Across Europe, civil society is facing growing pressure. As democratic backsliding takes root in some corners, the need to safeguard the space for public participation is becoming urgent. With an EU Civil Society Strategy expected later this year, there is a window of opportunity to set stronger foundations for civil society’s role in upholding democracy. In this article, Frederik Hafen and Ruby Silk consider what the strategy needs to realise this opportunity.
Europe is weathering a storm of democratic backsliding. Environmentalists familiar with the Aarhus Convention’s environmental democracy rights saw the direction in which the wind blew already at the tail end of the covid-19 pandemic when our Belarusian colleagues, stranded in exile, unsuccessfully fought the 2022 departure of their country from the Convention. Followed by questionable laws in Georgia, Hungary, and Slovakia, civil society opponents clearly feel emboldened; this is evidenced by the recent attacks on civil society organisations’ funding structures by European and German Parliaments. Europe’s democratic values, by and large, persevere, but if ever the line in the sand is moved permanently, we are all complicit. When governments stand by as those working in the public interest come under attack, it signals democratic backsliding—a dangerous pattern that, historically, rarely stops at civil society.
NGOs can and are fighting back. This is, of course, easier for Brussels based organisations with political allies in the European Parliament than for our Belarusian colleagues, many of whom are living in exile due to personal threats of imprisonment. Not only politics but also the law is at civil society’s disposal. For environmentalists, the framework for this was drawn authoritatively in 2001, when the Aarhus Convention came into force. Minimum standards for access to environmental information, participation in democratic decision-making, and access to impartial courts were anchored. The Convention is heavily relied upon in national, EU and UN level Aarhus Compliance Committee litigation, and it now provides inspiration and hope to CSOs and others working for the public good, even if it is not a silver bullet.
The European Commission promises an EU Civil Society Strategy by the end of this year. This strategy will go hand in hand with the (currently open for consultation) Democracy Defence Shield but has a more direct focus on supporting civil society. Long called for, by NGOs such as European Civic Forum and Civil Society Europe, and supported by selected politicians and the European Economic and Social Committee President, the strategy is being drafted in a heavily politicised environment. While it won’t be legally binding, it is still a litmus test for the current Commission’s commitment to protecting a healthy democracy now and for the future.
It is still early days, with the strategy not due to be made public until after the summer. But it will be critically important that the strategy set forward a proactive and not only reactive approach to strengthening civil society. Four lessons learned over the last year should inform civil society’s priorities when contributing to the consultation.
Say “until here and no further”: A strategy can deliver an affirmation of minimum guarantees. NGOs could think about an extension of the spirit of the environmentally focused Aarhus Convention to all policy areas. The Convention legally recognises the legitimacy of NGOs in environmental policy- making (article 2(5)). A strategy cannot provide the same legal guarantee, but it can provide a political signal. It can provide mechanisms to monitor, name and shame, and dissuade restrictive legislation, funding restrictions, and strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), which are still on the rise in Europe.
Recognise that material support provides protection: A strategy can go a long way towards providing guarantees for structural, material support. A pat on the shoulder is nice but cash in hand is better. What civil society needs are long-term funding streams such as a continuation and extension of the LIFE programme. Without them, the power imbalance in favour of businesses, build into our economic systems, will be even more overpowering.
Enable access: In a political climate where NGO voices are less often actively sought out, rules that oblige their involvement can help civil society. Again, the Aarhus Convention is a useful compass. It speaks on the need to identify the parts of the public which are concerned by a policy and involve them (article 6(5)). Proactively reaching out to and seeking input from relevant civil society stakeholders should be the norm on top of the availability of institutions to listen when approached.
Centre transparency: Calls for increased NGO funding transparency are often rooted in conspiracy theories and political agendas rather than genuine concern. Still, centring transparency in the CSO strategy can help reinforce a level playing field and pre-empt bad-faith attacks. Advocating for clear, fair, and easy-to-comply-with legislation is a smart and strategic step to strengthen civil society ahead of future challenges.
Even the most well-crafted EU-level strategy cannot, on its own, guarantee smooth sailing for civil society across Europe. But a robust strategy has the potential to set the EU on the right course. Its impact will depend on how ambitiously the European Commission chooses to implement it – as a bold tool to strengthen democratic resilience or as a routine bureaucratic exercise. In 2025, the urgency for a clear political commitment to protecting, resourcing, and enabling NGOs is greater than ever. Supporting and safeguarding civil society has always been important – but now it is imperative.
