualification Commission of Judges (HQCJ). At the same time, the procedure for selecting and nominating Ukrainian experts to this body should also be revised.
- Adopt legislation to improve the system of integrity declarations submitted by judges, including the temporary involvement of independent experts delegated by international partners to verify the declarations of judges of the higher courts. To minimise corruption risks in the Supreme Court, such experts should also be temporarily involved in the selection of new Supreme Court judges. This would enhance the accountability of the judiciary.
- Refine the constitutional procedure in line with the recommendations of the Venice Commission.
- Promptly address the staffing shortage in the courts by accelerating competitive selection procedures and qualification assessments.
- Strengthen the institutional capacities of the High Council of Justice (HCJ) and the HQCJ — including through the development of IT and analytical departments — to speed up judicial appointments.
- Reinforce public oversight bodies, particularly the Public Integrity Council, by improving access to case files, enhancing its analytical capacity and establishing an independent secretariat.
- Note that the refusal of the Bar to delegate representatives to judicial governance bodies adversely affects the balance within the system.
- Strengthen the Service of Disciplinary Inspectors by ensuring adequate financial and institutional support.
- Begin renewing the Ukrainian Bar and reform the bodies of judicial, Bar, and prosecutorial self-government — the Bar Council of Ukraine, the Council of Judges and the Council of Prosecutors — an issue on which the European Commission has repeatedly insisted.
The EU draws particular attention to the developments taking place within the prosecution service, which are causing concern. It emphasises that the sphere must be shielded from political influence and that prosecutorial independence must be ensured:
- The procedures for appointing and dismissing the Prosecutor General must become more objective, transparent and merit-based in line with European standards, in order to reduce the risk of politicisation. The European Commission expects this to be reflected in the relevant legislative amendments.
- Despite positive steps — including the restoration of the independence of the NABU and the SAPO in July 2025 — several harmful provisions remain in the new Law No. 4555-IX. These include those that allow, during martial law, the transfer and appointment of prosecutors to regional prosecutors’ offices and to the Prosecutor General’s Office without competition, as well as those granting the Prosecutor General access to any pre-trial investigation materials (except for materials of the NABU and the SAPO). The European Commission is convinced that this undermines meritocracy in the prosecution service and creates risks of undue interference in criminal cases. It therefore stresses the need to revoke such provisions and that until new amendments are adopted, their application should be suspended.
- The European Commission assessed negatively the decision of the Prosecutor General to abolish the personnel reserve shortly before the reserve list of candidates with high integrity and professionalism had been finalised. European partners link this decision to the politicised nature of the procedure for appointing the Prosecutor General.
In the security sector, the European Commission notes the lack of tangible progress in reforming the Security Service of Ukraine. In the EU’s view, the SSU should focus on national security and its investigative functions should either be transferred to other law enforcement agencies or limited strictly to national security matters, with appropriate safeguards against abuse. Among the priority steps for Ukraine, the EU also highlights:
- the need to complete the crime analysis based on the SOCTA methodology;
- the need to approve the Strategy for Combating Organised Crime for 2026–2030;
- the continued need to conduct competitive selections for middle and senior management positions in the National Police of Ukraine and the State Bureau of Investigation, with the participation of independent experts delegated by international partners;
- the European Commission notes that the appointment of a new Director of the Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine after prolonged delays was a positive step. At the same time, the reform of the ESBU must continue. The agency’s strategic development plan should be revised, and a re-attestation of staff should be carried out. The EU considers it necessary to strengthen the ESBU with financial, human and technical resources, as well as to ensure its proper operational independence.
Thus, the European Commission sees Ukraine’s efforts to implement reforms and acknowledges that progress is being made — though, it appears, not enough. It emphasises that the pace of change in the justice system, the prosecution service, and the security sector needs to accelerate. The readiness of the authorities not only to declare intentions but to implement them in practice will become the key indicator of genuine European integration maturity.
