Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen, in a written answer on 16 July 2026, outlined the Commission's existing and planned measures to protect press freedom and journalists in the EU, responding to concerns over surveillance, SLAPPs, accreditation restrictions, and the criminalisation of protest coverage. The answer, addressed to MEP Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE), reaffirms the Commission's commitment to implementing the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) and the Anti-SLAPP Directive, while announcing an update to the 2021 Recommendation on the safety of journalists and a review of the 2022 Recommendation on protecting journalists from abusive court proceedings.
The Commission's response highlights the EMFA's provisions on editorial independence (applicable since February 2025) and protection of journalistic sources (since August 2025), stressing that correct implementation is a priority. The European Democracy Shield, adopted earlier in 2025, is cited as recognising the essential role of free media and foresees additional protection measures. On SLAPPs, the Anti-SLAPP Directive protects journalists in cross-border civil cases. Virkkunen notes that the Commission will update the 2021 Recommendation on journalist safety, which encourages Member States to investigate and prosecute criminal acts against journalists impartially and to ensure safety during protests. The 2022 Recommendation on abusive court proceedings will also be reviewed.
Regarding coverage of armed conflicts, the answer states that EU restrictive measures are designed and applied in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, with particular attention to avoiding unintended effects on legitimate journalistic work. All measures require unanimous Member State approval, with implementation and enforcement primarily their responsibility, monitored by the Commission. The answer does not propose new legislation or numerical targets, instead focusing on existing frameworks and upcoming reviews. Institutional follow-up is expected through the updated Recommendation and review, though no specific timeline is given. The response signals a declarative, continuity-oriented approach rather than new regulatory action.