Latest documents

Summary : This workshop assessed recent developments in human rights and accountability across Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in the context of the 4th EU–CELAC summit (Santa Marta, 9 November 2025). Bringing together EU policymakers, regional human rights representatives, academics and civil society actors, the discussion examined the structural challenges affecting democratic governance and the institutional mechanisms available to address them. Participants highlighted the coexistence of democratic backsliding, organised criminal violence, institutional fragility and shrinking civic space with enduring commitments to international human rights law and multilateral cooperation. Particular attention was given to the region’s complex “accountability mosaic”, comprising international and regional judicial bodies, national human rights institutions, transitional justice mechanisms and protection frameworks for human rights defenders. While these mechanisms have produced meaningful advances, their effectiveness remains uneven and vulnerable to political, economic and security pressures. The workshop also explored the human rights implications of transnational organised crime, climate-related vulnerabilities and trade-based cooperation frameworks, emphasising the need for policy coherence, sustained multilateral engagement and capacity-building. Overall, the discussion underscored that EU–LAC relations are grounded in shared normative principles but require more systematic operationalisation through political dialogue, cooperative instruments and support for regional and domestic accountability structures.

External author : Par Engstrom

Authors : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, SERPIERI Margherita

Summary : The fight against impunity remains a key challenge for the international community, as efforts to hold perpetrators of serious international crimes accountable are increasingly strained by geopolitical rivalries, fragmented enforcement and weak political will. This paper examines three accountability mechanisms – international criminal tribunals, universal jurisdiction and transitional justice – through comparative analysis and case studies. International criminal tribunals, from ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda to the International Criminal Court, have advanced legal norms and secured landmark convictions. Yet, their legitimacy is weakened by high costs, slow trials, selective enforcement and limited cooperation from states. Universal jurisdiction allows national courts to prosecute atrocities irrespective of territorial or personal links. Its growing use in Europe, especially in cases linked to Syria and Ukraine, demonstrates potential, although inconsistent application and political frictions limit its effectiveness. Transitional justice, through truth commissions, reparations and institutional reforms, offers societies pathways to reconciliation and peace, but faces recurring challenges of political interference, resource scarcity and insufficient victim participation. Case studies from the Balkans, Ukraine, Ethiopia, Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Colombia, Syria and Israel-Palestine highlight that no single mechanism is sufficient. Instead, effective accountability requires context-sensitive and context-specific combinations of tools. The paper concludes with recommendations for strengthening the European Union’s global role.

External author : Veronika BÍLKOVÁ, Federica CRISTANI,

Summary : On 21 October 2025, the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen's second mandate adopted its work programme for 2026 (2026 CWP). In line with the Commission President's political guidelines and letter of intent and highlighting the need for full implementation of Mario Draghi's competitiveness report, the 2026 CWP places a strong emphasis on competitiveness, innovation and collective security. In parallel, the Commission commits to advancing simplification, implementation, and this year, also to strengthening enforcement. These three areas will remain key horizontal priorities for the entire Commission mandate. Just like last year's CWP, the 2026 CWP adheres to the seven headline ambitions put forward in the political guidelines. It is accompanied by a report on implementation, simplification and enforcement, the first of its kind. This new annual report is set to replace the annual burden survey. Annex I of the 2026 CWP puts forward 70 major new legislative and non-legislative initiatives, 44 % of which fall under the competitiveness headline ambition. (Up to) 48 of the new initiatives are legislative, including three sector-specific omnibus packages (on energy product legislation, taxation and citizens). Of the forthcoming legislative initiatives, 67 % are likely revisions of existing legislation, while more than half have a strong simplification dimension. Unlike previous CWPs, the 2026 CWP does not indicate whether a legislative initiative will be accompanied by an impact assessment; this lack of transparency runs counter to the spirit of the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making. Information on the Commission's 'Have your say' portal shows that, at the time of writing, two thirds of the up to 48 legislative initiatives were expected to be accompanied by an impact assessment (though the final number may be higher). The annual evaluation plan presented in Annex II of the CWP, comprising 20 evaluations, does not appear exhaustive. Finally, the communication on Better Regulation, expected in Q2 2026, may entail a revision of the Better Regulation Guidelines, the first since 2021.

Authors : ANGLMAYER Irmgard, DALLI HUBERT, IOANNIDES Isabelle

Summary : A surge in autocratic governance has become increasingly threatening to global politics, having gathered momentum over the past two decades. This autocratic wave continues to evolve, becoming ever more complex and diverse as it unfolds. Hence, the shifting dynamics driving this wave need to be fully understood and disaggregated if the European Union (EU) is to design effective responses. Democratic strategy needs not only to hold at bay severe repression, but also to engage with the ideas and narratives that underpin autocracy’s apparent appeal. Accordingly, this paper draws on historical and contemporary writings that present various arguments against democracy. After unpacking the different components of this autocratic wave, EU responses over recent years are assessed, looking at how these relate to pro-authoritarian narratives. It finds that the EU has improved many elements of its policies during this time but still needs to tailor its strategies to the ideational aspects of anti-democratic trends.

External author : Richard YOUNGS, Elene PANCHULIDZE

Authors : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, SERPIERI Margherita

Authors : SANDERSKI ANDRZEJ, SERPIERI Margherita

Summary : This paper provides an overview of both long-standing and new legal and policy developments concerning Environmental Human Rights Defenders (EHRDs). The focus is on four major components: i) observing different approaches and understandings about EHRDs; ii) analysing the content of international obligations concerning EHRDs and mechanisms for reviewing implementation and accountability; iii) discussing the opportunities and challenges of using European Union (EU) instruments to advance the realisation of EHRDs’ rights; and iv) exploring EU collaboration with other regions on environmental democracy and EHRDs’ rights. The paper reports on recent vital breakthroughs, driven partly by EHRDs, including recognition of the right to a healthy environment by the United Nations, as well as progress from voluntary guidelines to binding provisions on human rights and sustainability due diligence. Yet, contrary to the principles of non-regression and progression, the paper also shows that key legal and institutional advances are at risk of being weakened or even reversed. Recommendations are provided for the EU to strengthen the realisation of EHRDs’ rights and their role as custodians of the right to a healthy environment, not only for themselves but also for others who cannot raise their voices, namely future generations and other living beings.

External author : Claudia ITUARTE-LIMA, Maria Andrea NARDI, Britta SJÖSTEDT

Summary : The European Parliament is vested with powers of democratic oversight and political scrutiny vis-à-vis the European Commission. These powers of Parliament enhance the democratic legitimacy of the EU as a whole, and help increase the transparency and accountability of the Commission as the EU's executive body. This study examines Parliament's oversight and scrutiny powers over the Commission. It focuses mainly, but not exclusively, on the powers that are enshrined in specific provisions of the EU Treaties. This includes Parliament's role in the Commission's investiture, in motions of censure, parliamentary questions, committees of inquiry and special committees, and in the Commission's obligations to report, consult and inform. It also looks into Parliament's scrutiny over budgetary issues, of delegated acts, in the context of the EU legislative procedure and agenda-setting, of legal proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union, and of the EU's external relations. The study builds on a previous EPRS study on parliamentary scrutiny of the Commission, originally requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) in 2018. The data presented in this edition focus on the ninth term parliamentary term (2019 to 2024).

Authors : TENHUNEN Susanna, EISELE Katharina, AHAMAD MADATALI HANNAH NAFIZE, JANSEN Talander Hugo

Summary : Transnational repression arises when foreign governments reach across national borders to coerce, control and silence individuals in other countries using a broad range of methods, ranging from digital surveillance to extraterritorial killings. Amongst the primary targets of transnational repression are human rights defenders, whose advocacy is perceived by repressive regimes as a threat to their interests and power. As a result, human rights defenders fleeing persecution or other forms of repression at home are now facing increasing danger even though they have moved abroad. The practice of transnational repression negatively impacts every level of society, from individual rights to national security and democratic institutions. This paper presents global trends in transnational repression against human rights defenders, focusing on human rights impacts and curtailment of civic space. It examines the human rights obligations of European Union (EU) Member States as host countries to address transnational repression and outlines some of the emerging policy responses by governments worldwide. The paper also examines how current EU legal and policy frameworks and instruments could be applied to counter transnational repression and provides recommendations for improving protection for the human rights defenders.

External author : Saipira FURSTENBERG, Marcus MICHAELSEN, Siena ANSTIS

Summary : Following more than twelve months’ discussion in the Council, the European Union’s Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime was adopted in December 2020 – a cause for celebration in the human rights community. Having been designed to address human rights violations as well as abuses and corruption worldwide, its adoption followed enactment of the Global Magnitsky legislation in the United States of America. This was part of a wave towards similar legislation being enacted in the Western world. Yet even though the list of designations under this regime has grown, little is known about its impact and effectiveness. Hence, this paper analyses trends in the regime’s designations and implementation, evaluating its efficacy in the achievement of goals.

External author : Clara PORTELA, Nathanael TILAHUN, Anton PEEZ