2022 REPORT ON THE APPLICATION OF THE

EU CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS:

THE CIVIC SPACE AND ITS ROLE IN
PROTECTING AND PROMOTING THE
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER THE
CHARTER
CONSULTATION OF ENNHRI AND EQUINET, INCLUDING FOR
DISSEMINATION TO THEIR MEMBERS
Civil society organisations (CSOs) and rights defenders (i.e., national human rights institutions (NHRIs),
equality bodies and Ombuds-institutions) are key actors for the enforcement of the EU Charter of
fundamental rights (the Charter). They play an important role in protecting rights under the Charter and
promoting a culture of values, based on the rule of law, democracy, and fundamental rights.

This was underlined in the 2020 and 2021 rule of law reports, in the democracy action plan and in the
strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter in the EU (the Charter strategy). Promoting an enabling
and supportive environment for CSOs and rights defenders is a shared responsibility of the EU and the
Member States and was one of the four priorities of the Charter strategy.

It is for these reasons that the Commission decided to dedicate its 2022 annual report on the application of
the EU Charter of fundamental rights to the civic space and its role in protecting and promoting the
fundamental rights under the Charter.

The report will explain, in a factual manner and through concrete examples, the role of CSOs and rights
defenders in ensuring the effective implementation of the Charter, and illustrate EU and Member State
actions to protect, support, and empower them.

To inform its work on preparing the report, the Fundamental Rights Unit of DG Justice and Consumers of the
European Commission is consulting key actors in the Charter’s enforcement chain and in promoting an
enabling environment for CSOs and rights defenders, such as Member States, CSOs, and international
organisations. NHRIs and Equality bodies play a key role in making the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights a
reality for all and are usually the bridge between CSOs and the national institutions.

The Commission would like to collect NHRIs, Equality bodies and their networks’ view on the questions
below. The purpose of this consultation is twofold as they will be able to provide information on their own
contribution and working conditions, as well as to report about the contribution and the working
environment of CSOs. Relevant contributions already submitted to the Commission or to the FRA, for
instance in preparation to the Rule of Law reports or in the context of the FRA surveys on the civic space, will
also be taken into account.

Please limit the length of your answers to 500 words per question.
The EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) will assist the European Commission in the assessment of the
contributions received. All answers will be presented in a fully anonymised way. Please refer to the privacy
statement attached for information on data protection regarding this consultation.

Questionnaire:
A – The role of CSOs and rights defenders in ensuring the effective implementation of the
Charter
1. How do you as NHRI /Equality body contribute to activities aimed at implementing EU policies or
strategies related to fundamental rights at EU and/or national level? Please give concrete examples.

Equality bodies are champions for the core EU value of equality and defenders of the right to non-
discrimination. They are public and independent organisations assisting victims of discrimination, monitoring,
and reporting on discrimination issues, and contributing to an awareness of rights and a societal valuing of
equality. They are legally required to do so in relation to one, some, or all the grounds of discrimination
covered by European Union (EU) law – gender, race and ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, religion or belief,
and disability. They play a fundamental role in the non-discrimination architecture of the EU.

By its own nature, they play a fundamental role in the implementation of all the equality related EU legal
instruments, for instance:

- Charter of Fundamental Rights, especially Title III (Equality)

- Race Equality Directive (Directive 2000/43/EC)
- Framework employment Directive (Directive 2000/78/EC) against discrimination at work on grounds
of religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation
- Gender Goods and Services Directive (Directive 2004/113/EC) implementing the principle of equal
treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services
- Gender Recast Directive (Directive 2006/54/EC) on the implementation of the principle of equal
opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation
- Work-Life Balance Directive (Directive (EU) 2019/1158) of the European Parliament and of the
Council on work-life balance for parents and carers and repealing Council Directive 2010/18/EU
- Directive 2010/18/EU implementing the revised Framework Agreement on parental leave concluded
by BUSINESSEUROPE, UEAPME, CEEP and ETUC and repealing Directive 96/34/EC
- Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the
application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a
self-employed capacity and repealing Council Directive 86/613/EEC
- Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage
improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently
given birth or are breastfeeding
- Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978 on the progressive implementation of the principle of equal
treatment for men and women in matters of social security
- Directive 2014/54/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on measures
facilitating the exercise of rights conferred on workers in the context of freedom of movement for
workers
- Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing
minimum standards on the rights, support, and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council
Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA
- Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time
work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC - Annex: Framework agreement on part-time work
 - Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and
expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law. This Framework Decision acts as a
follow-up to Joint Action 96/443/JHA of 15 July 1996 and aims to improve and encourage judicial
cooperation in this field.
- Pending proposals:
o Horizontal Directive Proposal – a Proposal for a Directive against discrimination based on
age, disability, sexual orientation and religion or belief beyond the workplace
o Pay Transparency Proposal – a Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of
the Council to strengthen the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work or work
of equal value between men and women through pay transparency and enforcement
mechanisms.
o Violence against women proposal
o Women on boards proposal

Likewise, they contribute to the application of several EU strategies, especially those included in the Union of
Equality.

- Commission Recommendation (EU) 2018/951 of 22 June 2018 on standards for equality bodies
- Gender Equality Strategy
- EU anti-racism Action Plan 2020-2025
- EU Roma Strategic Framework for Equality, Inclusion and Participation 2020-2030
- LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025

Last, but not least, the EU’s Common Provisions Regulation foresees an important role for equality bodies in
the governance of European Structural and Investment Funds. The importance of equality bodies is clear
considering the Charter, gender equality and non-discrimination horizontal principles and the enabling
conditions linked to the Charter, the CRPD, gender equality, social inclusion and poverty reduction and
national Roma inclusion strategic policy frameworks.

It would be impossible to give a comprehensive view through examples of all these areas due to space
constraints, but please make sure to follow up and request a concrete example if need be.

2. Could you give concrete examples how you cooperate with CSOs in the implementation of Charter
rights?

Most of our members have incorporated CSOs to their governance mechanisms, such as advisory boards
and have an ongoing relationship with them. This informs the conceptualisation and implementation of
all their activities in their mandate, which make a reality the Charter rights. Regarding concrete
examples, for instance,

- UNIA, Belgium. UNIA has created several ad-hoc thematic consultative committees to inform their
activities on certain areas, in which right-holders and CSOs are invited. For instance, on 5 March
2020, UNIA launched the Consultative Commission on Racism, in the presence of some 30 players
from civil society, trade unions and the academic world. The Commission treats issues of racism in
the broadest sense of the word: anti-Semitism and Islamophobia can also be addressed. Additionally,
UNIA often consults right holders and CSOs directly even when they are not incorporated to their
consultative committees. For instance, in 2020, persons with disabilities in Belgium were asked
about the breached to their rights, with the objective of guiding UNIA’ s initiatives in the future.
- Ombudswoman of Croatia: Ombudswoman Human Rights Council is an advisory body for the
Ombudswoman regarding Human Rights issues. Members of the Council include CSOs and for
instance, local Roma Youth leaders. The Council informs the Ombudswoman on the implementation
of their activities. This practice was features in the Fundamental Rights Forum in October 2021 is the
 session titled “The Power Of Community: Together For Equality & Human Rights”. The session
focused on how National Equality Bodies (NEBs), National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), and
Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) work to help individuals achieve justice and get redress for
discrimination and human rights violations. By coming together in cooperation and tapping into each
one’s expertise, different organisations can strengthen and increase their potential to produce
change. With the power of communities, equality and human rights defenders can support each
other on their mission to improve the lives of people across Europe.
- The Council for the Elimination of Racial or Ethnic Discrimination in Spain is a collegiate body and
includes representatives of the national, regional, and local administrations, of social partners and of
10 NGOs working for the promotion of equal treatment and non-discrimination on grounds of racial
or ethnic origin (ACCEM, CEAR, Spanish Red Cross, Fundación CEPAIM, Fundación Secretariado
Gitano, Movimiento contra la Intolerancia, MPDL, Unión Romaní, Rumiñahui, Red Acoge).
- Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Malta. The Council for the Rights of Persons
with Disability of the commission is composed of not less than 14 members. This includes 9 members
representing voluntary organisations, 1 member from the University of Malta, 1 member
representing service providers, 1 member representing residential homes for disabled people. There
is also 1 member appointed by the Government and 1 member representing the Opposition party.
- The Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, has and Advisory Council that advises the Board every
year on the proposed policy plan and advises the Minister of Justice and Security on the appointment
of the members and deputy members of the Board. Permanent members of the Advisory Council are
the National Ombudsman, the chairman of the Dutch Data Protection Authority and the chairman of
the Council for the Judiciary. Other members come from academia, employers’, and employees'
organizations and CSOs.
- The Equality Ombudsman of Sweden conducts dialogues and meetings with civil society on a regular
basis, but also within specific projects and assignments. For instance, in spring 2022 the Equality
Ombudsman have conducted dialogue meetings with representatives from about fifty organizations
in civil society to develop knowledge about discrimination related to religion or other beliefs. The
dialogue has primarily been carried out with representatives from different faith communities, but
representatives from other organizations have also participated in the dialogue. The purpose of the
dialogue has been to deepen the Ombudsman's knowledge and understanding of discrimination
related to religion or other beliefs. The dialogue has also aimed to spread knowledge about the
Ombudsman’s work with issues concerning discrimination related religion or other beliefs.
Additionally, The Equality Ombudsman has an Advisory Council, which aims at providing advice and
support to the Equality Ombudsman on discrimination issues and other questions of relevance to
their work. The advisory council is comprised of members by different national actors, including civil
society and academia.

3. In your view, in which areas do you as NHRIs and/or Equality body contribute the most to the
protection of fundamental rights?
Notwithstanding the multi-mandated bodies, Equality Bodies are focused on contributing to the
implementation of the Equality and non-discrimination acquis, that includes, among others, all the
instruments’ listed under question 1.

4. Which are the main obstacles that you as NHRIs and/or Equality body face in carrying out your
activities aimed at protecting fundamental rights? Please give concrete examples.

Equality bodies and other equality stakeholders have been working in an increasingly challenging
environment where social consensus on the value of equality is being challenged and discriminatory
statements, policies and actions that are illegal and have been unacceptable are being normalised. Equality
bodies have a crucial role and responsibility to remind Member States, institutions, and all Europeans that
equality and non-discrimination are fundamental European values and, ultimately, hold to account violators
of equality legislation.

EU Directives remain limited to providing for the establishment of equality bodies and vesting them with a
minimum set of functions. However, this broad framework has led to very diverse levels of protection against
discrimination across Member States.

To fulfil their potential and maximise their impact, standards on the independence, effectiveness, functions,
and powers of equality bodies have been recommended by both the European Commission and the Council
of Europe. The EC is currently working on a legally binding proposal that would provide guarantees in these
fields and would mark a significant positive development in enabling equality bodies to effectively carry out
their functions.

Equinet’s (and their members) ambitions for what this new piece of legislation should look like can be found
in the Equinet publication Legislating for stronger, more effective equality bodies: Key elements for and
expectations from future EU legislation on equality bodies. All Equinet’s activities in this realm can be found
here.

The effective implementation and monitoring of these standards at European and Member State level will be
one of our common challenges for the coming years.

B – The work of EU institutions and the Member States to protect CSOs and rights defenders
5. Are there effective initiatives/actions at the EU- and/or national level that promote a safe and
enabling environment for CSOs? Please give examples.

There are several reports, especially those related to the rule of law that regularly look at civil society space.
As underlined in events such as The Virtual Seminar On The Role Of The Charter Of Fundamental Rights Of
The European Union In The Work Of Equality Bodies And National Human Rights Institutions 20–22 October
2021 or The power of community: together for equality & human rights session in the FRF 2021 or reports
such as The Case For A Human Rights Approach To The Rule Of Law In The European Union Un Human Rights
Regional Office For Europe (OHCHR), Brussels, May 2020; it is essential that Civic space and rule of law
mechanisms cover space for Equality bodies, Ombuds institutions, as well as NHRIs.

Protecting safe spaces has been a concern for a number of our members. Unia, in Belgium, wrote a
statement regarding the construction of safe spaces for racialised groups, discussing why safe spaces are
essential for marginalized groups and establishing that these should be organised primarily by addressing the
target groups concerned ("reserved for victims of discrimination, racism, people from ethnic minorities,
sexual, lesbians ...") avoiding communicating in an exclusionary way ("forbidden to whites, straight people
...") and in any case never on the basis of the colour of the skin. A dedicated recommendation is being
drafted at the moment.

For the sake of comprehensiveness, we have chosen to focus on a single practice to illustrate effective
initiatives/actions at the national level that promote a safe and enabling environment for CSOs shared by the
Slovak National Centre for Human Rights:

Structural support at the national level

The legal framework for CSOs in Slovakia remains favourable and the legislation concerning establishment and
functioning of CSOs provides a structural support for the establishment of CSOs. This is highlighted in particular
by the existing platforms and bodies operating at the national level. For example, the Office of the
Plenipotentiary of the Government of the Slovak Republic for Development of Civil Society began functioning
in 2011.1 The Plenipotentiary is mandated to design and implement the open government initiatives (i.e.
introduce wider participatory process into adoption of national action plans, strategies and other policies).2
Additionally, in 2012, the Council of the Government of the Slovak Republic for Non-Governmental Non-Profit
Organizations was created as a permanent expert, advisory, coordinating and consulting body of the
Government in the field of civil society development.3 It evaluates the results achieved and proposes solutions
in a specific area on its own initiative. The Council is designed to contribute to the strengthening of
participatory democracy in society, to ensure that government policy material is not only effective, fair, and
democratic, but also to a broad consensus of the governmental and non-governmental sectors, and that its
implementation is guided by the civil society.

Support from selected state authorities for CSOs

The commitment to further strengthen civil society has been taken over by the Slovak Government in its
Programme Statement.4 Act No. 346/2018 on the Register of Non-Governmental Non-Profit Organizations5
entered into force in 2019, establishing a public register of all non-profit NGOs. The register has been launched
in 2021. By requiring organizations to provide more information to the registry to be eligible for public funding,
the register is expected to increase transparency in the sector.

Grants to support the civil society

The Ministry of Investments, Regional Development, and Informatization of the Slovak Republic (“Ministry”)
introduced a new architecture of management and programming European Structural and Investment Funds
to improve management of structural funds and simplify access to funding, including for CSOs. Accordingly,
there is one central body responsible for the management and programming of structural funds, and only one
operational programme is established compared to the previous programming period. In August 2021, the
Ministry launched a call for proposals to support CSOs’ activities dedicated to the development of regions in
the amount of 1.1 million euros.6 Regional tourism projects, various activities to support ecology, volunteering,
education, culture, and the preservation of monuments have received support of up to EUR 50,000.

COVID-19 related subsidies

The Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic published a call for applications for a subsidy for the purpose of
eliminating the consequences of extraordinary events or reducing the negative effects of a crisis on culture7 to
reduce the economic impact on the non-profit sector of culture and creative industries, which has suffered
significant economic losses in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Civic associations, non-profit organizations or foundations that have been active in culture for a long time
can apply for a subsidy of up to EUR 50,000. These include theatre ensembles, cultural operators or

1
Resolution of the Government of the Slovak Republic No. 134/2011 of 18 February 2011, available in Slovak at:
https://rokovania.gov.sk/RVL/Material/6931/1.
2
Office of the Plenipotentiary of the Government of the Slovak Republic for Development of Civil Society, available in
Slovak at: https://www.minv.sk/?ros_my.
3
The Council of the Government of the Slovak Republic for Non-Governmental Non-Profit Organizations, available in
Slovak at: https://www.minv.sk/?ros_rvmno.
4
Program Statement of the Government of the Slovak Republic for 2021 – 2024, pp. 16-17.
5
Registry of Non-Governmental Non-Profit Organizations, available at: https://minv.sk/?register-mimovladnych-
neziskovych-organizacii.
6
https://www.mirri.gov.sk/aktuality/regionalny-rozvoj/vicepremierka-remisova-na-projekty-mimovladnych-organizacii-
z-regionov-ide-dotacia-11-miliona-eur/index.html.
7
Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic, ‘COVID subsidy for non-profit organizations active in culture’, available in
Slovak at: https://www.culture.gov.sk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Vyzva_covid_neziskovky_2021.pdf.
organizers of various festivals.8 The Ministry will reimburse 20% of annual operating costs and 80% of the
year-on-year difference in income from cultural activities, which is the cause of the COVID-19 pandemic.-

6. Are there initiative/actions at the EU- and/or national level that can result in restricting the space for
CSOs? Please give examples.
As expressed in the answer above, we have chosen to focus on a single practice to give a comprehensive view
of the working of a single national example provided by the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights:

Restriction of funds
In November 2020, the National Council of the Slovak Republic enacted an amendment to Act No. 544/2010
Coll. on subsidies within the competence of the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak
Republic, as amended9. The amendment created obstacles in the allocation of subsidies in the field of gender
equality. The amendment relates to the subsidy scheme and regulates the purpose, scope, conditions, and
manner of providing subsidies to support the development of the social field and equality of women and men
and equal opportunities within the competence of the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the
Slovak Republic. Consequently, the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic may
provide subsidies to promote equality between women and men and equal opportunities.10 Such amendment
restricts the eligibility of potential applicants and beneficiaries. Under the new scheme, only organisations
promoting marriage and values of family can apply, excluding CSOs working on issues related to gender
equality, including LGBTIQ+ rights. The disbursement of funding through public subsidies schemes continues
to benefit only selected organizations, excluding organizations working on issues related to gender equality
and LGBTIQ+ rights.11 This has been highlighted also in the European Commission’s Rule of Law Report.12

Verbal attacks and negative perception towards CSOs by state authorities

Negative attitudes and perceptions of CSOs and human rights defenders working on sensitive issues persist.
Such negative perceptions also occur in the public discourse, namely employed by the public officials. Recently,
CSOs have reacted to the public rhetoric employed by the Minister of Finance of the Slovak Republic not to
disprove the work of the CSOs and called for the support of the broad participation of CSOs, for example, in
areas including finding effective and beneficial solutions for the inclusion of marginalized Roma communities.
In January 2022, CSOs addressed an official call of the not-for-profit sector, addressing their concerns regarding

8
Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic, available at: https://www.edotacie.sk/clanky/ministerstvo-kultury-spustilo-
financnu-pomoc-pre-neziskove-organizacie-v-kulturno-kreativnom-priemysle.
9
The amendment available in Slovak language at:
https://www.nrsr.sk/web/Default.aspx?sid=zakony/zakon&ZakZborID=13&CisObdobia=8&CPT=274.
10
Act No. 544/210 Coll. On subsidies within the competence of the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the
Slovak Republic, as amended, available in Slovak language at: https://www.slov-lex.sk/pravne-
predpisy/SK/ZZ/2010/544/.
11
Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic, List of accepted applications for subsidies in 2021,
available at: https://www.employment.gov.sk/sk/ministerstvo/poskytovanie-dotacii/archiv/poskytovanie-dotacii-roku-
2021/schvalene-dotacie-2021.html.
12
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social
Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘2021 Rule of Law Report – Country Chapter on the rule of law situation
in Slovakia,’ SWD (2021) 727 final, 20 July 2021, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021SC0727&from=EN, p. 20.
the negative rhetoric towards the CSOs.13 In November 2021, the Chamber of NGOs issued a public statement
reminding the MPs of their declarations in the Programme Statement.14

Participation and involvement of CSOs

Participation of CSOs in public matters remains challenging, namely concerning participatory processes when
adopting important reforms. For example, despite the announcements of the Ministry of Finance of the Slovak
Republic that the Recovery and Resilience Plan of the Slovak Republic will be discussed at several roundtables
and implemented in close cooperation with CSOs, CSOs criticized the lack of involvement of key partners and
called on the Government to discuss further steps and participation of relevant CSOs. Moreover, it is a common
practice that important laws or legislative amendments are submitted directly through the parliament (as
proposals of MPs) where the space for the civil society to participate is limited as compared to the procedure
regulating governmental proposals that need to pass through the interdepartmental commentary procedure.

7. Do you as NHRI/Equality Body have in place a system to monitor the civic space?
As expressed in the answer above, we have chosen to focus on a single practice to give a comprehensive view
of the working of a single national example provided by the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights:

From 2020, the Centre has been publishing an annual report on the rule of law in the Slovak Republic. This
Report forms part of the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions’ (ENNHRI) submission to the
European Rule of Law Mechanism. One of the main areas of focus of the report forms the enabling space for
civil societies and human rights defenders.

Rule of law tracker

In addition to the monitoring and reporting through the European Rule of Law Mechanism, the Centre together
with its project partners the Centre for International Legal Cooperation and Transparency International
Slovakia has also designed a rule of law project that focuses on bringing relevant stakeholders together to
create a rule of law tracker – a tool that would enable to reflect on the rule of law in Slovakia and allow key
stakeholders to make informed decisions about measures that might negatively (or positively) impact the rule
of law in Slovakia. The project aims at developing a practical and meaningful tool for monitoring and evaluating
the state of rule of law in Slovakia. The project also aims to identify, monitor, and evaluate the most searing
flaws in the field by providing knowledge and insight in an accessible manner to a wide range of stakeholders.
One of the selected areas to be closely monitored and included in the mechanism is the enabling space of CSOs
in the Slovak Republic.

Regular monitoring
Although there were no specific legislative changes affecting the enabling space for CSOs and CSOs continue
to be free to operate and criticize state authorities, the Centre continues to follow some instances of shrinking
of civic space and hate speech directed at CSOs and human rights defenders, especially those working on
human rights of LGBTIQ+ people and on women’s rights including sexual and reproductive rights. In 2021 for
instance, there have been repetitive attempts to amend the legislation concerning sexual and reproductive

13
Chamber of Non-governmental organizations, available in Slovak at:
https://www.minv.sk/swift_data/source/rozvoj_obcianskej_spolocnosti/rada_vlady_pre_mno/rokovania/2022/2022_0
1_13_mimoriadne_zasadnutie/Rada%20vlady%20MNO_2022-01-13_mimoriadna_Vyzva%20Komory%20MNO_2022-
01-13.pdf.
14
Chamber of Non-governmental organizations, available in Slovak at:
https://www.minv.sk/swift_data/source/rozvoj_obcianskej_spolocnosti/rada_vlady_pre_mno/rokovania/2022/2022_0
1_13_mimoriadne_zasadnutie/Rada%20vlady%20MNO_2022-01-
13_mimoriadna_Vyhlasenie%20Komory%20MNO_2021-11-05.pdf.
health of women, which also impacted the work and the environment in which civil societies and human rights
defenders work. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, addressed multiple
letters to the Members of the National Council of the Slovak Republic, where she expressed concern about
these repeated attempts and their compliance with international human rights obligations.15 On that occasion,
she also underlined that these repeated attempts create “an increasingly hostile environment" for Slovak
human rights defenders working on the issues of gender equality and sexual and reproductive health and
rights.

8. Do you as NHRI/Equality Body have in place a system for monitoring threats or attacks (including
physical attacks) on CSOs activists and rights defenders? If yes, how does it work? Do you provide for
support or finance an alert mechanism and/or supporting services in case of physical and on-line
attacks to CSOs activists and rights defenders?
As expressed above, we have chosen to focus on a single practice to give a comprehensive overview shared
by the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights:

In 2021, the Centre has carried out a research focused particularly on CSOs and human rights defenders active
in the field of environment protection. It mapped the experience of threats and bullying or other restriction of
rights of human rights defenders and CSOs in this field. The aim of the mapping was to obtain basic information
on whether such cases occur, in what form and whether human rights defenders and CSOs turn to public
authorities to stop such actions. The mapping included collection of data through a questionnaire with the aim
to explore detailed characteristics of the experience of threats or bullying, e.g., threatening subjects, method
of threat or bullying, strategies of solution and protection against such conduct. The Centre received
information on 11 cases that respondents considered as threat or bullying. The most common form of threat
and restriction of rights was the different ways of harassment and slander of individuals or their families by
the parties involved, but also threats and the use of various administrative acts as a form of harassment
(complaints, criminal reports). Such action came from entities whose interests may be affected by the work of
defenders.

In 2022, as part of the annual Report on the Observance of Human Rights Including the Principle of Equal
Treatment in the Slovak Republic for the year 2021, the Centre focused on the enabling democratic space for
human rights defenders, including activists, journalists and CSOs working in the field of sexual and reproductive
rights. As part of this report, the Centre conducted expert interviews with selected human rights defenders,
activists, and journalists to examine their perception of the democratic space they operate in. The interviews
focused on the barriers that these respondents have encountered in connection with their work on sexual and
reproductive rights and women's health. As the Centre perceives that the existence of a strong and diverse
civil society, including a community of human rights defenders, is an indicator of a healthy and strong
democratic society, the issues raised by human rights defenders dealing with women's sexual and reproductive
rights and health should be seen as an indicator of the problems of the democratic space in general and should
therefore be given due consideration. Aware of the limitations stemming from the size of the research sample
and the consequent possibility of generalization, the Centre noted the limitation of the democratic space for
human rights defenders dealing with women's sexual and reproductive rights. Several aspects of the hostile
environment for human rights defenders have been reflected in the research talks, including limited and
unsystematic funding, participation, and the need to defend against negative, even hateful, reactions.

9. Are you building capacity, or financing capacity building, for CSOs on how to protect civic space? Are
you supporting them in any other way?

15
Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Letter to the National Council of the Slovak Republic, 15 October
2021, CommHR/DM/sf 040-2021, available at: https://rm.coe.int/letter-to-the-slovak-national-council-by-dunja-
mijatovic-council-of-eu/1680a43530.
As mentioned in the previous section (A), many of our members have stable relationship with CSOs as part of
their mandate, and have even incorporated them into internal governmental structures, such as advisory
Boards. This implies that any kind of menace to civic space is immediately communicated to the Equality
Body, that can act in support, either by transmitting a request to the government, by making
recommendations and statements etc (depending on their mandate and powers). Many Equality Bodies,
additionally, run training programs for and/or CSOs on different topics related to equality and non-
discrimination and therefore the Charter. For instance, the Maltese CRPD organises a Disability Equality
Training to various public and private organisations in collaboration with DPOs and persons with disabilities
themselves.

Equinet supports Equality Bodies in their capacity building regarding many topics and grounds, including
building their capacity together with CSOs in which the main objective is to allow both our members and
CSOs and right holders to understand, support and work with each other. For instance, following Discussion
Paper drafted by the Gender Working group of Equinet together with trans and intersex CSOs and activities,
(Building bridges between equality bodies and trans and intersex activists) a capacity building event together
with these CSOs in order to build bridges between Equality Bodies and right holders.

Equality Bodies themselves engage with CSOs and communities, as shown in this questionnaire, on various
issues. One of those is engagement with Roma and Traveller Communities. Equality bodies identify a strong
relationship with civil society as a key enabling factors for all aspects of their work on Roma and Traveller
issues. They report a wide range of engagement with Roma and Travellers, their representatives, and their
organisations. This has a mutual benefit in informing the work of equality bodies on Roma and Traveller
issues and in informing Roma and Travellers, their representatives, and their organisations on making use of
equal treatment legislation and on the role of the equality body. This engagement encompasses a range of
activities, including:

- visits to and meetings at Roma settlements

- provision of training to Roma and Traveller associations
- meeting Roma and Traveller groups and associations as a source of learning
- networking with Roma and Traveller associations within the official institutions established in
relation to Roma and Traveller issues; and
- having Roma and Traveller representatives on equality body institutional structures

Regarding concrete practices:

- In Croatia, the Human Rights Council, an advisory body of the Office of the Ombudswoman, includes
Roma representatives, and the equality body engages in visits to local Roma communities and
settlements, as well as meetings with Roma politicians and NGOs.
- In Kosovo, the Ombudsperson Institution in Kosovo hosted twenty children from the Roma, Ashkali
and Egyptian communities, from the Municipality of Podujeva, to enable them to express their
opinions, attitudes, or concerns about the various problems they face every day, not only at school,
but also on the streets and elsewhere, and to be heard by the Ombudsperson.
- In the Slovak Republic, the Slovak National Human Rights Centre plans to establish an advisory body
to assist in strengthening its work on Roma rights16

Additionally, a number of our members also have ongoing grants schemes to help strengthen civic space. For
instance:
- IHREC in Ireland, has had for a few years a re-granting scheme open to civil society organisations,
including community and voluntary organisations, non-governmental and non-profit organisations,

16
For more information and context, please check Equinet perspective Roma and Traveller Inclusion:
Towards a new EU Framework Learning from the Work of Equality Bodies, 2020.
 groups representing geographic communities or communities of interest, and trade unions with
different foci. In 2019, for instance, the grants scheme focused on activities advancing economic and
social rights and equality. In 2021-2022 the scheme focused on Advancing Social and Economic
Rights and Equality, Combatting Racism and Racial Discrimination and Progressing the Rights of
People with Disabilities.
- The Institute of Women in Spain has an ongoing scheme to support, through funds CSOs and
associations. This scheme includes core funding, but also other kind of grants, technical assessments
support and premises.

C – The work of EU institutions and the Member States to empower CSOs and rights
defenders
10. Are there dialogues between NHRIs/Equality bodies and public authorities at national, EU or
international level that work well regarding activities aimed at making the fundamental rights
enshrined in the Charter a reality on the ground? Do these dialogues, if existing, also cover rule of law
and democracy related issues? Please give examples.

Equality Bodies, by definition, work on areas covered by EU antidiscrimination acquis, and therefore, also
covered by the Charter. As equality watchdogs, they mostly focus on equality and non -discrimination, but
due to the variety of our members.

One specific example could entail Equality bodies and Roma equality. Equality Bodies are expected to be
involved in the development, implementation and monitoring of national equality strategies and plans
following the EC Roma Strategy.

- In Belgium, Unia works in close contact with the National Roma Contact Point, which takes the form
of an administrative working group with representation from relevant bodies in federal government,
the regions, and communities, and is a member of the National Roma Platform.
- In Cyprus, the office of the Commissioner for Administration and Protection of Human Rights
participated on a National Platform on Roma which was formed to improve implementation of policy
measures for the integration of Roma over a two-year period from 2016.
- In the Czech Republic, the Public Defender of Rights is a member of the Government Council for
Roma Minority Affairs, a permanent advisory and initiative body on issues related to Roma
integration. The Council cooperates on preparation of the national Roma integration strategy. The
Public Defender of Rights informs the Council on progress in implementing the strategy and
implements some actions under the strategy.
- In Ireland, the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission is a member of the Steering Group to
support and monitor implementation of the National Traveller and Roma Inclusion Strategy.
- In the Slovak Republic, the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights was involved in the preparation
of the Strategy for Integration of Roma by 2020 by the Office of the Plenipotentiary of the
Government of the Slovak Republic for Roma Communities.

Depending on their mandate they also take upon themselves to cover rule of law and democracy in a wider
way, even beyond what could be related to their equality and non-discrimination mandate.

For instance, the Polish Commissioner for Human Rights has a proven record of speaking in favour of CSOs
and defend the rule of law and democracy and the shrinking civic space in Poland for several years.

11. Are there any EU or national processes where NHRIs/Equality bodies are systematically consulted
regarding legislative proposals related to their areas of work? Please give examples.
Most equality bodies are consulted (even if their recommendations or statements may not be binding)
regarding legislative proposals in equality and non-discrimination and especially those having relation with
their mandate, in their own countries. It is notable nonetheless, that this does not happen across the board
or not in a transparent and timely manner, which points to the need for a legal obligation for Governments
to do so. Additionally, regarding ex-ante equality impact assessments for other files, as concluded in the
2020 Compendium of Good Practices on Equality Mainstreaming: The Use of Equality Duties and Equality
Impact Assessments, systematic equality impact assessments are rare and even when performed they were
infrequently binding.

For instance, FADA in Germany is currently being consulted regarding a modification of the German
antidiscrimination federal legislation. If approved, the proposal foresees to has been consulted in all
legislative projects related to discrimination in the future.

12. Are CSOs or, where relevant, NHRIs included in the national committees set up to monitoring the
implementation of EU funded programmes under the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) and are
they involved in the arrangements set up under the horizontal enabling condition to ensure
compliance with the Charter? If so, what is their role in this context?

Several Equality Bodies have reported to have been asked to participate or perform the duties linked to the
horizontal enabling condition to ensure compliance with the Charter. Those same Equality Bodies have raised
concerns especially regarding the lack of clear information regarding their expected role (due to the
technicality of the topic) and human and technical constrains (given that any kind of extension of their
mandate should be linked to an increase on their capacity, especially a systematic work such as this one).
Nonetheless, the Equinet Policy Formation Working Group will prepare a Perspective that will touch upon
this topic and will be accompanied by a series of Mini workshops for our members to build their capacity in
this regard in 2022.

As an example, in Malta both CRPD and NCPE review all proposals for EU funded projects under ERDF and
ESF programmes to ensure that horizontal priorities are complied with. Before the proposals are submitted
there is a meeting organised by the managing authority where we both give presentations to all potential
applicants explaining the importance of horizontal priorities and what the project applicants need to
consider and then answer their questions. When the proposals are received by the managing authority, we
are sent the proposals and we report on any aspects that are missing or that the applicants should consider.
The final proposals are then reviewed by a committee organised by the managing authority which includes
both CRPD and NCPE to ensure that horizontal priorities have been provided for and clear up any aspects
that need to be corrected.