What changed

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

P9_TA(2024)0036

on the transparencyTransparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget

(2023/2122(INI))

Committee on Budgetary Control

PE751.681

European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2024 on the transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget (2023/2122(INI))

– having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Articles 2, 3, 5, 11(2) and Protocol (No 2) thereof,

C. whereas civil society ranges from low-key community activities to NGOs; whereas the spectrum of NGOs receiving EU funding covers a wide range of structures, ways of functioning, sources of financing and focus areas, which translates into a variety of projects that are financed with EU funds; whereas the Treaties require the EU institutions and Member States to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society; whereas the EU and its Member States should provide adequate funding to programmes aimed at protecting and promoting the rights and values enshrined in the EU Treaties; whereas NGOs and civil society organisations (CSOs) play an important role in implementing these programmes; whereas, in some cases, public authorities are outsourcing tasks to NGOs and CSOs; whereas the Commission manages EU funds directly, indirectly or in a shared way; whereas in line with the principle of subsidiarity, the funds directly awarded to beneficiaries, including NGOs, are subject to monitoring and reporting by the Commission;

D. whereas the Treaties require the EU institutions and Member States to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society; whereas it is important for EU Member States and EU institutions to provide adequate funding to programmes aimed at protecting and promoting the rights and values enshrined in the EU Treaties; whereas NGOs and CSOs play an important role in implementing these programmes;

D. whereas the Commission’s Financial Transparency System (FTS) is the main source of publicly available data for large-scale analysis of grants and contracts managed directly by the Commission; whereas a clear distinction should be made between public transparency and transparency for the purpose of legitimate budgetary control, given the sensitive contexts and issues NGOs work with;

E. whereas the Commission’s Financial Transparency System (FTS) is the main source of publicly available data for large-scale analysis of grants and contracts managed directly by the Commission; whereas a clear distinction should be made between public transparency and transparency for the purpose of legitimate budgetary control, given the sensitive contexts and issues NGOs work with;

E. whereas an analysis of FTS data shows that EU financial commitments to NGOs, excluding EU programmes in the field of education and research, amounted to at least EUR 2.6 billion in 2022, under direct management, across all EU programmes and funds;

F. whereas an analysis of FTS data shows that EU financial commitments to NGOs, excluding EU programmes in the field of education and research, amounted to at least EUR 2.6 billion in 2022, under direct management, across all EU programmes and funds;

F. whereas EU transparency and accountability requirements and controls should apply to all interest representatives benefiting from EU funds; whereas 3 377 entities are registered in the EU Transparency Register under the category ‘NGOs, platforms and networks and similar’; whereas the nature of requirements and controls has to conform with the categorisation established in the Transparency Register, with a view to taking into account all judicial forms of entities and not only NGOs; whereas EU requirements and controls do not solely have to be linked to the Transparency Register as some entities granted with EU funds might prefer to stay out of this register to avoid putting their existence at risk;

G. whereas EU transparency and accountability requirements and controls should apply to all interest representatives benefitingbeneficiaries fromof EU funds; whereasfunds, 3including 377NGOs, entitiesthat are registered in the EU Transparency Register under therequired categoryto ‘NGOs,maintain platformsaccurate and networkstransparent andfinancial similar’;records whereason the natureuse of requirements and controls has toEU conformfunds withand the categorisation establishedorigin inof thefinancial Transparencysources Register,used withfor atheir viewfunctioning, toas takingthey intoare accountaccountable allto judicialtheir formsmembers, ofdonors, entitiespartners and not onlybeneficiaries NGOs;regarding whereasthe EUactions requirementsthey andtake, controlsthe dosources notof solelytheir havefinancing, toincluding beEU linkedfunds, toand the Transparencydecisions Registerthey astake someon entitiesbehalf grantedof withtheir EUstakeholders; fundswhereas mightthe preferMember toStates staylay outthe oflegal thisbasis registerfor toNGOs, avoidwhich puttinghave their existencestatus registered at risk;national level;

H. whereas EU transparency and accountability requirements and controls should apply to all beneficiaries of EU funds, including NGOs, that are required to maintain accurate and transparent financial records on the use of EU funds and the origin of financial sources used for their functioning, as they are accountable to their members, donors, partners and beneficiaries regarding the actions they take, the sources of their financing, including EU funds, and the decisions they take on behalf of their stakeholders; whereas the Member States lay the legal basis for NGOs, which have their status registered at national level;

H. whereas the exploitation of EU funds against EU rules, principles and values is on the rise; whereas individuals and front organisations, most often under foreign influence, seek to obtain EU financial support and the respectability that results from it, whatever the amount, but in reality use EU funds for activities that undermine fundamental EU principles and values and our attachment to democracy;

I. whereas the exploitation of EU funds against EU rules, principles and values is on the rise; whereas individuals and front organisations, most often under foreign influence, seek to obtain EU financial support and the respectability that results from it, whatever the amount, but in reality use EU funds for activities that undermine fundamental EU principles and values and our attachment to democracy;

I. whereas the Commission has the responsibility to ensure the implementation of the EU budget and to respect EU regulations and values; whereas, in this regard, all ex ante and ex post controls have to ensure that only NGOs and entities working in respect of EU rules, principles and values will be granted EU funds;

J. whereas the Commission has the responsibility to ensure the implementation of the EU budget and to respect EU regulations and values; whereas, in this regard, all ex ante and ex post controls have to ensure that only NGOs and entities working in respect of EU rules, principles and values will be granted EU funds;

J. whereas the 2021 Discharge on the general budget of the EU and the Commission underlines the deep concern regarding the funding of projects carried out by or involving NGOs with links to radical religious and political organisations; calls on the Commission to guarantee that EU funds only finance organisations that strictly respect all Union values and urges the Commission to set up ex ante mechanisms that clearly identify NGOs operating on Union territory and abroad that have acknowledged ties to religious fundamentalist networks and that push forward an agenda that undermines Union values;

K. whereas the 2021 Discharge on the general budget of the EU and the Commission underlines the deep concern regarding the funding of projects carried out by or involving NGOs with links to radical religious and political organisations; calls on the Commission to guarantee that EU funds only finance organisations that strictly respect all Union values and urges the Commission to set up ex ante mechanisms that clearly identify NGOs operating on Union territory and abroad that have acknowledged ties to religious fundamentalist networks and that push forward an agenda that undermines Union values;

K. whereas the same high standards for accountability and the same transparency rules should apply to all NGOs that receive EU funding, regardless of whether the place they operate is within or outside the European Union;

L. whereas the same high standards for accountability and the same transparency rules should apply to all NGOs that receive EU funding, regardless of whether the place they operate is within or outside the European Union;

L. whereas some considerations set out hereafter are based on some of the findings of the transparency and accountability study that address further transparency weaknesses concerning the information on the use of EU funds by the Commission, the Member States and beneficiaries, including NGOs;

M. whereas some considerations set out hereafter are based on some of the findings of the transparency and accountability study that address further transparency weaknesses concerning the information on the use of EU funds by the Commission, the Member States and beneficiaries, including NGOs;

General remarks

47. Calls for strict enforcement of the rules for access to Parliament and for invitations to parliamentary committees, which are conditional on the registration of each organisation in the Transparency Register by the new transparency officer who will be placed in each committee secretariat;

48. Considers the adoption of an NGO regulation to be a discriminatory measure that targets NGOs but not any other EU funding recipients; is of the opinion that issues such as revolving doors, transparency in financing and donations, the fight against money laundering, limiting foreign interference, independence from political and economic influence, and whistleblowing are of importance for all entities receiving EU funds and should not be used to limit the space of action of NGOs;

48. Calls for all EU-funded beneficiaries, including NGOs, to publish online all meetings with MEPs, MEPs’ assistants or representatives of other EU institutions, bodies or agencies whenever such meetings relate to ongoing EU legislative files or to the EU financing that such beneficiaries receive or apply for, in line with similar obligations for MEPs; calls for the relevant EU institutions and bodies to provide the tools necessary for the publication of such meetings, while permitting justified exceptions;

49. Reiterates its call in the 2021 Commission discharge resolution to ensure that all EU funding beneficiaries, including NGOs, that have misused or misappropriated EU funds, or engaged in activities contrary to the EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and the EU Charter, including inciting terrorism, hate speech, supporting or glorifying violence, political and religious extremism as well as spreading disinformation under the disguise of intentionally falsified scientific data, are listed in the EDES and are blocked from access to EU institutions and EU funding programmes in direct and shared management; calls on the Commission and the Member States to enforce the implementation and publication of an improved exclusion list as recommended by Parliament and in line with the agreement on the Financial Regulation; expects the Commission to report on the implementation of this recommendation at the beginning of 2025;

49. Considers the adoption of an NGO regulation to be a discriminatory measure that targets NGOs but not any other EU funding recipients; is of the opinion that issues such as revolving doors, transparency in financing and donations, the fight against money laundering, limiting foreign interference, independence from political and economic influence, and whistleblowing are of importance for all entities receiving EU funds and should not be used to limit the space of action of NGOs;

50. Calls on the Commission and the ECA to systematically submit the findings and the audit conclusions related to the risk-based on-site checks of beneficiaries, including NGOs, and their results to Parliament as the discharge authority; encourages increased cooperation with the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the ECA; calls on the Commission to enhance, in particular, the access status for OLAF in order to obtain information on the financial misconduct of individual beneficiaries, investigate them and impose appropriate sanctions (i.e. suspension of payment via the EDES system), in the event of fraud, corruption and other irregularities related to EU funds, in compliance with the applicable regulations;

50. Reiterates its call in the 2021 Commission discharge resolution to ensure that all EU funding beneficiaries, including NGOs, that have misused or misappropriated EU funds, or engaged in activities contrary to the EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and the EU Charter, including inciting terrorism, hate speech, supporting or glorifying violence, political and religious extremism as well as spreading disinformation under the disguise of intentionally falsified scientific data, are listed in the EDES and are blocked from access to EU institutions and EU funding programmes in direct and shared management; calls on the Commission and the Member States to enforce the implementation and publication of an improved exclusion list as recommended by Parliament and in line with the agreement on the Financial Regulation; expects the Commission to report on the implementation of this recommendation at the beginning of 2025;

51. Recalls that NGOs are subjected to the same level of controls and investigations as any other recipient of EU funds covering all expenditure sides, within the respective mandates of both OLAF and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office;

51. Calls on the Commission and the ECA to systematically submit the findings and the audit conclusions related to the risk-based on-site checks of beneficiaries, including NGOs, and their results to Parliament as the discharge authority; encourages increased cooperation with the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the ECA; calls on the Commission to enhance, in particular, the access status for OLAF in order to obtain information on the financial misconduct of individual beneficiaries, investigate them and impose appropriate sanctions (i.e. suspension of payment via the EDES system), in the event of fraud, corruption and other irregularities related to EU funds, in compliance with the applicable regulations;

52. Recalls that NGOs are subjected to the same level of controls and investigations as any other recipient of EU funds covering all expenditure sides, within the respective mandates of both OLAF and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office;

°

° °

52.53. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European Court of Auditors.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are instrumental in linking civil society with the political decision-making in all EU policy areas. They also play an important role in the implementation of the EU budget, either when they receive EU funds as direct beneficiaries of EU grants awarded by the Commission or when they receive EU funds indirectly from beneficiaries and partners that have a legal relationship with the Commission, across all budget management modes. According to the data published in the Financial Transparency System (FTS) of the Commission, the contracted amount of grants awarded from the EU budget to NGOs, after excluding EU programmes in the field of education and research, amounted to at least 2.6 billion EUR in 2022, under direct management and across all EU programmes and funds. However, the total amount of grants awarded to NGOs is likely to be higher (approximatively EUR 3.7 billion in 2022), due to the absence of an NGO definition and due to the lack of clear differentiation between NGOs and not-for-profit organisations (NFPOs) in the FTS.

Whereas transparency and accountability are basic principles enshrined in the financial rules governing the implementation of the EU budget and important factors of public trust, the analysis of the framework surrounding the implementation of the EU budget by NGOs reveals major shortcomings in terms of public transparency and accountability. Since only the funds directly awarded to NGOs are subject to monitoring and reporting by the Commission, the EU funds reallocated in the form of sub-granting, sub-contracting or shared within a consortium are difficult to track and are not published on public websites such as the FTS. As a result, control mechanisms aimed at ensuring that EU funds are used effectively, efficiently, and in accordance with the EU’s objectives, policies and financial rules are made difficult to implement, if not ineffective.

With a view to preventing and fighting against fraud and ensuring that EU funds are not used against EU values, public transparency and accountability requirements must be strengthened. It is of paramount importance to ensure that the contracted EU funds be tracked up to the final beneficiaries in a systematic and harmonised manner across information and transparency platforms at EU level and at the level of NGOs in the Member States. In particular, the EU Transparency Register should allow the traceability of funding sources, including EU funds, and provide greater transparency of registered organisations, thus contributing to avoid cases such as Qatargate. Furthermore, the funding of NGOs has to be made transparent from the source.

As recommended in previous years’ budgetary discharge resolutions, the adoption of a NGO Regulation setting up minimum requirements for NGOs across the EU (definition, access to funding, disclosure of sources of financing, independence from political influence and non-European interference, etc.) would provide a more sound budgetary control framework, allowing the NGOs to deliver their positive achievements with the outmost transparency and accountability.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, until the adoption thereof in committee:

Entity and/or person

European Commission/DG Budg

Blomeyer & Sanz

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

17.11.2023

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

for the Committee on Budgetary Control

on the transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget

(2023/2122(INI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Deirdre Clune

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution:

– having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2022 on the shrinking space for civil society in Europe,

A. whereas Article 11 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 15 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires the EU institutions to conduct their work as openly and transparently as possible in order to promote good governance and ensure the participation of civil society; whereas the European Economic and Social Committee, composed, inter alia, of representatives of civil society organisations and exercising advisory functions, should assist Parliament, the Council and the Commission, in line with Article 300(1) TFEU;

B. whereas, under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI), ‘civil society organisations’ (CSOs) are defined as a wide range of actors with multiple roles and mandates, which may vary over time and across institutions and countries; whereas CSOs include all non-state, not-for-profit independent and non-violent structures through which people organise the pursuit of shared objectives and ideals, whether political, cultural, religious, environmental, social or economic, which operate at local, national, regional or international levels and which comprise urban and rural, and formal and informal organisations;

C. whereas, in Article 2(48) of its proposal of 16 May 2022 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast) (COM(2022)0223), the Commission defines a ‘non-governmental organisation’ (NGO) as ‘a voluntary, independent from government, non-profit organisation, which is not a political party or a trade union’;

D. whereas interest representatives, including NGOs, should be subject to scrutiny, due diligence and transparency rules, in particular with regard to financing, with proportional criteria and non-cumbersome procedures, in particular for small NGOs;

E. whereas strengthening transparency requirements for legal entities, including NGOs, carrying out lobbying or advocacy activities with EU institutions should contribute to tracing foreign interference;

F. whereas the Commission has strong mechanisms for the control of the expenditure of NGOs funded from the EU budget, among the strictest in Europe; whereas recent corruption allegations against Members and former Members of the European Parliament involved an NGO which was not registered in the Transparency Register;

G. whereas on 13 September 2023, the European Parliament amended its Rules of Procedure with a view to strengthening integrity, independence and accountability;

Importance of the role of NGOs in promoting and protecting human rights and democracy

1. Commends the essential role that NGOs and CSOs working for the promotion and protection of human rights, democracy and the rule of law play in societies around the world; highlights, in this regard, the crucial work of these organisations in promoting and defending human rights and democracy, combating all forms of discrimination, fighting for a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, informing individuals and groups, especially the most vulnerable, about their rights and standing up for them when those rights are violated, denouncing human and civil rights violations, promoting intercultural dialogue, civic engagement and public participation, countering disinformation and hate speech, collecting public interest information and holding governments and elected representatives accountable to citizens, and fighting corruption and impunity for human rights abuses;

2. Highlights the serious risks that people working for human rights NGOs face in their activities around the world, including threats against them and their families, intimidation and all forms of harassment, including through online channels and social media, abusive legal proceedings and prosecution, arbitrary detention, violence, torture, disappearances, killings and executions, which can force them into exile;

3. Is alarmed by the fact that some governments in third countries, whose aim is to shrink civil society space and silence dissenting voices, have adopted legislation based, inter alia, on security, counter-terrorism and the fight against foreign interference, that imposes discriminatory obligations on human rights NGOs and their workers, stigmatises, restricts or bans their activities, including by closing these NGOs, freezing their assets, deterring their donors from contributing funds or depriving them from access to funding; believes that the EU should lead by example in this context;

Transparency and accountability of human rights NGOs funded by the EU external action budget

4. Underlines the importance of ensuring, as far as possible, transparent and accessible information on the beneficiaries, including NGOs, of EU external action funds dedicated to human rights and democracy support and to the related EU-funded projects which are implemented worldwide; recognises that NGOs have been calling for further transparency at EU level for years; acknowledges the risky and life-threatening conditions faced by some human rights defenders and NGOs in non-EU countries; believes, in this regard, that confidentiality and data protection must be ensured in order not to put them at risk;

5. Welcomes the cessation of EU funding and the recovery of funds paid to a few organisations whose actions were contrary to EU values; calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to ensure that EU funds do not finance organisations that do not respect EU values as set out in Article 2 TEU; also calls on the Commission to develop more flexible strategies of supporting civil society actors in repressive environments, which have difficulties benefiting from assistance;

6. Calls for the EU and its Member States to be fully transparent about the allocation of funds to third countries for cooperation in migration matters, and to ensure that migration-related European funding, training or other forms of support to third countries neither directly or indirectly facilitate the perpetration of human rights violations, nor reinforce and perpetuate impunity for such violations; urges that any EU or Member State-funded migratory cooperation project or initiative be made subject to thorough and independent ex ante human rights impact assessments and monitoring throughout the project, and for the results of such assessments and monitoring to be disclosed to the European Parliament;

7. Calls on the Commission to improve the clarity and organisation of information and data available in the Financial Transparency System (FTS) on the beneficiaries of EU-funded projects, including in the field of human rights and democracy support; stresses that requiring beneficiaries to disclose all funding sources must take into account the situation of the countries and the environment in which they operate, in order to ensure that the publication of the information and data under the FTS does not put them at risk;

8. Recommends that the legal obligations on transparency and financial accountability be applied identically to all NGOs and other interest representatives benefiting from EU funding;

9. Points out that NGOs receiving EU funding must be transparent about the funding received; notes that their work gives visibility to the EU’s support in different ways, through various communication channels, including official websites; underlines that these differences could sometimes also depend on the fact that, in some countries ruled by certain authoritarian and illiberal regimes and with reduced civic spaces, the dissemination of such information may put NGOs at risk; calls for the establishment of harmonised but flexible approaches to make EU funding for human rights and democracy support more visible to the public, while avoiding putting at risk NGOs that operate in precarious contexts;

10. Denounces the use of organisations sponsored by third country governments (government-organised NGOs (GONGOs)) to spread disinformation and false narratives related, in particular, to human rights issues;

11. Stresses that the funding by third countries of EU-based legal entities, including NGOs, carrying out lobbying or advocacy activities within the EU and aiming to influence the EU’s foreign policymaking, may at times expose these entities to malign external influences; believes that transparency requirements should not, however, stigmatise legitimate foreign funding; recalls, in this regard, the findings of its resolution of 1 June 2023 on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation, and of 13 July 2023 on recommendations for reform of the European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity, accountability and anti-corruption, highlighting the risks of foreign interference and disinformation stemming from some NGOs funded by non-EU countries; calls for further reflection on the future strategy and approaches of the EU institutions to detecting and preventing risks of corruption and foreign interference in EU policymaking; highlights that in the context of recent corruption allegations against some Members and former Members of the European Parliament, an NGO not registered in the EU Transparency Register and whose stated purpose was to carry out advocacy activities in the human rights field, is suspected to have been used as a vector of foreign interference; considers that there is a public interest in knowing the financial sources, including non-EU funding, of all stakeholders active in the fields of lobbying or advocacy, while any measures in this regard need to be proportional, preventing any unintended limitations on fundamental rights;

12. Welcomes the progress made in the use of the EU Transparency Register and is committed to continuing its work to expand the scope of the Register and strengthen the monitoring of the data it contains; points out that, as a general rule, annual financial data on the sources of funding, including EU grants and domestic and non-EU donations, of registered legal entities are made publicly available under the EU Transparency Register; stresses that, since 12 July 2023, the participation of ‘interest representatives’ as invited active guests at Parliament’s events is conditional on their prior registration in the EU Transparency Register, except if registration is likely to endanger an individual’s life or personal safety or the existence of the entities concerned or where other compelling reasons require confidentiality; recalls that the EU Transparency Register (Annex II) requires that NGOs provide their main sources of funding by category, including EU funds; stresses that the measures requiring NGOs to disclose all funding sources must take into account the situation of NGOs operating in countries under authoritarian and illiberal regimes, in particular when the disclosure of such information could put them and their work at risk because of the application of repressive legislation such as ‘foreign agents’ laws and similar provisions; regrets the fact that registration imposes a heavy bureaucratic burden on small CSOs based in other continents, which do not usually work or conduct advocacy activity in the working places of the EU institutions; calls for an assessment of the new measures, in order to avoid unintended limitations on fundamental rights for civil society and to ensure that the adopted measures are proportional and fair, in consultation with CSOs;

13. Recalls its own decision adopted on 13 September 2023, to make amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure with a view to strengthening integrity, independence and accountability; recognises, however, that the EU institutions, including the European Parliament, should be more diligent in ensuring greater transparency, integrity and accountability regarding their framework for interaction with entities to be listed in the EU Transparency Register; calls, in this regard, for increased scrutiny by Parliament’s services in order to enforce Parliament’s amended Rules of Procedure relating to integrity, independence and accountability; acknowledges that further resources are needed to strengthen the transparency and the accountability of all lobbying or advocacy activities of legal persons or entities, including human rights NGOs;

14. Calls for all EU institutions to be far stricter in their implementation, enforcement and supervision of adherence to the current provisions on the EU Transparency Register; also calls for the strengthening of the EU Transparency Register by increasing the budget and staff allocated to it, so that it is able to offer support to all applicants and registrants, particularly small entities and NGOs, throughout the registration process and verify the information they provide more thoroughly; calls on the Commission to present proposals to enhance the transparency of interest representation and to ensure that lobbying or advocacy activities, in particular on behalf of third country governments, their budgets and their policy scope are properly disclosed under the EU Transparency Register and that sanctions are provided for in the event of false declarations.

ANNEX: LIST OF ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The following list is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur. The rapporteur has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion, until the adoption thereof in committee:

Entity and/or person

HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY NETWORK

CIVIL SOCIETY EUROPE

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted

16.11.2023

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

39

5

3

Members present for the final vote

Alexander Alexandrov Yordanov, François Alfonsi, Maria Arena, Petras Auštrevičius, Anna Bonfrisco, Reinhard Bütikofer, Susanna Ceccardi, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Anna Fotyga, Giorgos Georgiou, Raphaël Glucksmann, Andrius Kubilius, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Thierry Mariani, Marisa Matias, David McAllister, Vangelis Meimarakis, Sven Mikser, Francisco José Millán Mon, Alessandra Moretti, Kostas Papadakis, Tonino Picula, Isabel Santos, Mounir Satouri, Jordi Solé, Dominik Tarczyński, Hilde Vautmans, Charlie Weimers, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Substitutes present for the final vote

Dacian Cioloş, Georgios Kyrtsos, Gabriel Mato, Juozas Olekas, Pina Picierno, María Soraya Rodríguez Ramos, Mick Wallace, Elena Yoncheva

Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final vote

Karolin Braunsberger-Reinhold, Charles Goerens, Eero Heinäluoma, Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu, Paul Tang, Eugen Tomac, Lucia Vuolo, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

28.11.2023

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS

for the Committee on Budgetary Control

on transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget

(2023/2122(INI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Clare Daly

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution:

– having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2022 on the shrinking space for civil society in Europe,

– having regard to the Council conclusions of 10 March 2023 on the application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; the role of the civic space in protecting and promoting fundamental rights in the EU,

– having regard to its resolution of 13 July 2023 on recommendations for reform of European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity, accountability and anti-corruption,

– having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular Article 11 thereof,

– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), and in particular Article 12 thereof,

– having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, in particular Article 11 thereof,

– having regard to its resolution of 7 October 2020 on the establishment of an EU Mechanism on Democracy, the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights,

– having regard to the Joint Guidelines on Freedom of Association adopted by the European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission) and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) in December 2014,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012,

A. whereas non-governmental organisations (NGOs), grassroots and community organisations, trade unions, activist groups, human rights defenders and many other civil society actors are the backbone of civic space, and constitute the legal and political framework in which people and groups can meaningfully participate in the political, economic, social and cultural life of their societies;

B. whereas civil society plays a crucial role in promoting and defending the rights and values enshrined in Article 2 TEU and the fundamental rights under the Charter, both at European and at national level, as well as in protecting women, LGBTIQ+ persons, persons with disabilities, minorities, migrants and refugees and other vulnerable groups; whereas to this end, it is crucial that civil society actors benefit from an environment that allows them to thrive throughout the Union;

C. whereas civil society actors play a central role in democracy by exercising public oversight over political power as an essential component of a rule of law ecosystem of healthy democracies, articulating and relaying to policy makers the aspirations and interests present in society, engaging in advocacy and litigation, contributing to informed policy-making with their expertise and knowledge of what goes on on the ground and fostering active and responsible citizenship, thereby promoting active public participation in the democratic process and governance, increasing transparency at Union and Member State level, and fostering public debate and pluralism in society; whereas some governments have a tendency to use pretexts in order to place restrictions on NGOs, causing them to face an unsafe environment with increasingly worrying attacks, including via legislation;

D. whereas the Council conclusions on the role of civic space and promoting fundamental rights in the EU and Parliament’s resolution on shrinking civic space in the EU call for the protection of civic space and for the active protection of civil society organisations (CSOs);

E. whereas Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, together with Articles 7, 8 and 12 of the Charter enshrines the freedom of association at all levels and protects non-profit organisations against discriminatory, unnecessary and unjustified restrictions regarding the financing of their activities; whereas the freedom of association is one of the essential foundations of a democratic and pluralist society, as it allows citizens to act collectively in fields of mutual interest and to contribute to the proper functioning of public life; whereas freedom of association includes not only the ability to create or dissolve an association but also the ability for that association to operate without unjustified interference by the state; whereas the ability to seek, secure and use resources is essential to the operation of any association;

F. whereas the Court of Justice of the European Union confirmed in its judgment in Case C-78/18 European Commission v Hungary that the obligations of declaration and publicity may, in certain circumstances, be liable to limit the capacity of CSOs to receive financial support or have a deterrent effect on the participation of donors;

G. whereas the Venice Commission indicated in its ‘Report on Funding of Associations’ of March 2019 that some public disclosure obligations can be imposed on associations with ‘public utility status’, but these obligations should be limited to information on how the public funds obtained by the association concerned are spent; the disclosure obligations should not be extended to all financing, including from private donors; and all reporting should be subject to a duty to respect the rights of donors, beneficiaries and staff, as well as the right to protect business confidentiality; whereas international standards on freedom of association require that no restrictions may be placed on its exercise other than those which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;

H. whereas recent corruption allegations involving the EU institutions have underlined the need to pay more attention to scrutiny and transparency regarding EU funding;

1. Emphasises the crucial role played by civil society, which comprises, inter alia, grassroots and community organisations, trade unions, activist groups, human rights defenders and NGOs in promoting and upholding democratic values, equality, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and in ensuring civic participation and the accountability of governments, as well as state and private actors;

2. Stresses, moreover, civil society’s crucial role in providing societal benefits and assistance, in particular for the most vulnerable and marginalised groups, as well as promoting their rights and interests, and in providing space for a diversity of opinions and positions to be expressed and heard, thereby allowing citizens to take an active part in setting the political agenda;

3. Stresses that civil society is a broader category than that of NGOs; acknowledges the diversity of NGOs as regards their size, from large international organisations to small regional or local organisations; as regards resources, from organisations that mostly rely on paid employees to organisations consisting mostly of volunteers; and as regards staff, policy outlook and activities; notes, therefore, that they should not be perceived as a singular bloc; emphasises further that the historical development of the NGO sector varies across Europe and that it is essential to recognise that sensitivity must be deployed in addressing issues regarding NGOs in different parts of Europe;

4. Notes that in spite of the risks of some NGOs being leveraged by state and private actors for their own ends, many of them play a significant role in exposing public and private wrongdoing and strengthening accountability; stresses, therefore, that they must be protected, including through the provision of and access to adequate and transparent funding at all levels – public and private, domestic and foreign – on which many organisations rely;

5. Recalls that the Treaties require the EU institutions and EU Member States to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society; stresses the importance for EU Member States and EU institutions of providing adequate funding to programmes aimed at protecting and promoting fundamental rights and the values enshrined in the EU Treaties; recognises the role NGOs and CSOs play in implementing these programmes;

6. Remains deeply concerned by threats to and unjustified attacks on NGOs in some Member States and at European level; strongly denounces the fact that such threats and attacks include increasing crackdowns on and the curtailing of political speech and action at all levels across the EU, proposing and adopting legislation that imposes discriminatory obligations on NGOs, which restrict or ban their activities, actions both against organisations and their infrastructure and against their staff or volunteers, online and offline intimidation and harassment, negative public statements and smear campaigns, verbal threats and legal and physical attacks; stresses that some NGOs also face excessive administrative controls or audits, politically motivated funding cuts and overly strict legal requirements for their formation and registration;

7. Recalls that civil society actors at all levels need appropriate and sufficient human, material and financial resources to carry out their missions effectively and that the freedom to seek, receive and use such resources is not circumscribed by national borders and is an integral part of the right to freedom of association;

8. Is deeply concerned that access to funding, including foreign funding, continues to be hindered by restrictive rules in several Member States, such as disproportionately burdensome application and selection procedures regarding EU funds under shared management, attempts to introduce rules penalising NGOs, rules on political advertising and foreign interference in elections that affect advocacy and watchdog activities, funding conditionality requirements and transparency laws that are perceived as stigmatising, and negative campaigns against CSOs receiving foreign funding;

9. Calls for the Member States and the EU to improve the legal environment for civil society through the provision of adequate funding and by ensuring that any measure restricting the right of associations to seek, secure and use resources, including foreign resources, must pursue one of the legitimate aims under Article 11(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights and be fully compliant with fundamental rights in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as with the recommendations of the Venice Commission; calls for the Member States and the EU to provide appropriate legal remedies for civil society in the event of any restrictions;

10. Calls for the Member States and the EU to ensure that access to funding and other resources for NGOs is made through clear, transparent and non-discriminatory procedures, and without undue impediments;

11. Underlines that transparency and accountability measures, as well as the monitoring of how public money is spent, are important for upholding democracy and are two of the guiding budgetary principles of the European Union enshrined in the Financial Regulation; emphasises that transparency and accountability measures must only serve the purpose of ensuring legitimate public scrutiny; recalls that international standards on freedom of association and freedom of assembly require authorities to apply a presumption in favour of NGOs’ liberty to seek and receive funding from any source; stresses, therefore, that reporting requirements for NGOs must be applied to all beneficiaries of EU funding without discrimination, and must be strictly necessary, proportionate and justified to the specific aims pursued; stresses further that these reporting requirements should take into account the resources, size and staff available to a beneficiary of EU funding and the scope of its activities;

12. Warns against introducing further requirements for NGOs as compared to other beneficiaries; insists that any additional EU measures on reporting requirements should be led by the principles of necessity and proportionality; recalls that imposing obligations of registration, declaration and publication on certain categories of CSOs directly or indirectly receiving support from abroad must be in line with the principles of non-discrimination, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to the protection of personal data and the right to freedom of association, as stated by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-78/18 (European Commission v Hungary); recalls the need to focus on the accountability and transparency of the budget, and its use and implementation by the beneficiaries, rather than on measures regarding their organisation and governance;

13. Considers that it would be helpful to have comprehensive data from the Commission on the extent and effectiveness of the implementation of the different EU programmes which provide support to NGOs in achieving the goal of bolstering civic space and participation, as part of their evaluation; considers further that the managing authorities and the Commission should maintain a list of projects awarded grants in line with the explicit requirement in the Common Provisions Regulation to create a list of operations selected for support by the funds publicly available on the website in at least one of the official languages of the institutions of the Union and to update that list at least every four months;

14. Welcomes the establishment of Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) Programme for the period 2021-2027, which provides direct funding to CSOs from the EU budget; recalls Parliament’s role in securing an increased budget for the programme in the negotiations with the Council and the Commission on the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-2027; calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that the budget for the programme is increased in the next MFF to account for inflation and the need to support CSOs in building a resilient and participatory democracy; calls on the Commission to make the tender procedures in the CERV programme transparent and user-friendly, and to avoid overly complicated requirements that are difficult to fulfil for CSOs, as well as to ensure the necessary flexibility in the process of re-granting the funds to local and grassroots organisations by operators in Member States in order to ensure that the money reaches those working closest to citizens; recalls that any reporting obligations must be proportionate and feasible for the organisation to fulfil, taking into account its size and the level of funds;

15. Stresses that reporting obligations and transparency should be in place to ensure that EU money is well spent, while avoiding unnecessary burdens on organisations; believes that current EU legislation on scrutiny, due diligence and transparency is likely sufficient with minor adjustments, which should apply to all beneficiaries of EU funds, and could, inter alia, address the concerns expressed by the European Court of Auditors, for achieving proportionate transparency goals;

16. Emphasises that a disproportionate increase in reporting and transparency requirements for NGOs under various pretexts should be avoided in order not to undermine civic space;

17. Calls, however, on the Commission to step up its work on streamlining databases and on increasing the user-friendliness of the Financial Transparency System (FTS) to improve transparency and accessibility; stresses that, within the FTS, all types and subtypes of beneficiaries, including for-profit organisations, should be searchable as a category in the register, rather than providing distinct categories just for NGOs or non-profits; calls on the Commission to facilitate better support for applicants when accessing EU funding, as well as increased institutional funding for organisations;

18. Recalls that the circumvention of transparency and accountability requirements cannot be prevented or remedied by creating new, burdensome rules on transparency and accountability, or conducting comprehensive financial pre-screening of NGOs before they are listed in the Transparency Register, or developing a centralised certification system for NGOs wishing to apply for EU funding, which create further legal and administrative obstacles and may hinder smaller NGOs from receiving EU or foreign funds;

19. Appreciates the fact that the Commission has enhanced the access status for the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) in order to obtain information on the financial misconduct of individual NGOs, to investigate them and to impose appropriate sanctions in the event of fraud, corruption and other irregularities related to EU funds, in compliance with the applicable regulations;

20. Appreciates the fact that the Commission ensures that all applicants or beneficiaries of EU funding are required to publish annually the number, amounts and nature of lobbying contacts they have, and welcomes the fact that a growing number of EU-funded NGOs publish their pursued interests and financial data online, in compliance with the applicable regulations, while adding that a more proactive approach from NGOs to public transparency that goes beyond the existing requirements for EU grant funding would be expected;

21. Welcomes Parliament’s decision of 13 September 2023 amending Parliament’s Rules of Procedure with a view to strengthening integrity, independence and accountability; calls on all EU institutions to better implement the current provisions on the EU Transparency Register; insists that the EU Transparency Register should be strengthened by increasing its budget and its staff so that it is able to offer support to all applicants and registrants, particularly small entities and NGOs, throughout the registration process and to verify the information they provided more thoroughly; stresses that it is imperative that NGOs do their utmost to ensure compliance with the EU data protection regime;

22. Calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility and necessity of EU legislation in establishing transparency requirements for all organisations that engage in direct political lobbying, independent of their legal status and sources of funding;

23. Stresses that top-down national regulation involves the risk of politically driven control of NGOs and that a cautious approach should be applied in this regard; emphasises that measures that could contribute to excessive state monitoring should be avoided; stresses further that anti-corruption measures should be strictly proportional and must not be used as a justification for excessive reporting and transparency requirements for NGOs that would undermine their activities and restrict freedom of association; deplores the reported cases of excessive disclosure obligations recently introduced in some Member States;

24. Warns emphatically against the weaponisation of the concept of ‘foreign interference’ and emphasises that this can be and is being used by governments to repress and stigmatise civil society and NGOs; emphasises, however, that some stakeholders may be used as a tool of influence by foreign entities ultimately affecting the democratic process in Member States; believes, therefore, that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to dealing with civil society;

25. Deplores the smear campaigns against NGOs, including those which pursue advocacy and research activities in the area of the environment and human rights, under the pretext, for example, that they are predominantly financed by foreign funding, which aims to undermine their credibility.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted

28.11.2023

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

31

25

4

Members present for the final vote

Abir Al-Sahlani, Pietro Bartolo, Theresa Bielowski, Vladimír Bilčík, Malin Björk, Vasile Blaga, Karolin Braunsberger-Reinhold, Patrick Breyer, Saskia Bricmont, Annika Bruna, Damien Carême, Clare Daly, Lena Düpont, Lucia Ďuriš Nicholsonová, Cornelia Ernst, Nicolaus Fest, Evin Incir, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Patryk Jaki, Marina Kaljurand, Assita Kanko, Fabienne Keller, Łukasz Kohut, Moritz Körner, Jeroen Lenaers, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Nadine Morano, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Pina Picierno, Birgit Sippel, Vincenzo Sofo, Tineke Strik, Annalisa Tardino, Yana Toom, Milan Uhrík, Tom Vandendriessche, Elena Yoncheva, Javier Zarzalejos

Substitutes present for the final vote

Daniel Freund, José Gusmão, Rasa Juknevičienė, Beata Kempa, Matjaž Nemec, Janina Ochojska, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Kostas Papadakis, Silvia Sardone, Paul Tang, Petar Vitanov, Axel Voss, Tomáš Zdechovský

Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final vote

Mathilde Androuët, Tom Berendsen, Jarosław Duda, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Pär Holmgren, Andrey Kovatchev, Antonius Manders, Riho Terras

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Date adopted

14.12.2023

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

19

6

2

Members present for the final vote

Matteo Adinolfi, Dominique Bilde, Gilles Boyer, Olivier Chastel, Caterina Chinnici, Ilana Cicurel, Carlos Coelho, Beatrice Covassi, Ryszard Czarnecki, Luke Ming Flanagan, Daniel Freund, Isabel García Muñoz, Maria Grapini, Monika Hohlmeier, Joachim Kuhs, Alin Mituța, Jan Olbrycht, Markus Pieper, Sándor Rónai, Petri Sarvamaa, Eleni Stavrou, Viola von Cramon-Taubadel

Substitutes present for the final vote

Mikuláš Peksa, Sabrina Pignedoli, Wolfram Pirchner

Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final vote

Agnes Jongerius, Marisa Matias

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Key to symbols: