Anti‑Corruption and Integrity Outlook 2026: Croatia
Table of contents
In 2021, the Croatian Parliament adopted the Prevention of Corruption Strategy for 2021-2030 through the Official Gazette, No. 120/2021, identifying five strategic objectives: i) Strengthening the institutional and legislative framework for combating corruption, ii) Reinforcing transparency and openness of the work of public authorities, iii) Strengthening the integrity system and conflict of interest management, iv) Boosting the anti-corruption potential in the public procurement system, v) Raising awareness about the harm caused by corruption, necessity of reporting regularities and strengthening transparency. The Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation oversees its implementation through triennial action plans.
The Commission for the Resolution of Conflict of Interest oversees conflict-of-interest management and the transparency of lobbying activities. The State Audit Office performs audits of political parties, independent members of the Croatian parliament and independent councillors. The State Electoral Commission supervises the annual financing of political parties, independent members of parliament and independent councillors by collecting and publishing their annual financial statements and other reports, as well as monitoring election campaign financing. The Information Commissioner is responsible for safeguarding, monitoring and promoting the right to access of public information as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia, and the right to reuse information.
The Law on the State Judicial Council provides the regulatory framework for judicial integrity in Croatia. Prosecutors are governed by the Act on the State Attorney’s Council. There also is a disciplinary procedure for civil servants established in the Croatia’s regulatory framework under Civil Service Act.
Note: 2025 and 2020 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Data on where Croatia’s integrity system is strongest and could be most improved can be found at the link below:
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 53% on the strength of strategic framework, and 80% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 38% and 32%, respectively.
The Strategy for the Prevention of Corruption for 2021-2030 was adopted by the Croatian Parliament through the Official Gazette, No. 120/2021. The strategy includes a situation analysis identifying current public integrity risks, outcome-level indicators and target values for public integrity objectives. Its five priority areas establish strategic objectives to mitigate public integrity risks in human resource management and public procurement, and to reduce fraud and other types of corruption across the public sector.
Implementation of the Strategy is overseen by the Ministry of Justice, Public Administration and Digital Transformation through its Sector for Prevention of Corruption unit. There are two bodies contributing to coordinating and monitoring of the implementation of the strategy. First, the National Council for Monitoring the Anti-Corruption Strategy is established at the parliamentary level to strengthen oversight of the implementation of the strategy, reporting to the Croatian Parliament twice a year on its activities. Second, the Council for the Prevention of Corruption is a governmental working body which develops, improves and systematically monitors implementation. The Council for the Prevention of Corruption further evaluates the effects of measures and activities included in national strategic and implementation documents related to the prevention of corruption. It submits annual reports to the Government on the implementation of the strategy’s action plans and the outcomes of its monitoring and evaluation activities. The action plans includes objectives with dedicated outcome-level indicators, baseline targets, and a list of activities, and identifies lead organisations for each activity.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 80% of criteria on lobbying regulations, and 33% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 43% and 38%, respectively.
Croatia’s Law on Lobbying (Official Gazette, No. 36/2024) entered into force on 1 October 2024 and includes a definition of lobbying, lobbying activities, and lobbyists. The legislation also establishes a mandatory 18-month cooling-off period for public officials. However, it does not include a mandatory cooling off period for lobbyists.
The Commission for Resolution of Conflict of Interest supervises lobbying activities and has the mandate to oversee transparency of lobbying activities. It is authorised to impose administrative sanctions for non-compliance with legal provisions. A lobbying register is available online and provides information on registered lobbyists.
Beneficial ownership rules make mandatory the disclosure of company data which allows to identify owners of corporations, establish a central register, and make information accessible to the public. The public can access data from the Beneficial Ownership Register through the e-Citizens portal.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 100% of criteria on conflict-of-interest regulations, and 78% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 80% and 45%, respectively.
Croatia’s Law on Prevention of Conflicts of Interest (Official Gazette, No. 143/2021, 36/2024) defines institutional responsibilities for managing conflicts-of-interest and establishes obligations to submit interest declarations for all elected officials, and senior civil servants appointed by the Government. Moreover, it outlines a range of sanctions for breaches of conflict-of-interest provisions depending on the severity of the offence.
The Commission for Resolution of Conflict of Interest oversees compliance with these regulations, including verifying data from the submitted declaration reports. In practice, all ministers and members of Parliament have submitted interest declarations over the past six years, as have 82%of the members of the highest bodies of the judiciary. The members of the highest bodies of the judiciary submit their asset declarations to the State Judicial Council, in accordance with the applicable legislation. Furthermore, all declarations are submitted electronically, and a Register of Senior Civil Servants Appointed by the Government alongside their respective asset declaration is maintained.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 80% of criteria on political finance regulations, and 57% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 76% and 58%, respectively.
Law on Financing of Political Activities, Election Campaigns and Referendums (Official Gazette, No. 29/2019, 98/2019) bans anonymous donations, contributions from foreign states and enterprises, and contributions from state-owned enterprises. Moreover, a range of sanctions depending on the severity of the offence is defined for breaches of political finance and election campaign regulations, and electoral candidates can be held personally liable for breaches.
In practice, the State Electoral Commission is responsible for the supervision of regular annual financing of political parties. Their latest annual report in 2024 includes, among others, information on the number of cases related to breaches of political finance regulations, the number of investigations conducted, and a breakdown of the different types of sanctions issued. Financial reports from political parties are publicly available on a single online platform in a user-friendly format. However, not all political parties have submitted their financial reports within the defined timelines for the past five years or the past two election cycles.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 89% of criteria on public information regulations, and 81% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 72% and 62%, respectively.
In Croatia, Law on the Right of Access to Information (Official Gazette No. 25/13, 85/15 and 69/22) establishes that all public institutions and other legal entities carrying out public duties are holders of public information; and that any domestic or foreign natural person or legal entity, have the right to access information in all available forms. Moreover, information holders are required to provide information in the requested format, and requesters are not required to provide justification for their requests. However, information is not always free of charge as reproduction costs may be charged. The Information Commissioner protects, monitors and promotes the right to access to information and the right to reuse information.
In practice, Croatia proactively discloses a range of public interest information online, including data on the state budget for the current calendar year and the latest full calendar year; the results of the last national elections; legislative proposals of the government as sent to parliament; Government session agendas; the company and land registries; data on salaries of individual senior civil servants; asset declarations of the top-two-tiers of public employees in the executive branch, members of the judiciary, and national elected officials; public tenders and their results; and aggregated data on requests for access to public information.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 88% of criteria on judicial integrity regulations, and 52% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 66% and 45%, respectively.
The Constitution guarantees judges’ tenure until mandatory retirement, the expiry of their term, or lawful dismissal based on objective grounds. The Law on the State Judicial Council establishes merit-based and objective procedures for the selection and promotion of judges, including an interview before the Council. The State Judicial Council is defined by the Constitution as an autonomous and independent body responsible for appointing judges. It comprises eleven members: seven judges, two university professors of legal sciences, and two members of Parliament, one of whom must come from the opposition. Additionally, the Law on the State Judicial Council, in conjunction with the Constitutional Act on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia, allows for the submission of a constitutional complaint against decisions concerning judicial appointments or promotions.
Integrity standards for judges are set out in the Code of Judicial Ethics. In addition, the Civil Procedure Act, the Criminal Procedure Act, and the Administrative Dispute Act specify the circumstances and relationships that may give rise to conflicts of interest for judges. The Law on the State Judicial Council further requires all judges, including members of the highest judicial bodies, to submit declarations of interest at a minimum upon taking office and whenever there is a significant change in their assets.
Mechanisms for reporting judicial misconduct are defined in the State Judicial Council Act. The Whistleblower Protection Act establishes internal reporting channels for whistleblowers within the judiciary. Internal reporting channels have been established in all high courts, as well as in all municipal and county courts. However, specific training on ensuring confidentiality for staff handling such reports is not mandatory.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 93% of criteria on prosecutorial integrity regulations, and 79% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 66% and 52%, respectively.
The Act on the State Attorney’s Council establishes merit-based and objective procedures for the selection and promotion of prosecutors and sets out objective grounds for their dismissal. The State Attorney General is appointed by Parliament upon the proposal of the Government.
All prosecutorial positions are publicly advertised. Although the Constitutional Act on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia allows individuals to file a constitutional complaint if they believe their constitutional rights have been violated, this provision does not offer a specific right to appeal decisions concerning the selection, appointment, or promotion of the State Attorney General.
The State Attorney’s Council Act defines the circumstances and relationships that may give rise to conflicts of interest for prosecutors and requires all prosecutors, including members of the highest prosecutorial bodies, to submit declarations of interest at a minimum upon taking office and whenever there is a significant change in their assets. It also establishes sanctions for related violations. The Criminal Procedure Act specifies situations in which prosecutors may be recused or should recuse themselves and outlines the procedure for determining whether a prosecutor may continue handling a case.
The Whistleblower Protection Act obliges prosecutors’ offices to establish internal reporting channels and provides safeguards against retaliation. Publicly available portals are established to facilitate reporting of misconduct. Staff responsible for processing such reports are subject to mandatory confidentiality training.
Note: 2025 data or latest year available.
Source: OECD Public Integrity Indicators Database (data extracted on 7 March 2026).
Croatia fulfils 83% of criteria on disciplinary system regulations, and 0% on practice, compared to the OECD average of 66% and 22%, respectively.
The Civil Service Act sets out disciplinary procedures for civil servants and defines a disciplinary offence as any breach of official duties. It establishes a range of sanctions for such offences and introduces a statute of limitations for disciplinary actions. The Act guarantees the right to appeal disciplinary decisions before a judicial body once all administrative remedies have been exhausted. It also requires officials responsible for investigating and adjudicating disciplinary cases to notify the judiciary or law enforcement authorities in instances involving suspected criminal conduct.
The Civil Service Act, which governs disciplinary procedures, does not mandate training for staff involved in disciplinary investigations, and such training is currently not provided in practice. Moreover, there is no centralised case management system for disciplinary cases; each state body manages its own cases and proceedings through internal archives and various administrative applications. In addition, there is no publicly available data on the total number of disciplinary proceedings initiated, concluded, or appealed, disaggregated by type of offence.
This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Member countries of the OECD.
This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.
The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law.
Kosovo: This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244/99 and the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on Kosovo’s declaration of independence.
The full book is available in English: OECD (2026), Anti-Corruption and Integrity Outlook 2026: Harnessing the Integrity Advantage, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/16708b78-en.
© OECD 2026
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. By using this work, you accept to be bound by the terms of this licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Attribution – you must cite the work.
Translations – you must cite the original work, identify changes to the original and add the following text: In the event of any discrepancy between the original work and the translation, only the text of the original work should be considered valid.
Adaptations – you must cite the original work and add the following text: This is an adaptation of an original work by the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed in this adaptation should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its Member countries.
Third-party material – the licence does not apply to third-party material in the work. If using such material, you are responsible for obtaining permission from the third party and for any claims of infringement.
You must not use the OECD logo, visual identity or cover image without express permission or suggest the OECD endorses your use of the work.
Any dispute arising under this licence shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) Arbitration Rules 2012. The seat of arbitration shall be Paris (France). The number of arbitrators shall be one.