Portugal is grappling with a deepening corruption crisis, marked by a string of high-profile scandals and declining performance in global transparency rankings. According to the 2020 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International, the country ranks 33rd out of 176 nations, with a score of 61 out of 100—its worst since 2012. This performance underscores growing public concern over the government’s inability to address corruption effectively and implement meaningful reforms.
A report by the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), affiliated with the Council of Europe, reveals that Portugal has fully implemented only one of 15 recommended measures aimed at enhancing transparency in politics, the judiciary, and public administration.
Critics have described the country’s approach as largely reactive, driven by public outrage over scandals rather than a strategic, preventative stance. This lack of proactive measures has allowed a series of corruption cases to emerge, shaking public trust and exposing systemic weaknesses.
One of the most prominent cases is Operation Marquês, involving former Prime Minister José Sócrates. He stands accused of receiving approximately €34 million in bribes between 2006 and 2015 in exchange for political favours to business groups such as Espírito Santo Group and Portugal Telecom. The case has led to 189 charges, including passive corruption and money laundering, implicating high-profile figures and influential companies.
The collapse of Banco Espírito Santo (BES) further underscores the scale of corruption. Former BES president Ricardo Salgado faces 65 charges, including organised crime, fraud, and money laundering. Investigations uncovered a complex network of financial manipulation, leaving over 300 victims in Portugal and abroad.
Meanwhile, Operation Lex exposed corruption within the judiciary, with senior judges accused of leveraging their positions for personal gain. Rui Rangel and Fátima Galante, two high-profile judges, were removed from the judiciary, amplifying concerns about institutional integrity.
Corruption scandals have also struck other critical sectors. The Tancos military arsenal case involved the theft of military equipment and allegations of a subsequent cover-up by defence officials, while the football world saw allegations of tax fraud and match-fixing.
Notably, former Benfica president Luís Filipe Vieira was arrested as part of the “Red Card Operation,” highlighting governance issues within the nation’s most popular sport.
Despite the increasing number of investigations, convictions for corruption have significantly declined. In 2019, only 59 individuals were convicted, a sharp drop from the 112 convictions recorded in 2017. Critics argue that the slow pace of judicial proceedings and lenient sentencing contribute to a perception of impunity.
Compounding this is the cultural normalisation of corruption, as highlighted in a sociological study by the Foundation for Science and Technology. The study found that practices such as nepotism and political patronage are widely tolerated, particularly in rural and suburban areas where education levels are lower.
While 88% of Portuguese citizens claim they would not vote for a politician involved in corruption, electoral outcomes suggest otherwise. Many candidates with allegations of misconduct continue to secure re-election, exposing a disconnect between public discourse and political behaviour.
The reluctance of citizens to report corruption, driven by fear of reprisal or scepticism about authorities’ willingness to act, further exacerbates the issue.
Experts are calling for urgent reforms, including greater transparency in political financing, enhanced judicial independence, and civic education to challenge entrenched cultural norms. Without these measures, Portugal risks perpetuating a cycle of scandals that undermine its international reputation and weaken democratic institutions. The challenge now lies in shifting from reactive responses to a cohesive, long-term strategy to restore public trust and ensure accountability in governance.
