By NHRI mandate
By topic
Enabling environment for HRDs & CSOs
Environmental HRDs
Freedom of assembly and association
Freedom of expression
Freedom of the media
Funding of CSOs
Non-government controlled territories
Prohibition of discrimination
Protection of HRDs
Right to a fair trial
Right to an effective remedy
Right to privacy
Right to respect for private and family life
Sustainable Development Goals
Whistleblowers
Women HRDs
By country
In 2019, the People’s Advocate of Albania monitored 31 public demonstrations organised by various entities, including opposition political parties, civil society, students, and citizens. Some of these resulted in physical confrontations. Through working groups, the NHRI monitored the situation on the ground and immediately verified cases of alleged rights violations committed by state authorities.
In 2021, the Constitutional Court of Albania examined the constitutionality of a Criminal Code article relevant to freedom of assembly and referring to “obtaining permission from the competent body according to special provisions”. When conducting the examination, the People’s Advocate of Albania submitted observations stating that all legislation referring to rights to freedom of assembly must be clear and drafted in accordance with international human rights standards. Additionally, they highlighted that freedom of assembly cannot be subject to any formal approval by police. It is sufficient that authorities are notified in sufficient time. Lastly, the People’s Advocate underlined that it was disproportionate to have fines or imprisonment (of up to one year) as possible punishments for organisers of/participants in peaceful rallies. The Constitutional Court accepted these points.
At the end of 2020, a young person was murdered by a state police employee. This caused nationwide protests lasting several days that demanded the responsible person be brought to justice. The People’s Advocate of Albania launched an investigation into police conduct when arresting journalists during these protests. Media reports documented several media actors being taken to police premises. The NHRI recommended that the police analyse the cases in terms of what constitutes lawful conduct of police officers when escorting individuals. It also recommended that the police guarantee the media’s right to cover protests; train police officers to improve their conduct towards media actors; avoid violating the rights of escorted persons; and establish special rules concerning the treatment of media actors. The police have followed up on the recommendations with concrete measures and actions addressing them.
Human Rights Defender of the Republic of Armenia
In 2018, the State Revenue Committee of Armenia prepared a draft on making amendments to the Law on Non-Governmental Organisations which may interfere with the right to freedom of association. The amendments include that all NGOs are obliged to publicise the content of their annual report, including information about their financial activities, projects, number of employees and personal data of their employees among other requirements.
In 2024, the Human Rights Defender of the Republic of Armenia actively monitored the human rights situation during widespread protests and assemblies in Yerevan and across the provinces. Rapid response teams from the Defender’s Office visited police departments in which detained protesters were held, conducted private interviews, informed individuals of their rights, and assessed conditions firsthand. The Office also reviewed submitted complaints and conducted ongoing monitoring of mass media and social media to identify rights violations and take appropriate action. Throughout this period, the Defender issued public statements urging state authorities to safeguard the peaceful nature of assemblies and uphold fundamental rights.
In 2022-2023, the Federal Institute for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights (FIRM-IFDH) conducted a research report on the protection of human rights defenders (HRDs) in Belgium. Most of the consulted human rights organisations had recently faced pressure and intimidation. Many indicated that the situation as a whole had deteriorated over the two-year reporting period, with a strong gendered component. The report’s conclusions highlighted that stronger protection of civic space and HRDs is required.
A number of concrete proposals were included in the report, grounded in various regional and international guidelines on the protection of HRDs. The main findings of this report were presented to and discussed with most major political actors in several meetings throughout 2024. They were subsequently included in the main priorities of political parties ahead of the June 2024 elections. The final report was published in 2024.
In 2023, the Institute also carried out a public awareness campaign to draw attention to the importance of the work of HRDs in Belgium. For nearly a month, several thousand support posters were displayed across five major cities in Belgium. On 5 December 2023, FIRM-IFDH organised a support action in central Brussels, together with human rights defenders, aimed both at raising public awareness and at presenting the first results of its research. The action generated significant interest in the written press and on the radio. The campaign was conducted in French and Dutch.
The Federal Institute for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights (FIRM-IFDH) devoted its 2024 Annual Report to the right to protest. The report draws attention to the growing pressure on this fundamental right. Through concrete findings, it analyses the cumulative effect of different types of measures taken before, during, and after protests: preventive restrictions (such as individual protest bans), potentially disproportionate surveillance and policing measures, and administrative or criminal sanctions. As the national human rights institution, FIRM-IFDH highlights the risks these trends pose to freedom of expression, civic participation, and, more broadly, the space for public debate.
Federal Institute for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights
In its report to the UN Committee against Torture, the Federal Institute for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights criticised the use of the concepts of “radicalism” and “radicalisation” by Belgian authorities to preventatively manage the threat of terrorism. It highlighted the increasing tendency to use vague and ill-defined concepts to justify a variety of actions. These include bans on working in certain sensitive areas, refusal to grant Belgian nationality, the closure of establishments by local authorities, refusing to issue a Belgian passport or travel document, revoking residence permits, and expelling foreigners from Belgian territory.
Human Rights Ombudsman of Bosnia and Herzegovina
In 2019, the Human Rights Ombudsman of Bosnia and Herzegovina received numerous complaints from individuals concerning alleged violations of the right to peaceful assembly. These were prompted by the alleged excessive use of force by law enforcement agencies at public gatherings. In 2020, the Ombudsman published a Special Report on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly. This looked at the overall situation concerning freedom of assembly and listed challenges that law enforcement agencies and organisers of public gatherings face during said gatherings. The report analysed relevant domestic and international regulations and collected information through questionnaires filled out by civil society organisations and ministries. The NHRI shared the recommendations with state authorities, organisers of public gatherings and civil society organisations in order to improve the relevant legislation.
Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria
During mass anti-government protests in 2020, the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria received several complaints from individuals and civil society concerning violations of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and the right to legal aid. Protesters were detained by police in Sofia on 10 July and 2 September 2020 in reportedly overcrowded premises and with no access to lawyers. The media published images of violence and presumably excessive use of force against protesters and reporters by law enforcement. The Ombudsman issued a public statement emphasising the need to ensure that any use of physical force and auxiliary means by law enforcement is proportionate and in line with national law and international and regional standards.
The French National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) takes specific actions to protect civil society space and human rights defenders (HRDs), including by issuing recommendations and opinions.
On World Human Rights Defenders’ Day in 2023, CNCDH published its “Opinion on Human Rights Defenders”. This underscored the need for a robust protection framework and the development of a national action plan for HRDs. It also praised HRDs’ essential role in ensuring the effectiveness of human rights.
In September 2025, CNCDH issued a dedicated opinion on civic space. This highlighted ongoing threats to freedom of assembly, rising surveillance of protesters, the stigmatisation of activism, and insufficient consultation with CSOs.
In 2023, parliamentary discussions on the draft law on “Transparency of Foreign Influence” commenced in Georgia. From the outset of the legislative process, the Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia (PDO) has strongly criticised the bill, underlining major incompatibilities with international human rights and democratic standards. In this vein, the PDO issued a public statement in 2023 expressing concerns.
After the draft law was initially withdrawn due to major mobilisation by civil society and criticism by international stakeholders, the government launched a large-scale crackdown on protests and a denigratory campaign against civil society organisations (CSOs) and human rights defenders (HRDs).
In 2024, the parliamentary majority reintroduced the aforementioned draft law on “Transparency of Foreign Influence”, and the bill was finally adopted later that year.
In its 2022-2024 parliamentary reports, the PDO maintained that such legislation contradicts fundamental principles of a democratic society and damages civil society and HRDs, as it aim to undermine public trust in them.
The law’s adoption in 2024 was shortly followed by a Ministerial order, that obliged CSOs to register as the entities “pursuing the interests of foreign power.” The NHRI determined that the requirements of the order were unjustified and detrimental as the large-scale
publication of individuals’ personal data further exacerbated the law’s restrictive and stigmatising impact on individuals employed by the affected organisations.
Consequently, the PDO submitted a recommendation to the Ministry of Justice, requesting personal data not to be subject to disclosure. The PDO’s recommendation was partially accepted and implemented. Although names and surnames remain publicly accessible, even this partial implementation has significantly mitigated the negative impact of the regulation on the protection of personal data.
At present, the draft law is being challenged before the Constitutional Court of Georgia, and the Public Defender has submitted an amicus curiae brief in the ongoing proceedings.
The Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia (PDO) supports the protection of human rights defenders (HRDs) through amicus curiae briefs submitted to national courts, including in follow-up to complaints filed by HRDs and civil society organisations (CSOs).
For example, in July 2025, the Public Defender submitted an amicus curiae brief to the Tbilisi Court of Appeals following the complaint of a CSO. The organisation contested a City Court ruling that upheld the Anti-Corruption Bureau’s request to compel disclosure of sensitive information. At least six similar motions against CSOs had been granted by June 2025. The PDO raised concerns about state interference in freedom of association, the protection of HRDs’ activities, and the rights of vulnerable groups, such as minors, persons with disabilities, and victims of violence, highlighting privacy and child rights considerations. The submission also warned of a growing trend of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) and outlined tools for courts to recognise and address them effectively.
Further, in August 2025, the PDO submitted another amicus curiae brief on a City Court ruling concerning HRDs charged with violating the law due to road blockages during a public demonstration. From November 2024 to June 2025, the Tbilisi City Court reviewed over a thousand of administrative cases under Article 174 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, covering violations in organising or holding assemblies. The PDO stressed that courts must carefully balance the scope of the right to freedom of assembly, the lawful limits on restrictions, and the responsibilities of law enforcement in policing assemblies.
Both submissions aim to guide the judiciary in applying consistent human rights standards in cases with similar circumstances.
Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia
The Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia has drawn attention to the challenges and threats faced by human rights defenders and civil society in both Europe and Georgia. The Public Defender dedicated a chapter to this topic in the 2018, 2019 and 2020 annual reports it submitted to parliament. The reports underlined an increasing trend of verbal abuse, physical assaults, intimidation, and defamation, including by high-ranking political officials. Specifically, the reports pointed to challenges faced by women and LGBTI+ defenders and voiced concerns about cyber threats against and the bullying of human rights defenders. The reports analysed the rights of peaceful assembly, association and expression, as well as media freedom. The NHRI called on law enforcement agencies to undertake effective, timely investigations into any cases of human rights defenders at risk. It also provided recommendations to the government on the promotion and protection of human rights defenders.
In its 2023 annual report to the German Parliament, the German Institute for Human Rights (GIHR) included a dedicated chapter on climate activism and is consistently monitoring the increasing repression of peaceful climate protests. It issued several public statements, including in reaction to preventive detention measures taken in Bavaria. GIHR regularly takes part in network meetings of civil society organisations working on the protection of climate activists and environmental defenders.
Ombudsperson Institution of Kosovo*
After receiving two complaints about the activities of civil society organisations being suspended following a request from a security body, the Ombudsperson Institution of Kosovo* published a report in 2018. It includes specific recommendations on compliance with the right to freedom of association. The report concluded that any suspension of activities based solely on suspicion – and without proper investigation – interferes with the right to freedom of association. The Ombudsman argued that this precedent poses a serious risk of other cases of state interference being justified on the same basis.
The activities of human rights defenders and civil society in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova have been restricted by rules and laws that limit their right to information and ability to express opposition to Transnistrian authorities. Human rights defenders’ freedom of expression was violated in 2020 when defenders were arrested and intimidated. In response, the People’s Advocate of Moldova issued recommendations to Moldovan authorities, mediators and observers. These aimed to make sure these parties applied international law and guaranteed the protection of human rights when designing measures to address the situation.
In 2024, the Slovak National Centre for Human Rights addressed a letter to the National Council of the Slovak Republic in relation to the amendment proposal to the Act on non-profit organisations (hereinafter “NGO Act”).
In the letter, the Centre shared its considerations on the draft law, including its adoption process, which was carried out without consultations with civil society organisations (CSOs), thus weakening and undermining trust in civil society. At the same time, the draft law portrayed civil society as an enemy and contributed to the restriction of democratic space and the stigmatisation of organisations.
Following widespread criticism, an amendment was presented to the National Council reformulating the original proposal. The new proposed legislation replaced the obligation to register as a ‘foreign-backed organisation’ with an obligation to register for the activity of “lobbying”, targeting non-governmental non-profit organisations only. In response to the new amendments, the Slovak NHRI published an opinion on its website, asking the deputies of the National Council not to support the parliamentary bill.
In addition, ahead of the second parliamentary hearing in March 2025, the Slovak NHRI requested a legal review of the draft law from the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR).
Shortly before the law was adopted in April 2025, certain provisions were removed, including those relating to ‘lobbying’ activities by non-profit NGOs and to the grounds for dissolution due to non-compliance with the newly introduced requirements.
Nonetheless, ODIHR found that the adopted law still did not meet the strict requirements set by international human rights law to limit the right to freedom of association. It concluded that the law should be fully reviewed.
Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia
The Human Ombudsman of Slovenia addressed a detailed inquiry to the Ministry of the Interior regarding the procedures the police followed when establishing some protesters’ identities during protests in Ljubljana on 19 June 2020. The justifications provided by the police for the identification of 69 individuals were in view of the Ombudsman so general that they could, most likely, be attributed to all the protesters, who numbered around 7,000. The Ombudsman, therefore, recommended that police always conduct identification procedures according to applicable laws and regulations.