Sittings · Compare

What changed

From · Plenary report · 2026-03-05 A-10-2026-0042 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025

→

To · Adopted text · 2026-04-29 TA-10-2026-0146 Situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025

+42 added · −74 removed · 72 modified paragraphs hide unchanged text

~~MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION~~

P10_TA(2026)0146

~~on the situation~~Situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025

~~(2025/2135(INI))~~

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

PE778.093

European Parliament resolution of 29 April 2026 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025 (2025/2135(INI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to 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 (Victims’ Rights Directive), the Commission proposal of 12 July 2023 for the revision of the Victims’ Rights Directive (COM(2023)0424) and the deal reached on the provisional agreement resulting from the interinstitutional negotiations,

~~– having regard to Directive (EU).../... [on combating corruption],~~

– having regard to a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating corruption, replacing Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA and the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of Member States of the European Union and amending Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council,

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1083 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU (European Media Freedom Act),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 7 March 2025 entitled ‘A Roadmap for Women’s Rights’ (COM(2025)0097), which outlines a long-term vision for achieving gender equality,

– having regard to the UN human rights treaties and instruments on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, in particular the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the recommendations and reports of the UN Universal Periodic Review, and the case-law of the UN treaty bodies and the special procedures of the Human Rights Council, including the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief ~~(A/HRC/49/L.18),~~(A/HRC/RES/49/5),

– having regard to Recommendation Rec(2006)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member states of the Council of Europe on the European Prison Rules of 11 January 2006,

– having regard to the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),

~~– having regard to the Yogyakarta Principles on the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics,~~

– having regard to the recommendations and reports of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the High Commissioner on National Minorities, the Representative on Freedom of the Media and other bodies of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE),

– having regard to its resolutions on the Commission’s rule of law reports,

– having regard to its resolutions on specific Member States, ~~including Greece, Hungary and Slovakia,~~

– having regard to its resolution of 8 February 2024 on the implementation of the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025,

G. whereas corruption is often linked to the erosion of democratic institutions and exploited by organised crime to infiltrate politics and the economy, distort democratic processes, and launder illicit money; whereas restoring trust at all levels of society, including in the judiciary and law enforcement, requires sustained anti-corruption efforts, ethical political leadership, robust independent oversight and a strong commitment to transparency, accountability and the protection of core democratic values;

H. whereas in its annual report, GRECO underlined concerns in several Member States, particularly as regards a lack of transparency in the law-making process, a robust framework to prevent conflicts of interest, a code of conduct for members of government and public officials, access to information on law reforms, and the strengthening of anti-corruption and integrity frameworks within law enforcement agencies; whereas in its study on the examination of persons with top executive functions and law enforcement agencies, GRECO stressed that the absence of integrity checks for top executives in governments and issues related to the recruitment and career of law enforcement personnel, particularly for top management positions, remain problematic;

H. whereas organised crime poses a serious threat to fundamental rights and the functioning of the rule of law in several Member States; whereas the experience of some Member States has shown the effectiveness of specific preventive mechanisms designed to stop organised crime infiltrating public procurement processes and the management of EU funds by requiring that anti-mafia checks be conducted prior to access being granted to public grants and concessions; whereas the introduction of such preventive mechanisms across the EU would help to protect the integrity of EU funds, uphold the fundamental rights of the communities impacted by organised crime and strengthen citizens’ trust in public institutions;

I. whereas there is a lack of adequate protection for whistle-blowers across the EU; whereas some Member States have not yet fully or correctly transposed the Whistleblowers Directive; whereas during 2024 and 2025, the CJEU sanctioned six Member States for failing to transpose the Whistleblowers Directive; whereas whistle-blowers play an essential role in detecting and reporting wrongdoing and in strengthening democratic accountability and transparency, and their protection should be guaranteed and promoted;

I. whereas in its annual report, GRECO underlined concerns in several Member States, particularly as regards a lack of transparency in the law-making process, a robust framework to prevent conflicts of interest, a code of conduct for members of government and public officials, access to information on law reforms, and the strengthening of anti-corruption and integrity frameworks within law enforcement agencies; whereas in its study on the examination of persons with top executive functions and law enforcement agencies, GRECO stressed that the absence of integrity checks for top executives in governments and issues related to the recruitment and career of law enforcement personnel, particularly for top management positions, remain problematic;

J. whereas ECtHR case-law emphasises that pre-trial detention must remain an exceptional measure, applied only when strictly necessary and justified on relevant and sufficient grounds; whereas the misuse of pre-trial detention undermines the right to liberty, the presumption of innocence and the overall fairness of justice systems;

J. whereas there is a lack of adequate protection for whistle-blowers across the EU; whereas some Member States have not yet fully or correctly transposed the Whistleblowers Directive; whereas during 2024 and 2025, the CJEU sanctioned six Member States for failing to transpose the Whistleblowers Directive; whereas whistle-blowers play an essential role in detecting and reporting wrongdoing and in strengthening democratic accountability and transparency, and their protection should be guaranteed and promoted;

K. whereas media freedom across the EU remains under threat in several Member States, as illustrated by the Commission’s latest Rule of Law Report, which issues recommendations to several Member States on addressing concerns relating to media independence, political pressure and the persistence of attacks against press freedom, including SLAPPs;

K. whereas ECtHR case-law emphasises that pre-trial detention must remain an exceptional measure, applied only when strictly necessary and justified on relevant and sufficient grounds; whereas the misuse of pre-trial detention undermines the right to liberty, the presumption of innocence and the overall fairness of justice systems;

L. whereas the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) shows a deterioration in working conditions for journalists, including violence, harassment and intimidation, a growing concentration of media ownership and the impact of digital platforms and budget constraints; whereas further safeguards are still needed, including independent regulators, transparency of media ownership, protection from political interference and enhanced access to information and security for journalists;

L. whereas media freedom across the EU remains under threat in several Member States, as illustrated by the Commission’s latest Rule of Law Report, which issues recommendations to several Member States on addressing concerns relating to media independence, political pressure and the persistence of attacks against press freedom, including SLAPPs;

M. whereas the Council of Europe’s 2025 annual assessment of press freedom in Europe shows that media capture, the lack of independence of public service media and AI-generated disinformation campaigns are growing threats across the EU, posing a direct risk to democracy; whereas preserving press freedom and ensuring the public’s access to independent, high-quality journalism is one of the key pillars of a democratic society; whereas SLAPPs remain a threat to media freedom; whereas the safeguards provided for in the Anti-SLAPP Directive should be extended to domestic and criminal cases; whereas the European Media Freedom Act entered fully into force on 8 August 2025; whereas in several Member States, journalists and media workers have been subjected to political smear campaigns, public denigration and orchestrated attempts to discredit their work, often accompanied by abusive legal actions and threats, pressure, harassment and violence, creating a climate of fear and self-censorship that undermines the public’s right to information;

M. whereas the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) shows a deterioration in working conditions for journalists, including violence, harassment and intimidation, a growing concentration of media ownership and the impact of digital platforms and budget constraints; whereas further safeguards are still needed, including independent regulators, transparency of media ownership, protection from political interference and enhanced access to information and security for journalists;

N. whereas some journalists and media workers in several countries are suffering from precarious conditions, a lack of resources and an unsafe environment, including increasing harassment and legal challenges, and must also deal with additional challenges including intimidation, legal threats, political interference, limited access to reliable funding and shrinking media pluralism; whereas many face threats, attacks and intimidation in the course of their investigations, and some are forced to live under police protection due to ongoing death threats; whereas according to the MPM 2024 report, the precariousness of journalistic work has had a direct impact on the independence and quality of reporting across Europe; whereas journalists and media professionals must enjoy the rights and assume the duties conferred upon them by their function;

N. whereas the Council of Europe’s 2025 annual assessment of press freedom in Europe shows that media capture, the lack of independence of public service media and AI-generated disinformation campaigns are growing threats across the EU, posing a direct risk to democracy; whereas preserving press freedom and ensuring the public’s access to independent, high-quality journalism is one of the key pillars of a democratic society; whereas SLAPPs remain a threat to media freedom; whereas the safeguards provided for in the Anti-SLAPP Directive should be extended to domestic and criminal cases; whereas the European Media Freedom Act entered fully into force on 8 August 2025; whereas in several Member States, journalists and media workers have been subjected to political smear campaigns, public denigration and orchestrated attempts to discredit their work, often accompanied by abusive legal actions and threats, pressure, harassment and violence, creating a climate of fear and self-censorship that undermines the public’s right to information;

O. whereas disinformation is often part of a broader range of hybrid threats aimed at undermining or harming democratically established governments, countries or alliances; whereas the spread of misinformation and disinformation, including state-sponsored and coordinated online campaigns, contributes to polarisation, erodes trust in democratic institutions, threatens the integrity of electoral processes and public debate, poses a threat to key electoral principles such as voters’ freedom to form their opinion, transparency, equality of opportunity and fairness, and is amplified by the rise of social media and digital platforms, which accelerate the dissemination of false and manipulative content;

O. whereas some journalists and media workers in several countries are suffering from precarious conditions, a lack of resources and an unsafe environment, including increasing harassment and legal challenges, and must also deal with additional challenges including intimidation, legal threats, political interference, limited access to reliable funding and shrinking media pluralism; whereas many face threats, attacks and intimidation in the course of their investigations, and some are forced to live under police protection due to ongoing death threats; whereas according to the MPM 2024 report, the precariousness of journalistic work has had a direct impact on the independence and quality of reporting across Europe; whereas journalists and media professionals must enjoy the rights and assume the duties conferred upon them by their function;

P. whereas algorithmic manipulation increasingly shapes public opinion by amplifying false or extremist narratives; whereas changes in content moderation policies and enforcement practices on certain major platforms have deepened this trend and raised concerns about the increased spread of harmful content and online manipulation; whereas the Commission has opened investigations into several platforms under the Digital Services Act for failing to curb disinformation and protect users;

P. whereas disinformation is often part of a broader range of hybrid threats aimed at undermining or harming democratically established governments, countries or alliances; whereas the spread of misinformation and disinformation, including state-sponsored and coordinated online campaigns, contributes to polarisation, erodes trust in democratic institutions, threatens the integrity of electoral processes and public debate, poses a threat to key electoral principles such as voters’ freedom to form their opinion, transparency, equality of opportunity and fairness, and is amplified by the rise of social media and digital platforms, which accelerate the dissemination of false and manipulative content;

Q. whereas vulnerable groups are particularly exposed online, facing targeted manipulation, harmful narratives and limited media literacy; whereas young people remain particularly exposed to algorithmic bias and propaganda without adequate digital literacy tools; whereas digital platforms can also play a positive role in access to knowledge, civic participation, community building, innovation and the promotion of fundamental rights; whereas bias in algorithms and the business model of social media platforms, based on micro-targeted advertising, play a role in spreading and amplifying hate speech and inciting discrimination, including racism, misogyny and violence;

Q. whereas algorithmic manipulation increasingly shapes public opinion by amplifying false or extremist narratives; whereas changes in content moderation policies and enforcement practices on certain major platforms have deepened this trend and raised concerns about the increased spread of harmful content and online manipulation; whereas the Commission has opened investigations into several platforms under the Digital Services Act for failing to curb disinformation and protect users;

~~R. whereas upcoming EU initiatives to combat disinformation, including the European Democracy Shield, must be fully consistent with international human rights standards;~~

R. whereas vulnerable groups are particularly exposed online, facing targeted manipulation, harmful narratives and limited media literacy; whereas young people remain particularly exposed to algorithmic bias and propaganda without adequate digital literacy tools; whereas digital platforms can also play a positive role in access to knowledge, civic participation, community building, innovation and the promotion of fundamental rights; whereas bias in algorithms and the business model of social media platforms, based on micro-targeted advertising, play a role in spreading and amplifying hate speech and inciting discrimination, including racism, misogyny and violence;

S. whereas new technologies, including AI systems, offer significant opportunities for innovation, economic growth and improved public services, but may also risk exacerbating discrimination and amplifying existing inequalities and creating new forms of bias; whereas they may raise concerns with regard to privacy and fundamental rights and should be subject to strict safeguards and clear legal frameworks;

S. whereas upcoming EU initiatives to combat disinformation, including the European Democracy Shield, must be fully consistent with international human rights standards;

T. whereas children across the EU are facing a growing mental health crisis driven by the unchecked influence of algorithmic techniques, such as addictive and manipulative design, ‘dark patterns’ pushing children into extended screen time, and the promotion of harmful content; whereas this has negative effects on children’s healthy development, mental well-being and safety; whereas current EU legal frameworks governing the online environment do not sufficiently address the protection of children’s mental health online;

T. whereas new technologies, including AI systems, offer significant opportunities for innovation, economic growth and improved public services, but may also risk exacerbating discrimination and amplifying existing inequalities and creating new forms of bias; whereas they may raise concerns with regard to privacy and fundamental rights and should be subject to strict safeguards and clear legal frameworks;

U. whereas the use of spyware, facial recognition and surveillance technologies requires strict safeguards, transparency and democratic oversight in order to prevent abuses, protect fundamental rights and ensure full respect for privacy; whereas new technologies are being used to create predictions, profiles and risk assessments that affect people’s lives and can reproduce social biases; whereas the use of facial recognition technologies can have a chilling effect on the right to peaceful assembly and may have discriminatory effects; whereas biometric mass surveillance practices risk undermining fundamental rights; whereas such practices constitute serious violations of the right to privacy and to freedom of expression; whereas new technologies should be better regulated to protect fundamental rights;

U. whereas children across the EU are facing a growing mental health crisis driven by the unchecked influence of algorithmic techniques, such as addictive and manipulative design, ‘dark patterns’ pushing children into extended screen time, and the promotion of harmful content; whereas this has negative effects on children’s healthy development, mental well-being and safety; whereas current EU legal frameworks governing the online environment do not sufficiently address the protection of children’s mental health online;

V. whereas, in the case of journalists, surveillance not only endangers their safety but also destroys the confidentiality of their sources, effectively preventing them from carrying out their work; whereas when there is mounting evidence and an alert from companies about surveillance operations, national authorities should provide information on the scope, authorisation and accountability of these operations, and not leave victims without clarity or effective redress;

V. whereas the use of spyware, facial recognition and surveillance technologies requires strict safeguards, transparency and democratic oversight in order to prevent abuses, protect fundamental rights and ensure full respect for privacy; whereas new technologies are being used to create predictions, profiles and risk assessments that affect people’s lives and can reproduce social biases; whereas the use of facial recognition technologies can have a chilling effect on the right to peaceful assembly and may have discriminatory effects; whereas biometric mass surveillance practices risk undermining fundamental rights; whereas such practices constitute serious violations of the right to privacy and to freedom of expression; whereas new technologies should be better regulated to protect fundamental rights;

W. whereas there has been widespread use, including by governments, of spyware technologies in several Member States; whereas the use of spyware constitutes an abusive and undemocratic practice that undermines the rule of law and fundamental rights in our society, and for which there is no effective redress; whereas advances in technology are making spyware infections harder to detect and far more widespread;

W. whereas, in the case of journalists, surveillance not only endangers their safety but also destroys the confidentiality of their sources, effectively preventing them from carrying out their work; whereas when there is mounting evidence and an alert from companies about surveillance operations, national authorities should provide information on the scope, authorisation and accountability of these operations, and not leave victims without clarity or effective redress;

X. whereas the Parliament’s Committee of Inquiry to investigate the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (PEGA) found that spyware such as Pegasus, Predator and Graphite had been unlawfully used in several Member States against journalists, civil society actors, lawyers, opposition figures and officials; whereas it identified serious breaches of privacy, data protection and freedom of expression, and warned that such practices pose a systemic threat to democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the Union; whereas the full implementation of the PEGA recommendations is essential to prevent further abuses;

X. whereas there has been widespread use, including by governments, of spyware technologies in several Member States; whereas the use of spyware constitutes an abusive and undemocratic practice that undermines the rule of law and fundamental rights in our society, and for which there is no effective redress; whereas advances in technology are making spyware infections harder to detect and far more widespread;

Y. whereas recent journalistic investigations have revealed that certain EU funds may have been allocated to companies developing or marketing intrusive surveillance technologies, including spyware; whereas it is essential to ensure that no EU funds contribute to the development, export or deployment of spyware or other surveillance tools that can be used to violate fundamental rights and the rule of law;

Y. whereas the Parliament’s Committee of Inquiry to investigate the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware (PEGA) found that spyware such as Pegasus, Predator and Graphite had been unlawfully used in several Member States against journalists, civil society actors, lawyers, opposition figures and officials; whereas it identified serious breaches of privacy, data protection and freedom of expression, and warned that such practices pose a systemic threat to democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the Union; whereas the full implementation of the PEGA recommendations is essential to prevent further abuses;

Z. whereas according to the Venice Commission, spyware technologies could be turned into a surveillance weapon that could be used to curtail fundamental rights, censor and criminalise criticism and dissent, and harass, or even suppress, journalists, human rights activists, political opponents and civil society organisations, as shown by the multiple allegations and revelations;

Z. whereas recent journalistic investigations have revealed that certain EU funds may have been allocated to companies developing or marketing intrusive surveillance technologies, including spyware; whereas it is essential to ensure that no EU funds contribute to the development, export or deployment of spyware or other surveillance tools that can be used to violate fundamental rights and the rule of law;

AA. whereas many instances of disproportionate use of force against demonstrators continue to be reported across the EU, including violence and the use of less lethal weapons to control or disperse crowds;

AA. whereas according to the Venice Commission, spyware technologies could be turned into a surveillance weapon that could be used to curtail fundamental rights, censor and criminalise criticism and dissent, and harass, or even suppress, journalists, human rights activists, political opponents and civil society organisations, as shown by the multiple allegations and revelations;

AB. whereas there is evidence that some EU funds, including certain EU Home Affairs funds, have been used in a way that leads to fundamental rights violations, including discrimination; whereas EU funds should be used in a manner that promotes and respects fundamental rights and does not result in any such violations; whereas compliance with the Union values laid down in Article 2 TEU, including respect for the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, is a fundamental prerequisite for accessing and implementing EU funds, as reflected in the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; whereas Member States and the Commission must ensure respect for fundamental rights and compliance with the Charter in accessing and implementing EU funds; whereas increased transparency and accountability and effective oversight in the allocation and use of EU funds and the assessment of the relevant programmes are key to ensuring compliance with the horizontal enabling conditions;

AB. whereas many instances of disproportionate use of force against demonstrators continue to be reported across the EU, including violence and the use of less lethal weapons to control or disperse crowds;

AC. whereas fundamental rights violations at borders, including ill treatment, pushbacks and verbal and physical violence, have been widely reported; whereas such practices have arisen in several Member States in recent years; whereas these include cases of migrants being mistreated by border guards or other officials; whereas these practices violate fundamental rights, EU law and international human rights and refugee law, including the principle of non-refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsions; whereas Member States and the EU have the responsibility to conduct thorough and effective investigations into violations of fundamental and human rights at borders; whereas fundamental rights violations often go unreported;

AC. whereas there is evidence that some EU funds, including certain EU Home Affairs funds, have been used in a way that leads to fundamental rights violations, including discrimination; whereas EU funds should be used in a manner that promotes and respects fundamental rights and does not result in any such violations; whereas compliance with the Union values laid down in Article 2 TEU, including respect for the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, is a fundamental prerequisite for accessing and implementing EU funds, as reflected in the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; whereas Member States and the Commission must ensure respect for fundamental rights and compliance with the Charter in accessing and implementing EU funds; whereas increased transparency and accountability and effective oversight in the allocation and use of EU funds and the assessment of the relevant programmes are key to ensuring compliance with the horizontal enabling conditions;

AD. whereas according to the report entitled ‘Externalised asylum and migration policies and human rights law’ by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, externalisation policies may engage the responsibility of Member States, in particular with regard to the principle of non-refoulement, the right to life, freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, the prohibition of collective expulsion and arbitrary detention, and the right to access effective remedies, as guaranteed by EU and UN treaties, the Charter and the ECHR; whereas the report identifies the external processing of asylum claims, external return procedures and the outsourcing of border controls, some of which have a documented history of serious violations against people on the move, as being among the main areas in which the risks are particularly acute;

AD. whereas fundamental rights violations at borders, including ill treatment, pushbacks and verbal and physical violence, have been widely reported; whereas such practices have arisen in several Member States in recent years; whereas these include cases of migrants being mistreated by border guards or other officials; whereas these practices violate fundamental rights, EU law and international human rights and refugee law, including the principle of non-refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsions; whereas Member States and the EU have the responsibility to conduct thorough and effective investigations into violations of fundamental and human rights at borders; whereas fundamental rights violations often go unreported;

AE. whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights recommends carrying out comprehensive human rights risk assessments before engaging in external cooperation, reviewing the human rights impact of ongoing activities, defining clear and non-negotiable principles that exclude any cooperation likely to put people at risk of fundamental rights violations, ensuring adequate human rights preconditions and safeguards, and strengthening transparency, monitoring and accountability; whereas the division of responsibilities between the Member States and EU bodies or agencies should never result in accountability gaps;

AE. whereas according to the report entitled ‘Externalised asylum and migration policies and human rights law’ by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, externalisation policies may engage the responsibility of Member States, in particular with regard to the principle of non-refoulement, the right to life, freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, the prohibition of collective expulsion and arbitrary detention, and the right to access effective remedies, as guaranteed by EU and UN treaties, the Charter and the ECHR; whereas the report identifies the external processing of asylum claims, external return procedures and the outsourcing of border controls, some of which have a documented history of serious violations against people on the move, as being among the main areas in which the risks are particularly acute;

AF. whereas according to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the detention of any child solely on account of their or their parents’ migration status constitutes a child rights violation and contravenes the principle of ensuring the best interests of the child; whereas the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution entitled ‘Artificial Intelligence and Migration’ stresses that asylum seekers should have the right to challenge AI-generated evidence, such as flawed interview summaries or biased analyses, that legal aid should be expanded to support such challenges, that reparations must be available where harm results from algorithmic errors, and that technological innovation must not come at the expense of fundamental rights;

AF. whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights recommends carrying out comprehensive human rights risk assessments before engaging in external cooperation, reviewing the human rights impact of ongoing activities, defining clear and non-negotiable principles that exclude any cooperation likely to put people at risk of fundamental rights violations, ensuring adequate human rights preconditions and safeguards, and strengthening transparency, monitoring and accountability; whereas the division of responsibilities between the Member States and EU bodies or agencies should never result in accountability gaps;

AG. whereas certain Member States’ responses to irregular migration risk undermining fundamental rights and may perpetuate racialised narratives; whereas the EU and the Member States should ensure the protection of the lives of refugees and migrants and take credible steps to deliver accountability for violations;

AG. whereas according to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the detention of any child solely on account of their or their parents’ migration status constitutes a child rights violation and contravenes the principle of ensuring the best interests of the child; whereas the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe resolution entitled ‘Artificial Intelligence and Migration’ stresses that asylum seekers should have the right to challenge AI-generated evidence, such as flawed interview summaries or biased analyses, that legal aid should be expanded to support such challenges, that reparations must be available where harm results from algorithmic errors, and that technological innovation must not come at the expense of fundamental rights;

~~(Ex AM 49 (Or. EN) of FdR \\ipolbrusnvf01\LIBE\docep\AM\1337973EN.docx)~~

AH. whereas certain Member States’ responses to irregular migration risk undermining fundamental rights and may perpetuate racialised narratives; whereas the EU and the Member States should ensure the protection of the lives of refugees and migrants and take credible steps to deliver accountability for violations;

~~AH.~~AI. whereas attempts to suspend the registration of asylum applications are a matter of serious concern; whereas the human rights of the people concerned must be respected and their protection needs assessed, and those who qualify for international protection must be given access to meaningful protection measures; whereas the new legislative framework under the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum establishes revised rules for asylum procedures, border management and solidarity; whereas its effective application requires full respect for fundamental rights and compliance with EU and international obligations; whereas several Member States continue to face significant operational pressure at their external borders; whereas these challenges require a coordinated European response, including streamlined and effective procedures, in full accordance with the applicable EU and international legal framework; whereas the need to prevent the abuse of the European asylum system by smugglers and the need to combat all forms of transnational organised crime are essential for managing migration effectively;

~~AI.~~AJ. whereas women and girls face increasing and pervasive online violence, hate speech and hate crime, with particular and extreme consequences for their daily lives, their participation in public life, and, as a result, for equal representation; whereas the EU Roadmap for Women’s Rights and the declaration of principles for a gender-equal society are welcome initiatives, although they have no enforcement power; whereas urgent efforts are needed to defend and promote gender equality, and thus a Union of Equality;

~~AJ.~~AK. whereas the growing global influence ~~of the so-called ‘manosphere’~~ has given rise to online communities and male influencers promoting the false narrative that feminism and gender equality harm men, spreading misogynistic content, normalising violence against women and girls, and increasingly intersecting with extremist and radical movements;

~~AK.~~AL. whereas opposition to gender equality has escalated in recent years; whereas the level of gender-based violence, particularly against women and girls, as well as LGBTIQ+ people, including sexual violence and rape, remains high across the Union, particularly for those experiencing multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination; whereas gender-based cyberviolence represents a continuation of offline gender-based violence in the online environment; whereas gender-based cyberviolence often leads to self-censorship and can have serious consequences for victims’ personal and professional lives; whereas responses from the criminal justice system remain insufficient to address this phenomenon; whereas training police officers in the soft skills needed to listen to, understand and respect all victims of gender-based violence is essential to counter underreporting and re-victimisation; whereas ensuring accessible reporting mechanisms and effective remedies is indispensable to creating a safer environment for all victims of gender-based violence;

~~AL.~~AM. whereas the denial of access to safe and legal abortion exposes women to serious risks and is therefore a form of gender-based violence, as it also denies women’s autonomy and freedom of reproductive choice; whereas sexual and reproductive healthcare services are essential healthcare services; whereas more than 20 million women in the EU still lack access to safe and legal abortion and other sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) services, which puts women and girls at risk of physical harm and undue economic and mental stress; whereas the denial of such essential healthcare services as SRHR services in some Member States also includes women and girls who are victims of sexual violence, hindering the process of their recovery from the offence in question; whereas the ‘My Voice, My choice’ European Citizens’ Initiative calls on the EU to ensure access to safe and legal abortion for all while respecting the division of competences under the Treaties; whereas the ECtHR has ruled that restrictive abortion laws and the lack of consistent implementation in practice violate women’s right to bodily autonomy and integrity;

~~AM.~~AN. whereas discrimination based on sex, gender and other grounds is prohibited under Article 21 of the Charter;

~~AN.~~AO. whereas, as parties to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), Member States are bound by its commitments, including Article 12 on the elimination of discrimination against women in the field of healthcare, with a view to ensuring that men and women have equal access to healthcare services, including those related to family planning;

~~AO.~~AP. whereas denying access to safe and legal abortion in law and practice discriminates against women on the grounds of sex by prohibiting a type of healthcare only required by women; whereas no similar restrictions exist on health services that are needed only by men;

~~AP.~~AQ. whereas total annual anti-gender funding in Europe rose from USD 220 million in 2019 to USD 271 million in 2023, which represents a 23 % increase; whereas a significant portion of the funding driving the growth of anti-gender movements across the EU comes from foreign actors; whereas the rise of anti-gender and anti-rights movements in the past few years is a result of coordinated transnational efforts with regard to organisation, fundraising and mobilisation; whereas research shows that these movements benefit from funding from a broad range of actors from the far-right of the political spectrum ;

~~AQ.~~AR. whereas media reports show that EU funding has in the past been awarded to organisations that mislead women about their sexual and reproductive health; whereas all EU funding must align with the common values of the Union as enshrined in Article 2 TEU and the Charter, ensuring that financial support reinforces the democratic values of the EU;

~~AR.~~AS. whereas we are witnessing an unprecedented and intensified attack on civic space across the EU, including through legal and financial restrictions, funding suspensions, smear campaigns, intimidation and criminalisation, and on the right to peaceful assembly; whereas the right to peaceful assembly is crucial in a democratic society;

~~AS.~~AT. whereas the UN Human Rights Council underlined that the global trend of backsliding on democracy and the rule of law and the securitisation of agendas have exacerbated and deepened restrictions on the right to peaceful assembly; whereas attacks on civil society organisations (CSOs) and human rights defenders (HRDs) such as those working to protect and promote human and environmental rights, including gender equality, migration, democracy and advocacy, have increased and remain a matter of serious concern; whereas CSOs and HRDs engaged in protecting and promoting fundamental rights play a vital role in safeguarding Union values; whereas their ability to operate freely and independently should be ensured and supported across all Member States;

~~AT.~~AU. whereas individuals in vulnerable situations, such as children, women, racialised and ethnic communities, LGBTIQ+ people, migrants and asylum seekers, people with disabilities and older people are recurrent targets of hate speech and derogatory narratives; whereas in several Member States, anti-LGBTIQ+ narratives are being spread by politicians and media outlets, and anti-LGBTI legislation has been tabled and in some cases even adopted; whereas such situations run contrary to international human rights standards and undermine the right of these groups to be treated as equal citizens;

~~AU.~~AV. whereas access to funding is crucial for civil society to thrive and to perform its watchdog role; whereas a vibrant civil society and an active civic space are essential pillars of democracy; whereas CSOs also play a crucial role, particularly for marginalised communities, including in the provision of social services; whereas in its political guidelines, the Commission committed to stepping up its engagement with CSOs that have expertise and an important role to play in defending specific societal issues and upholding fundamental rights;

~~AV.~~AW. whereas civil society organisations are close partners of the Member States in their efforts to protect and promote fundamental rights; whereas humanitarian assistance continues to be arbitrarily criminalised; whereas restrictions and obstacles affecting search and rescue activities (by Member States) are contributing to a continuing loss of lives; whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights has called on EU Member States to end their repression of HRDs assisting refugees, asylum seekers and migrants, and to refrain from using derogatory, inflammatory or stigmatising rhetoric about them and their role;

~~AW.~~AX. whereas the upcoming EU civil society strategy should aim at ensuring that EU policies are shaped and implemented in line with the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU and the Charter; whereas the strategy should include ambitious initiatives and benchmarks to measure progress; whereas the Commission has announced its intention to create a civil society platform which can centralise and harmonise the current engagement of civil society actors in EU policymaking: whereas the platform should be co-designed and implemented with organised civil society;

~~AX.~~AY. whereas appropriate, predictable and sustainable long-term EU funding for civil society should continue to be ensured in the next multiannual financial framework (MFF), with due regard for financial transparency, sound management and clear contractual obligations, as should be the case for all funds and programmes; whereas funding for human rights organisations remains limited, fragmented and inconsistent; whereas cuts to this funding, including the freeze on US Agency for International Development (USAID) funds, are having a significant impact on civil society across the EU, as they are seriously weakening civil society’s ability to defend victims of discrimination, promote equality, ensure accountability and safeguard the rule of law and fundamental rights;

~~AY.~~AZ. whereas in certain cases, EU funds have supported initiatives that contribute to segregation or discriminatory practices, thereby undermining equality objectives; whereas the UN Human Rights Council has called for ensuring that funding for civil society actors is in compliance with Member States’ international human rights obligations and commitments and not misused to hinder the work or endanger the safety of civil society actors;

~~AZ.~~BA. whereas the intensifying attempts in the EU to limit or roll back fundamental rights of women and LGBTIQ+ people are of grave concern; whereas these attempts focus mostly on the area of reproductive healthcare and rights, gender identity and legal gender recognition or access to comprehensive sexuality education; whereas attacks on these areas are not only harmful to the most vulnerable members of society but also incompatible with the values of the EU and the international human rights framework, and thus constitute violations of EU law;

~~BA.~~BB. whereas at present, there are gaps in EU anti-discrimination legislation, with some grounds of discrimination only covered in the area of employment and occupation; whereas this has led to a patchwork of protection and the creation of an artificial ‘hierarchy of grounds’; whereas the Treaties and the Charter give the EU a mandate and responsibility for combating discrimination in relation to all protected grounds;

~~BB.~~BC. whereas all Member States are bound to act in the best interests of the child, including by safeguarding the fundamental right of every child to family life and prohibiting the discrimination of children on the basis of their parents’ marital status or sexual orientation, or the way the child was conceived; whereas around 2 million children may still face a situation in which their parents are not recognised as such in another Member State; whereas in 2022, the Commission proposed a Council regulation on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition of decisions and acceptance of authentic instruments in matters of parenthood and on the creation of a European Certificate of Parenthood ~~(COM/2022/0695)~~(COM(2022)0695) (Parenthood Regulation), which is still pending final decision in the Council;

~~BC.~~BD. whereas concerns have been raised regarding the fact that discrimination and racism remain widespread across the EU, including in laws and policies, as well as in public institutions such as law enforcement and the justice system; whereas discriminatory law enforcement practices remain a serious concern; whereas racialised groups are disproportionately targeted by stop-and-search procedures, excessive use of force and harassment; whereas oversight and accountability mechanisms remain weak and are hindered by a lack of independent investigations; whereas, at the same time, violence against public officials must be effectively addressed;

~~BD.~~BE. whereas despite formal recognition of structural racism at EU level, it continues to manifest in key areas of life in the Member States; whereas segregation, including in education, and repeated cases of hate speech and hate crime disproportionately affect racialised communities and other marginalised groups, such as LGBTIQ+ persons; whereas these are structural barriers and fundamental rights violations that hinder equal access to rights, opportunities and justice across the Union; whereas this negatively impacts public trust in institutions and social cohesion;

~~BE.~~BF. whereas the Holocaust and historical injustices, including ~~colonialism, slavery~~colonialism and ~~the Holocaust,~~slavery, continue to shape structural racism in Europe today; whereas acknowledgement, remembrance and education about ~~these injustices~~those are essential to combating racism and promoting equality and fundamental rights;

~~BF.~~BG. whereas intersectional discrimination remains largely unaddressed in policy and practice; whereas the compounded impact of racism and gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics, socio-economic status, migration background and other grounds continues to be overlooked, leaving many victims without adequate protection, support or access to effective remedies;

~~BG.~~BH. whereas recent surveys conducted by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) among Black people, Jews, Muslims and LGBTIQ+ people in the EU reveal that these groups continue to experience widespread instances of hatred and discrimination in the EU, reflecting systemic racial discrimination; whereas fears, misconceptions and ‘othering’ fuel discrimination and intolerance; whereas ECRI has raised concerns about xenophobic, homophobic and transphobic speech, including from politicians and public officials; whereas every person in the EU has the same right to become a full and active member of society and be treated equally;

~~BH.~~BI. whereas recent legislative and institutional reforms in some Member States raise serious questions regarding compliance with the fundamental right to a fair trial and to an independent and impartial tribunal, as guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter; whereas judicial independence is an indispensable component of the rule of law and a prerequisite for the effective protection of all other fundamental rights; whereas the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has emphasised that judicial councils must remain independent from parliamentary and executive influence;

~~BI.~~BJ. whereas the Hungarian law on the protection of local identity, which entered into force on 1 July 2025, grants municipal authorities the power to restrict residence based on arbitrary criteria such as education level, language proficiency and proof of employment; whereas such measures risk institutionalising racial segregation in housing and disproportionately affecting the Roma community, raising serious concerns about compliance with EU law and fundamental rights;

~~BJ.~~BK. whereas the Roma community continues to face systemic discrimination, segregation, social exclusion and police violence; whereas FRA reports reveal significant shortcomings in the implementation of the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation, and highlight the low likelihood of achieving its 2030 targets; whereas forced evictions against Roma people have recently resulted in the displacement of hundreds of individuals, including children, elderly people and people with disabilities; whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights has called for the implementation of ECtHR judgments in relation to the rights of Roma people ;

~~BK.~~BL. whereas persons with disabilities living in the EU continue to face harassment and multiple and intersectional forms of discrimination in all areas of life, including the denial of reasonable accommodation, socio-economic disadvantages, social isolation, gender-based violence such as forced sterilisation, lack of access to community services, low-quality housing, institutionalisation, inadequate healthcare and denial of the opportunity to contribute to and engage actively in society;

~~BL.~~BM. whereas the EU and the Member States that have not yet ratified the Optional Protocol to the UNCRPD should do so without delay;

~~BM.~~BN. whereas ECRI has called on governments to actively promote the inclusion of migrants and to combat any discrimination against them; whereas racism and racial discrimination persist, including in the area of migration and asylum; whereas racialised migrants are disproportionately exposed to rights violations at the Union’s borders and within asylum and reception systems; whereas there is a lack of explicit anti-racism safeguards;

~~BN.~~BO. whereas the situation of intersex persons in the EU remains largely unknown to the public in the EU; whereas in April 2024, several member states of the Council of Europe sponsored the first UN Human Rights Council Resolution on combating discrimination, violence and harmful practices against intersex people;

~~BO.~~BP. whereas the Racial Equality Directive has been insufficiently applied by most Member States; whereas Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on racism and xenophobia has not been fully or correctly transposed by some Member States; whereas stronger efforts are needed to combat structural racism, including the impact of violent right-wing extremist narratives in social debate, and to ensure that Member States comply with EU anti-discrimination legislation;

~~BP.~~BQ. whereas access to justice for victims of racist hate crimes and other forms of hate crime and discrimination remains severely limited in several Member States due to inadequate support services, barriers to recognising racist and hate motivation, and weak enforcement of anti-discrimination legislation; whereas, as a consequence, racialised communities and other marginalised groups continue to face rights violations without access to effective remedies;

~~BQ.~~BR. whereas several Member States have consistently ignored judgments of the ECtHR;

~~BR.~~BS. whereas Article 151 TFEU refers to fundamental social rights such as those set out in the European Social Charter; whereas socio-economic inequalities, including poverty and social exclusion, are increasing across the EU and this is a matter of great concern; whereas they remain deeply racialised, with persistent and structural disparities in access to education, healthcare, housing, employment and wealth accumulation, which continue to exclude racialised groups from equal participation in society and perpetuate intergenerational cycles of poverty and marginalisation; whereas housing inequality and the number of homeless people have both increased at an alarming rate in several Member States;

~~BS.~~BT. whereas the Commission should look into what steps are needed for accession by the EU to the European Social Charter;

~~BT.~~BU. whereas there have been proposals for the Council of Europe and its member states to adopt a protocol to the ECHR, including the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment;

~~BU.~~BV. whereas in its KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland judgment, the ECtHR recognised that the failure of states to take adequate measures against climate change may constitute a violation of the right to respect for private and family life under Article 8 of the ECHR; whereas the ruling underlines the urgent need to provide an enforceable right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment within the framework of the ECHR, thereby ensuring consistency, foreseeability and protection for the public;

~~BV.~~BW. whereas some Member States published a letter regarding the interpretation of fundamental rights within the framework of the ECHR;

~~BW.~~BX. whereas European human rights standards are the rights, principles, and obligations established in the EU Treaties, conventions and EU law, which reflect a shared understanding of minimum levels of protection; whereas international human rights standards are the minimum norms for the protection of human rights that have been formally endorsed by the international community through universal treaties, customary international law and universally accepted principles; whereas such standards bind or guide states in their treatment of individuals;

Fundamental rights at stake

26. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote free, independent and pluralistic media; stresses the need to ensure robust legal protections for public service media, guaranteeing their editorial independence and stable funding and shielding them from political influence and interference, in order to enable them to serve the public interest effectively and impartially; calls on the Commission to closely monitor such developments across the EU and to address the ongoing challenges;

27. Urges the Commission to ensure the full and correct implementation of the European Media Freedom Act; further urges the Commission and the Member States to guarantee the swift and proper implementation of the Anti-SLAPP Directive and to take effective measures to put an end to all SLAPP cases across the EU;

27. Recalls several cases in which journalists with EU citizenship have been detained on spurious charges while carrying out their professional duties in non-EU countries, including candidate countries; urges the Commission and the Member States, in line with Commission Recommendation (EU) 2022/758, to increase their efforts to assist with the release and safe return of these arbitrarily detained journalists; calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to cases of unjustified detention of journalists in candidate countries, including Türkiye, and to the legal proceedings against Swedish journalist Joakim Medin;

28. Calls on the Member States to follow the recommendation from the Council of Europe Safety of Journalists Platform to strengthen the protections for journalists in exile, including safeguards against the misuse of Interpol red notices;

28. Urges the Commission to ensure the full and correct implementation of the European Media Freedom Act; further urges the Commission and the Member States to guarantee the swift and proper implementation of the Anti-SLAPP Directive and to take effective measures to put an end to all SLAPP cases across the EU;

29. Recalls that 16 EU Member States have recently committed to strengthening support for the integrity of information and independent media; acknowledges that several Member States have adopted dedicated action plans and taken steps to set up dedicated support structures promoting the safety of journalists;

29. Calls on the Member States to follow the recommendation from the Council of Europe Safety of Journalists Platform to strengthen the protections for journalists in exile, including safeguards against the misuse of Interpol red notices;

30. Recalls that 16 EU Member States have recently committed to strengthening support for the integrity of information and independent media; acknowledges that several Member States have adopted dedicated action plans and taken steps to set up dedicated support structures promoting the safety of journalists;

Intersection of fundamental rights, democracy and technology

~~30.~~31. Highlights the growing trend of election manipulation in the EU by both domestic and foreign actors; calls on the Commission to carry out regular specific analyses of the tools available to, and used by, Member States to combat disinformation and foreign interference linked to electoral processes, recognising that such threats undermine fundamental rights, including the right to receive and impart information, democratic participation, and free and fair elections;

~~31.~~32. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that all measures taken to protect the EU against foreign interference and information manipulation include strong and resolute safeguards for fundamental rights, including freedom of expression; takes note of the Commission’s newly proposed ‘Democracy Shield’ mechanism and expresses its intention to engage constructively in its further development;

~~32.~~33. Calls on the Commission to assess whether EU restrictive measures imposed on several academics, scientists and analysts comply with the proportionality and necessity requirements under EU law and with Article 11 of the Charter, and whether they are designed to minimise their impact on economic, social, and cultural rights; recalls that the right to be heard must be guaranteed;

~~33.~~34. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to guarantee the effective implementation and enforcement of the DSA, the Artificial Intelligence Act and the Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising Regulation, including by ensuring adequate human and technical resources to safeguard the integrity of future elections in the EU;

~~34.~~35. Recognises the important role of digital technologies in fostering access to information and democratic participation; stresses that the business model of social media platforms based on microtargeting can stimulate addictive behaviour and lead to the amplification of divisive content, with serious repercussions for fundamental rights, such as the rights of the child, the right to the protection of personal data, equality and non-discrimination; underlines that social media platforms are often used as a vehicle for foreign interference and hybrid attacks due to their amplifying effects on social cohesion and democratic processes; underlines the need to address these challenges as part of the EU’s broader resilience ecosystem;

~~35.~~36. Calls on the Commission to reinforce the risk assessment and mitigation obligations for very large online platforms and very large online search engines, and to ensure effective follow-up; urges the Commission to remain firm in the face of attempts to undermine the DSA and to pursue ongoing investigations into large online platforms;

~~36.~~37. Highlights the challenges posed by generative AI chatbots, including the potential for these systems to cause cognitive harm through their interactions; considers that new technologies, including AI systems, must be guided by the principles of transparency, explainability, fairness and accountability and by appropriate safeguards in algorithmic systems, such as carrying out independent impact assessments to prevent them from exacerbating discrimination and existing inequalities; shares the opinion of the UN Secretary-General that algorithms should not exclusively determine the information people access, and that technology companies should ensure that their algorithms and content recommendation systems are designed and used in ways that do not undermine fundamental rights and democratic values;

~~37.~~38. Recalls that, according to Article 27 of the DSA, providers of online platforms must set out in their terms and conditions the main parameters used in their recommendation systems, any options available for users to modify or influence those parameters and an explanation of why certain content is suggested to the user; urges online intermediaries to end practices that deliberately exploit polarisation for profit;

~~38.~~39. Highlights the negative effects that online platforms can have on fundamental rights and the mental health of children; stresses the need to protect children online, and calls on the Commission to closely monitor whether existing legal frameworks can effectively address these concerns, with a specific focus on ensuring a strong children’s rights and fundamental rights perspective in such assessments; underlines that the upcoming Digital Fairness Act must effectively protect children online and safeguard their rights; further calls on the Commission to ensure a high level of privacy, safety and security for children, and to better protect them from harmful and illegal content and from advertisements based on profiling;

~~39.~~40. Welcomes the announcement of the first EU-wide inquiry into the effects of social media on well-being, and calls on the Commission to speed up the process;

~~40.~~41. Calls for stronger investment in media and digital literacy as the most effective safeguard against manipulation; urges the Member States to include media and digital literacy, civic education, European history, respect for fundamental rights, critical thinking and the promotion of public participation in school and university curricula, recognising them as critical elements for meaningful participation in democratic life and the effective exercise of fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and the right to receive information; highlights the need to work in parallel on raising awareness about how to tackle disinformation and promoting digital literacy; calls for a concerted EU media and digital literacy strategy with projects that create tangible results with significant scale across the EU;

~~41.~~42. Deplores the growing practice of government surveillance of independent media outlets and journalists by intelligence services; strongly condemns attempts by certain governments to portray independent media and journalists as drivers of radicalisation or to restrict their work by labelling them as threats to society or national security;

~~42.~~43. Reiterates that surveillance must be conducted in accordance with the law, serve a legitimate aim and be necessary and proportionate given the threat it poses to fundamental rights and democracy; regrets that the legal framework in some Member States does not provide precise, effective and comprehensive safeguards on the authorisation and execution of surveillance measures and on the potential redress mechanisms against such measures; underlines that all surveillance measures must be subject to an appropriate judicial review and effective oversight; is concerned about new cases of unjustified invocation of ‘national security’ to justify the deployment and use of spyware and to ensure absolute secrecy and lack of accountability; welcomes the Commission’s statement, in line with the CJEU’s jurisprudence, that a mere reference to national security cannot be interpreted as being an unlimited exemption from EU law and should require a clear justification; calls on the Commission to follow up on that statement in cases where there are indications of abuse; recalls that in a democratic and transparent society that abides by the rule of law, surveillance in the name of national security should be the exception rather than the rule;

~~43.~~44. Reiterates its call on the Member States to follow all the recommendations of PEGA and the Venice Commission, which provide important guidance on ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, the rule of law and democratic oversight; stresses the need for full accountability and transparency in all cases of intrusive surveillance; urges the Commission to respond to the growing threats posed by spyware technologies; calls for effective judicial oversight to ensure that surveillance is never used against journalists, activists or political opponents;

~~44.~~45. Urges the EU’s accession to the ECHR to be finalised; recalls that the CJEU, in its case Opinion 2/13, identified a number of legal obstacles to accession, and underlines the importance of addressing these obstacles in order to enable the EU’s timely and successful accession; stresses that this step is essential to align the EU’s legal framework with the highest standards of human rights protection;

Fundamental rights at borders and migration policy

~~45.~~46. Recalls that the new legislative framework under the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum establishes revised rules for asylum procedures, border management and solidarity; underlines that its effective implementation requires full respect for fundamental rights; highlights that respect for fundamental rights must continue to be closely monitored;

~~46.~~47. Calls on the EU and the Member States, in particular their competent authorities, to comply with international human rights obligations and commitments in their migration policies, promote prompt investigations, closely monitor the impact of these policies on fundamental rights, both within existing legal frameworks and in the development of future legislation, and refrain from adopting migration policies that exacerbate inequality and exclusion; encourages the EU and the Member States to take into account the situation and specific needs of vulnerable groups; calls for the establishment of a mechanism to monitor compliance with these obligations;

~~47.~~48. Calls on the Member States to implement the Migration and Asylum Pact in full and in a timely manner; highlights the need to meet the implementation deadline; notes with concern the lack of preparedness by some Member States to meet the implementation deadline, including with regard to provisions related to fundamental rights, and encourages continued support and cooperation to ensure its full implementation; highlights that international law recognises that seeking asylum is a lawful act and that, accordingly, an asylum seeker cannot be arbitrarily detained solely on the grounds of being an asylum seeker; recalls that the detention of asylum seekers must be a measure of last resort if less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively; stresses that any detention of asylum seekers must be exceptional, necessary and proportionate, and may only be ordered on the basis of an individual assessment for the specific reasons provided under EU law;

~~48.~~49. Strongly condemns fundamental rights violations at borders, ~~including practices involving stopping asylum seekers and forcibly returning them to the country they entered from without carrying out an individual assessment,~~ ill-treatment and the use of violence by national authorities such as law enforcement and border guards; notes that such practices are often unreported and not investigated; notes, furthermore, that several Member States continue to face significant operational pressure at their external borders; underlines that these challenges require a coordinated European response, including streamlined and effective procedures, in full accordance with the applicable EU and international legal framework;

~~49.~~50. Reiterates the obligation under the International Law of the Sea to assist persons in distress, and urgently calls on the Commission and the Member States to establish permanent and coordinated search and rescue operations with swift disembarkations; further calls on the Member States to take every possible action to save the lives of people at risk at sea; calls, furthermore, for ensuring that search and rescue (SAR) operations can operate in accordance with EU and international law and that these operations are coordinated, where possible, between relevant actors, including Member State authorities, relevant EU agencies and relevant non-governmental actors;

50. Urges the Commission and the Member States to end the systematic obstruction of non-governmental SAR efforts; recalls the urgent need to set up an EU search and rescue fund, and calls for the EU institutions to allocate appropriate funding for this purpose in the next MFF;

51. Recalls that Article 46 of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency Regulation can be activated in cases of potential violations of fundamental rights; calls on the agency to proactively make full use of all the tools at its disposal, in particular the possibility of activating Article 46 in cases of potential fundamental rights violations;52.52. Urges the Member States to take due account of the recommendations made by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights in his report entitled ‘Protecting the Defenders: Ending repression of human rights defenders assisting refugees, asylum seekers and migrants in Europe’; stresses the importance of maintaining public discourse grounded in respect for human dignity, while underlining the importance of a fact-based and responsible public debate on migration and asylum; strongly condemns recurrent anti-refugee and anti-migrant rhetoric;

Gender-based violence, women’s rights and the rights of LGBTIQ+ people

55. Urges the Commission to ensure that in the new MFF, no EU funding will be made available to anti-gender and anti-rights groups that aim to roll back progress in women’s rights and the rights of LGBTIQ+ people, nor to any group or project that does not respect EU values and the fundamental rights outlined in the Charter; further urges the Commission to closely monitor the implementation in Member States of funds under shared management aimed at promoting gender equality and supporting civil society, including women non-governmental organisations, in order to ensure that calls for proposals to obtain such funds are not being deliberately paused or withheld;

56. Expresses serious concerns about the intensifying attacks on the LGBTIQ+ community and their fundamental rights in some Member States, including through the obstruction of legal gender recognition, the erasure of the existence of intersex people, violations of reproductive rights and restrictions on access to essential reproductive healthcare and age-appropriate, comprehensive sexuality education for children;States; emphasises that these attacks violate the right to non-discrimination, the right to equality before the law and the right to equal protection before the law without discrimination; calls for the EU and the Member States to combat all forms of violence and discrimination against LGBTIQ+ people and to address disparities in protection resulting from the inconsistent implementation of protection measures across Member States; welcomes the new LGBTIQ+ equality strategy 2026-2030, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure its swift implementation; calls on the Member States to renew or adopt new national LGBTIQ+ action plans or strategies to complement EU initiatives with effective national measures;

57. Underlines that the absence of legal gender recognition procedures constitutes a violation of fundamental rights; condemns conversion practices, such as practices aimed at changing, repressing or suppressing a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or gender expression, as violations of fundamental rights, and urges the Commission to tackle them through concrete actions; further urges, in this regard, the Commission to present a proposal for a legal act establishing an EU ban on conversion practices in all Member States as a follow-up action to the ‘Ban on conversion practices in the European Union’ European Citizens’ Initiative;

63. Underlines that gender-based violence, both online and offline, is a major and pervasive offence, as well as a violation of fundamental rights and the principle of equality before the law; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take action against all forms of gender-based violence, both online and offline;

64. Is concerned that forms and patterns of gender-based cyberviolence continue to evolve; underlines that the non-consensual sharing of intimate material and hate speech are some of the most widespread forms of cyberviolence; ~~expresses great concern over the growth of the so-called ‘manosphere’ in the online environment;~~ highlights the need to develop measures to address and counter the rise of misogynistic ~~and far-right~~ values ~~among boys and young men~~ concerning gender equality and women’s rights; stresses the need for a deeper understanding of the incel phenomenon and ideology, and emphasises the importance of prevention through more active policies to counter such phenomena and their narratives;

65. Urges the Commission and the Member States to address the growing potential harm and chilling effect that new technologies, including artificial intelligence, can have on victims, and to put in place preventive and supportive measures; further urges the Commission to take action against the pervasive online violence targeting women, which has become an increasing barrier to women’s participation in public life and to equal representation; urges, in this regard, the Commission and the Member States to fully and properly implement relevant legislation, in particular the Directive on combatting violence against women and domestic violence and the DSA;

68. Urges the Council to extend the current list of ‘EU crimes’ under Article 83(1) TFEU to include hate speech and hate crime; calls on the Council to activate the ‘passerelle clause’ in this regard; calls on the Commission to be ready to initiate the second stage of the procedure and propose a directive aimed at combatting hate speech and hate crimes both offline and online, and to take into account Parliament’s position in this regard;

69. Calls on the Commission to promote comprehensive, age-appropriate sexuality and relationship education in schools to counter gender-related misinformation and disinformation and to address gender stereotypes;

69. Emphasises that the lack of, or the denial of, access to SRHR, including safe and legal abortion, is a form of gender-based violence and a violation of human and fundamental rights; urges the Commission to actively work towards ensuring broad accessibility to SRHR; reiterates its call for the inclusion of the right to safe and legal abortion in the Charter;

70. ~~Emphasises that~~Urges the ~~lack of,~~Commission orto ~~the~~ensure ~~denial~~a ~~of,~~proper ~~access~~follow-up to ~~SRHR,~~the ~~including~~‘My ~~safe~~Voice ~~and~~My ~~legal~~Choice: ~~abortion,~~For isSafe aAnd ~~form~~Accessible ofAbortion’ ~~gender-based~~European ~~violence~~Citizens’ Initiative and to put forward a ~~violation~~proposal offor ~~human~~a ~~and~~financial ~~fundamental~~mechanism ~~rights;~~to ~~urges~~support ~~the~~Member ~~Commission~~States willing to ~~actively~~provide ~~work~~safe ~~towards~~sexual ~~ensuring~~and ~~broad~~reproductive ~~accessibility~~healthcare toservices, ~~SRHR;~~including ~~reiterates~~safe ~~its~~and ~~call~~legal ~~for~~abortion, ~~the~~for ~~inclusion~~those ofin the ~~right to~~EU ~~safe~~who ~~and~~still ~~legal~~lack ~~abortion~~access into ~~the~~such ~~Charter;~~services;

71. Urges the Commission to ensure a proper follow-up to the ‘My Voice My Choice: For Safe And Accessible Abortion’ European Citizens’ Initiative and to put forward a proposal for a financial mechanism to support Member States willing to provide safe sexual and reproductive healthcare services, including safe and legal abortion, for those in the EU who still lack access to such services;72. Stresses that there is still no EU-wide definition of rape based on the lack of consent; calls on the Member States to ensure that there is no assumption in law nor in practice that consent is given where there is absence of physical resistance to sexual conduct, regardless of whether the perpetrator threatened or used physical violence or whether the victim is in an intimate relationship with, or married to, the perpetrator; further urges the Member States that have not yet done so to include in their national legislation a definition of rape based on the absence of freely given consent, in line with the Istanbul Convention and evolving international standards; calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for such a definition at EU level; reiterates that sexual violence, including rape, is a grave violation of human rights and human dignity;

72. Recalls the body of documents published in connection with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, which indicates that countless crimes have been committed and, consequently, that there is a large group of hidden perpetrators; notes that it is well documented that Epstein had a network extending deep into the corridors of power across Europe, including royalty, top diplomats and politicians; condemns the fact that it has not yet been established how many, and which, members of this network were aware of or involved in human trafficking, the sexual exploitation of children, fraud and financial crime; stresses not only that it is seriously concerning that these individuals remain at large, but also that the lack of full accountability undermines the rule of law and public trust in democratic institutions; stresses that cases involving cross-border elements within the EU should be addressed at EU level; questions the EU’s ability to investigate, prevent and combat complex cross-border crime committed by society’s elites; urges the Commission to promptly task the EU’s expert centre for crime prevention (Europol), together with the European Anti-Fraud Office and national authorities, to investigate and analyse the nature of this criminal activity, as well as to identify those who can be held accountable;

73. Urges the Member States to formally recognise feminicide as a distinct gender-based crime in national legislation, to adopt and enforce comprehensive strategies to prevent and combat it, to ensure effective investigation and prosecution of all cases, and to provide specialised shelters, counselling and compensation mechanisms for victims’ relatives;

100. Calls on all Member States to adopt and fully implement national action plans against racism or strategies with ambitious standards, including clear targets, timelines and budgets; calls on the Commission to ensure regular monitoring mechanisms, in cooperation with civil society;

101. Underlines that third-country nationals in the EU, ~~regardless of their nationality, place of birth or residence status,~~ must be treated in a non-discriminatory manner; points out that third-country nationals have the right to apply for international protection under international and EU law, including in accordance with the principle of non-refoulement; calls on the ~~Commission to support the~~ Member States into ~~upholding~~uphold the rule of law and the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter and into ~~implementing~~implement the legislation adopted by the co-legislators; stresses the binding nature of the rulings of the CJEU and the ECtHR;

102. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to prohibit racial profiling and other discriminatory practices, including at borders, to allocate substantial resources to inclusion- and rights-based initiatives and to establish independent monitoring, accountability and complaint mechanisms; calls on the Commission to establish binding human rights and equality impact assessments to prevent algorithmic discrimination; further calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the disproportionate exposure of racialised communities to pollution, environmental degradation and climate-related risks;

103. Calls on the Member States to establish national human rights institutions, in accordance with the UN Paris Principles, to guarantee their independence and their capacity to carry out their tasks effectively, and to provide safeguards against political interference;

104. Calls on Member States to fully implement Directive (EU) 2024/1500 and Directive (EU) 2024/1499, which establish minimum standards for Equality Bodies; calls for concrete measures to guarantee the independence of equality bodies and to ensure their effectiveness in promoting equality; encourages support for CSOs in developing and disseminating educational initiatives to promote equality and in ensuring broad outreach and accessibility;105. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take effective action against antisemitism, xenophobia, racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia and any other form of prejudice, intolerance, discrimination or hate crime in a holistic manner; further calls for sustained efforts at both EU and national levels to monitor, prevent and prosecute related hate crimes and to protect minorities;accessibility;

105. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take effective action against antisemitism, xenophobia, racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia and any other form of prejudice, intolerance, discrimination or hate crime in a holistic manner; further calls for sustained efforts at both EU and national levels to monitor, prevent and prosecute related hate crimes and to protect minorities;

106. Notes with concern the findings of the FRA, which indicate a significant rise in antisemitism across the Union, including online, in public spaces and within local communities; stresses that many Jewish individuals report obstacles to openly expressing their identity and continue to face safety concerns; urges the Commission and the Member States to strengthen prevention, reporting and victim support mechanisms, to accelerate the implementation EU strategy on combatting antisemitism and ensure full enforcement of EU and national law, and to enhance education, awareness-raising and security measures where needed; strongly condemns the rising levels of antisemitism across the EU;

122. Recalls that the foundations of the EU project included the well-being of people as a pillar and considers that, regardless of any geopolitical, security and socioeconomic challenges, the EU cannot disregard the social and fundamental rights dimensions on which it was built; requests that the Commission duly take into account the well-being of individuals, including the most vulnerable, in all existing and upcoming EU policies, and to include food and health security in its political security agenda;

° °

123. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

~~EXPLANATORY STATEMENT~~

The years 2024 and 2025 have seen fundamental rights in the European Union come under increasing pressure from different fronts. Threats to the rule of law, shrinking civic space, a rise in hate speech and xenophobic narratives, violence against refugees and migrants, and the undermining of women’s and LGBTQ+ rights illustrate a worrying trend.

This erosion of fundamental rights has been exacerbated by enduring socio-economic inequalities. While Russia’s war against Ukraine continues, the attacks on Gaza persist, and more leaders display autocratic behaviour, fundamental rights are increasingly under pressure. In these tense times, there is a real risk that fundamental rights are sidelined on the political agenda.

Precisely in moments of instability, it is crucial to recall the values on which the European Union is founded: human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, all enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and in the EU Treaties. Upholding these principles is not only a legal obligation for EU institutions and Member States, but also what makes Europe a unique political project with citizens’ well-being at its core. The EU must not compromise on these foundations. Fundamental rights are not static; they require active promotion and implementation.

The attacks on civic space across Europe are one of the signs of weakening democracy. The recent restriction to the right to peaceful assembly, in particular bans on pro-Palestine protests and Pride events, as well as the repression and criminalisation of human rights defenders (HRDs) and NGOs working with refugees, asylum seekers and migrants set dangerous precedents. This is intensified by the funding restrictions from the US and the EU to civil society organizations.

The Rapporteur is concerned about the growing polarisation and fragmentation of European societies, often fuelled by populist political actors. Scapegoating minorities, exploiting identity politics, and spreading disinformation divides communities and erodes trust. Politicians and governments have a duty to uphold democratic standards and refrain from rhetoric that fuels hatred, racism, and violence.

Rapid digital change and artificial intelligence aggravate these risks, as the unchecked spread of hate speech and harmful content online, together with biased algorithms and manipulative design, undermine equality and civic life. These threats became particularly visible during the European elections, when reports found an increase in online hate speech, violence and death threats across various Member States. Moreover, security services in some countries warned about the rapid online radicalisation of young people, particularly within right-wing extremist networks. Finally, foreign interference in electoral processes is a clear example of how online platforms can be weaponised to undermine democracy.

In the years ahead, the Union must renew its democratic foundations, strengthen citizens’ participation, and place equality, justice and sustainability at the heart of its policies. Only by actively defending and advancing rights can the EU rebuild trust in its institutions, and remain credible on the international stage,

~~Approach by the Rapporteur~~

~~With this report, the Rapporteur seeks to highlight the main developments in the state of fundamental rights in the EU during 2024 and 2025.~~

The limited length of own-initiative reports requires prioritisation, yet the absence of certain concerns does not diminish their importance. This text provides a general framework which can and will be further enriched during the amendment stage.

~~Structure~~

The draft report is structured around clusters of fundamental rights. While the first part of the Report provides an overview of the main fundamental rights concerns in the EU, the individual chapters include concrete calls to action in order to make the report as practical, focused and actional as possible.

~~These are the main chapters:~~

~~Fundamental rights at stake~~

~~This chapter includes general calls for the upholding of fundamental rights, including for instance the promotion of EU values~~

~~Democracy under stress~~

This chapter addresses backsliding in several Member States, including threats to judicial independence, high-level corruption, misuse of spyware, and weakening parliamentary rights. It also highlights risks to media freedom and pluralism, the spread of disinformation, and the abuse of emergency powers.

~~Fundamental rights violations at borders~~

This chapter covers inter alia pushbacks, systemic violence, and externalisation policies that undermine access to asylum and breach non-refoulement. It calls for accountability and EU action to ensure that migration management respects human dignity.

~~Gender-based violence, women’s rights and the rights of LGBTIQ+ people~~

This chapter stresses the urgent need to combat gender-based violence, including and anti-gender movements. It calls for the protection of sexual and reproductive rights, the inclusion of the right to abortion in the Charter, and stronger safeguards for LGBTIQ+ people against hate and discrimination.

~~Civil society under threat~~

~~This chapter covers the unprecedented restrictions on civic space. It calls for sustainable EU funding for CSOs and protection of human rights defenders.~~

~~Structural racism and discrimination~~

This chapter addresses systemic racism and discrimination. It calls for the adoption of the Horizontal Anti-Discrimination Directive, stronger equality strategies, and enforcement of EU anti-discrimination law.

~~Environmental, social, economic and cultural rights at risk~~

~~This chapter highlights rising poverty, housing exclusion, and homelessness as fundamental rights concerns. It stresses the right to a sustainable environment and calls for a just transition.~~

~~ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT~~

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she included in her report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she received, in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

~~MINORITY POSITION~~

~~Authors: Marieke EHLERS; Fabrice LEGGERI; Elisabeth DIERINGER~~

The protection of fundamental rights is a cornerstone of European civilization, rooted in our shared heritage. However, we cannot support this Fundamental rights report in its current form, as it represents a continued departure from the legal reality of the Treaties toward a politicized and ideologically driven agenda.

Fundamental rights are best protected at the national level, where they are grounded in the specific legal frameworks of each Member State. We reject the increasing tendency of the European Union to use "fundamental rights" as a tool for legal activism to interfere in exclusive national competence, such as health care, education, and the organization of the judiciary. The principle of subsidiarity is not a suggestion; it is a treaty-based obligation that this report consistently overlooks.

On the other hand, the report fails to even consider the situation of traditional national minorities across the EU. The Commission continues to dismiss the rights of national minorities, despite the citizens' initiative Minority SafePack.

Furthermore, we express our grave concern regarding the weaponization of "fundamental rights" to curtail the freedom of expression. Under the guise of combating "disinformation" and "hate speech," the Union is constructing a centralized censorship apparatus.

~~INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE~~

~~FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE~~