Public Oversight: How the Shadow Report for the European Commission Is Prepared

What is a Shadow Report, who writes it, and how can civil society influence the European integration process?

Ukraine is moving along a long and challenging path toward joining the European Union. One of the recent steps in this direction was the official completion of the screening of Ukrainian legislation for compliance with EU law. Such detailed alignment of national laws is a mandatory stage for all candidate countries.

But even now, to meet the EU membership criteria, Ukraine is implementing a set of reforms. Representatives of the European Commission closely monitor the progress of these reforms and indicate what still needs to be done. To this end, EU partners are in constant communication with government institutions and civil society organizations to discuss the next necessary steps. Civil society’s vision of this European integration process is presented in a special document — the Shadow Report.

So what exactly is it, and why is such a report needed? Let’s break it down.

First and foremost, the Shadow Report is an independent alternative assessment of the government’s and other official bodies’ performance in meeting the EU membership criteria. This document is prepared by experts and civil society organizations at the request of European partners — offering an external perspective on the country’s reform progress. Importantly, the EU does not interfere in drafting the findings, the content of the document is the sole responsibility of the civil society organizations that prepare it.

This independence matters because, for obvious reasons, the government’s official progress report tends to focus on successes in implementing EU-related reforms. Civil society, however, usually takes a more critical approach. Therefore, the Shadow Report highlights shortcomings, unresolved issues, and unfulfilled commitments.

This format is not unique to Ukraine — it is commonly used in the integration processes of other EU candidate countries. Considering that Ukraine is only beginning negotiations with the EU, the practice of preparing a Shadow Report is still relatively new for us — it started only last year. However, this year we already have the opportunity to compare what has been achieved and where progress has stalled.

A coalition of civil society organizations, which includes Transparency International Ukraine, analyzes the implementation of recommendations under Chapter 23 – Judiciary and fundamental rights and Chapter 24 – Justice, Freedom and Security of the European Commission’s Report on Ukraine. These chapters are crucial because Ukraine cannot join the EU until all provisions outlined there are fully implemented.

Why is the Shadow Report important?

One of its main goals is to monitor government institutions. The European Commission, with the help of Ukrainian NGOs, verifies whether state authorities are implementing the recommendations provided by partners and civil society.

In addition, the document is used to improve public policy, as it sets out specific recommendations aimed at advancing reforms.

And the third goal is to raise public awareness. Civil society analysis helps the public and other interested stakeholders better understand reform progress and see where gaps remain.

Who prepares the Shadow Report, and how was it done last year?

Given the large scope of work required to assess multiple sectors and topics, the preparation of the report was entrusted to the coalition of civil society organizations, whose members analyze different policy areas according to their expertise.

Transparency International Ukraine, as a longstanding leader in anti-corruption reform, took responsibility for assessing the anti-corruption policy section of the report.

To do this, as last year, we conducted an independent audit of anti-corruption policy, which enabled us to present evidence, data, and analytical findings.

When drafting the Shadow Report, experts don’t just describe problems — they carry out in-depth analysis and propose solutions. Last year, for example, we identified 94 issues and offered 94 corresponding recommendations. How many there will be this year — we will share soon at the presentation of the new report.

Last year one of the identified challenges concerned the limited powers of the SAPO Head to initiate criminal prosecution and approve key investigative actions regarding MPs. We also noted the expiration of the mandate of the Public Council of International Experts before the completion of the selection process for High Anti-Corruption Court judges. Also, we pointed out the need to finalize the draft law aimed at developing the concept of plea agreements.

Of course, over the past year, some of these challenges in combating corruption and organized crime have been overcome. However, we have all witnessed the emergence of new ones — all of which we have analyzed in detail in the upcoming Shadow Report.

Whether the European Commission will take our warnings into account — we will find out soon enough.