EU citizens see political corruption as the norm
Despite efforts by the bloc's authorities, more than half of EU citizens do not believe anti-corruption measures are effective and doubt their impartiality, according to the poll; 51% say the problem is prevalent among political parties.
Distrust was particularly high in Greece, Croatia and Portugal, where perceptions of widespread corruption were also the most common. Greece reported the highest rate at 97%, followed by Croatia at 92% and Portugal at 91%. At the opposite end of the scale, Finland and Denmark recorded the lowest levels, at 21% and 28%, respectively. The most notable increases since 2024 were observed in Luxembourg, up nine percentage points, and Ireland, up six points, the report said.
Among respondents, 80% say it is never acceptable to give money to public services for a favor, with Portugal (98%), France (90%), and Spain (90%) leading that view. Over 70% oppose doing favors in exchange, while only 5% believe it is always acceptable. Roughly three‑quarters say giving gifts to get services is never acceptable. Older respondents, aged 55 and over, are more likely than younger ones to reject corruption.
The survey also explores perceptions of corruption by institution and region. More than half believe corruption is common among political parties, and 46% say it's widespread among politicians at all levels. Two‑thirds of EU citizens say high‑level corruption cases are not pursued sufficiently, and more than half consider government anti‑corruption efforts ineffective. Nearly half doubt that measures are applied impartially.
Only 5% of respondents reported experiencing or witnessing corruption in the past 12 months, and just one in five of them filed a report. In addition, fewer than half of those surveyed know where to report corruption cases. The survey also shows that men are more likely than women to personally know someone involved in bribery.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
Israeli government tries to fire head of Netanyahu corruption probe
The Israeli government voted unanimously on Monday to fire Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who is currently prosecuting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for corruption. The move was immediately suspended by the Israeli High Court. Netanyahu and his supporters have accused Baharav-Miara of exceeding her powers by blocking decisions by the elected government, including a move to dismiss the head of Israel's domestic security agency. In a statement after the vote, Baharav-Miara called her dismissal 'unlawful' and vowed that she and her office would remain faithful to the law and continue to act professionally and honestly. 'This is a fateful blow to the rule of law, equality before the law, human rights, and the ability of the law enforcement system to deal with government corruption,' she added. The attempt to fire the attorney general for the first time in the country's 78-year history was immediately frozen by the High Court until justices can rule on its legality. The government is barred from appointing a new attorney general and influencing Baharav-Miara's operations before further instructions are issued. Netanyahu did not take part in the hearing or vote on Baharav-Miara's dismissal due to a conflict of interest over his ongoing criminal trial and the attorney general's role as head of the prosecution. Three criminal cases have been opened against Netanyahu, who has been charged with bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. He could face up to ten years in prison over the bribery allegations, while the fraud and breach of trust charges each carry up to three years. Several hearings in Netanyahu's long-running corruption trial have been canceled after a court accepted requests by the prime minister on classified diplomatic, security, and health grounds. Opposition politicians have criticized the attorney general's dismissal, calling it part of Netanyahu's controversial judicial reform plan which sparked one of the largest protests in Israel's history. Opponents claim that the reform would violate democratic principles as the ruling coalition would concentrate more power in its hands and Netanyahu would attempt to avoid criminal liability.
Russia Today
10 hours ago
- Russia Today
Ukrainian officials busted in ‘large scale' military bribery scheme
Several senior Ukrainian officials have been detained on suspicion of receiving up to 30% in kickbacks from military contracts, anti-corruption agencies have announced. The arrests came just days after Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky was forced to abandon his attempts to restrict the independence of anti-graft agencies. In a statement on Saturday, the National Anti Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) said they had uncovered a 'large scale' corruption scheme involving contracts for the purchase of drones and electronic warfare systems for the Ukrainian army. Ukrainian media has identified three of the four suspects – Aleksey Kuznetsov, an MP representing Zelensky's Servant of the People party, former Lugansk Governor Sergey Gayday, and Rubezhansky district head Andrey Yurchenko. Between 2024 and 2025, members of the group allegedly created a scheme to systematically misappropriate budget funds allocated by local governments for defense needs. One part of the scheme involved awarding a contract for electronic warfare systems at an intentionally inflated price, with the group receiving illegal benefits worth 30% of the contract amount. A separate contract for FPV drones, worth around $240,000, was allegedly overpriced by around $80,000, with the company's officials later handing over kickbacks to members of the group, the investigators said. The same day, Zelensky stated that he had met with the heads of NABU and SAPO to discuss the scandal, calling it 'absolutely immoral' and thanked the agencies for their good work. Two weeks earlier Zelensky had attempted to bring both bodies under government control only for street protests to force him to sign off on their independence last week.
Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
Fyodor Lukyanov: Europe's last security project is quietly collapsing
This week marks the 50th anniversary of a landmark event in European diplomacy. In 1975, the leaders of 35 countries, including the United States, Canada, and almost all of Europe, gathered in the Finnish capital Helsinki to sign the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). The agreement capped years of negotiation over peaceful coexistence between two rival systems that had dominated world affairs since the end of the Second World War. At the time, many believed the Final Act would solidify the postwar status quo. It formally recognized existing borders – including those of Poland, the two Germanys, and the Soviet Union – and acknowledged the spheres of influence that had shaped Europe since 1945. More than just a diplomatic document, it was seen as a framework for managing ideological confrontation. Fifty years later, the legacy of Helsinki is deeply paradoxical. On the one hand, the Final Act laid out a set of high-minded principles: mutual respect, non-intervention, peaceful dispute resolution, inviolable borders, and cooperation for mutual benefit. In many ways, it offered a vision of ideal interstate relations. Who could object to such goals? Yet these principles were not born in a vacuum. They were underpinned by a stable balance of power between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact. The Cold War, for all its dangers, provided a kind of structure. It was a continuation of the Second World War by other means – and its rules, however harsh, were understood and largely respected. That system no longer exists. The global order that emerged after 1945 has disintegrated, with no clear replacement. The post-Cold War attempts to graft a Western-led system onto the rest of Europe succeeded only briefly. The OSCE, which evolved from the CSCE, became a vehicle for imposing Western norms on others – a role it can no longer credibly perform. Despite the growing need for cooperation in an unstable world, the OSCE today exists mostly in theory. The notion of 'pan-European security' that underpinned the Helsinki Process has become obsolete. Processes are now fragmented and asymmetric; rivals are unequal and numerous. There is no longer a shared framework to manage disagreements. That hasn't stopped calls to revive the OSCE as a political mediator, particularly amid recent European crises. But can an institution forged in a bipolar world adapt to the multipolar disorder of today? History suggests otherwise. Most institutions created in the mid-20th century have lost relevance in periods of upheaval. Even NATO and the EU, long considered pillars of the West, face mounting internal and external pressures. Whether they endure or give way to new, more flexible groupings remains to be seen. The fundamental problem is that the idea of European security itself has changed – or perhaps disappeared. Europe is no longer the center of the world it once was. It has become a theater, not a director, of global affairs. For Washington, Europe is increasingly a secondary concern, viewed through the lens of its rivalry with China. American strategic planning now sees Europe mainly as a market and an auxiliary partner, not a driver of global policy. The Trump administration's economic policies highlight this shift. Measures targeting Russia, for example, are often less about Moscow and more about Beijing or other major powers. Even the conflict in Ukraine, while grave, is treated by many in Washington as a pawn in broader geopolitical chess. Consider, too, the OSCE's diminished role in managing real-world conflicts. One recent case illustrates the point: proposals to establish an extraterritorial corridor through Armenia, protected by an American private military company. This idea may never materialize, but it reflects the mindset now prevalent in the West – one in which legitimacy can be manufactured as needed, with or without traditional institutions like the OSCE. The Final Act of 1975 was, in retrospect, the zenith of Europe's geopolitical stature. Much of Europe were no longer the main actors, but it remained the primary arena. Even that is no longer true. The continent's fate is increasingly shaped by external powers and shifting alliances. New agreements are needed, ones that reflect today's realities and involve new players. But whether such agreements can be reached is far from certain. The 'spirit of Helsinki' has not disappeared – but it no longer animates the institutions it once created. The principles remain appealing, but the context that made them meaningful is gone. If collective Europe wants a new era of security and cooperation, it will have to begin not by reviving the past, but by accepting its article was first published in the newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta and was translated and edited by the RT team
