Published for the seventh consecutive year, the report assesses the state of the rule of law in 22 EU member states, drawing on assessments by local civil liberties organisations. Estonia was classified as a standstill country — one of ten EU member states where the rule of law situation has not improved significantly. Others in this category include Spain, Ireland, Greece, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and the Czech Republic.

Developments in Estonia

The state of the justice system is deteriorating

The state of Estonia’s justice system has worsened compared to the previous year. Budget cuts have led to court closures and longer delays, particularly in appellate proceedings. The long-standing underfunding of state-provided legal aid has still not been addressed. Most concerningly, the government announced its intention to replace state-funded legal counselling for low-income individuals — used by approximately 10,000 people each year — with an automated chatbot from 2026 onwards. The Estonian Bar Association and legal professionals have warned that this will seriously undermine access to justice for the most vulnerable.

Disenfranchisement

A constitutional amendment was adopted removing the right of citizens of non-EU countries to participate in local elections from 2025 onwards. At the next elections, stateless persons will also lose their right to vote.

Surveillance without safeguards

New state surveillance capabilities — including a nationwide licence plate recognition camera network and expanded access to bank account data through an enforcement register — were introduced before the Riigikogu had defined their legal mandate or oversight framework. The Chancellor of Justice publicly warned against the drift towards a surveillance society.

Gender equality and equal treatment law reform kept under wraps

The Ministry of Justice commissioned a draft of a new unified gender equality act from a law firm (Sorainen), but subsequently refused to share it with the Gender Equality and Equal Treatment Commissioner, other ministries, or civil society organisations. The draft was neither published nor submitted for consultation throughout 2025, undermining democratic law-making and depriving Estonia’s gender equality legal framework — already marked by significant gaps — of much-needed reform.

Excessive restriction of religious freedom

The Riigikogu adopted amendments to the Churches and Congregations Act despite the President having twice refused to promulgate them on grounds of unconstitutionality and disproportionality, referring the matter to the Supreme Court for constitutional review.

Freedom of assembly

The report highlights that the Police and Border Guard Board has applied measures that obstruct lawful protests. As a positive development, it notes that the Supreme Court upheld freedom of expression by overturning the conviction of young protesters who had been fined for using the phrase “from the river to the sea” at a public demonstration in Tallinn.

The broader European picture

Estonia’s problems are not isolated from the wider world. The European Civil Liberties Union’s 2026 report documents stagnation across the EU, with member states making minimal progress despite four years of recommendations from the European Commission. The number of countries where deterioration is observed has grown — now including traditionally strong democracies such as Belgium, France, Sweden, Germany and Denmark. Five countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Italy, Slovakia and Hungary) were once again identified as actively dismantling rule of law institutions. The report also notes with concern that EU institutions themselves exhibited problematic tendencies in 2025, including accelerated law-making and reduced protection of fundamental rights in legislative proposals. The only country singled out as a strong performer in upholding the rule of law was Latvia.

Estonia may be described as resilient, but increasingly vulnerable. Democratic institutions and judicial independence continue to function. However, early warning signs — the expansion of surveillance without legal safeguards, reduced transparency in law-making, budget-driven barriers to justice, and the active removal of voting rights — risk becoming normalised if left unchallenged.

The corrective role of oversight bodies, courts and civil society remains a genuine strength. Both the Supreme Court and the Chancellor of Justice acted as important safeguards in 2025. Civil society scrutiny — including monitoring and reporting such as this report — remains essential.