Author: Veronica Charalambous

Right now, the European Union is renewing its Human Rights and Democracy Action Plan: the five-year blueprint that guides how the EU promotes human rights and democracy worldwide. The timing could not be more important. The attacks on civil society are not random or isolated: they follow similar patterns across regions and are part of a broader, coordinated effort to weaken democracy and human rights worldwide. This is a genuine opportunity to step up. But only if the EU uses it well.

The question is not whether civil society will be mentioned in the new plan. It almost certainly will be. The question is whether civil society will be enabled, protected, resourced, and genuinely engaged through a proper framework that supports the Action Plan’s implementation, or whether it will be squeezed out of the actual work.

A foundation worth building on

The current Human Rights and Democracy Action Plan does a number of things right. It recognises independent civil society as essential to democratic resilience. It commits to protecting a safe and enabling environment for civil society organisations. It calls out restrictive legislation, including limits on foreign funding. It positions CSOs not only as partners in implementation but as watchdogs in governance, media freedom, digital rights, and multilateral spaces.

This is a solid foundation. Civil society and civic space are woven across all five pillars of the current plan, not treated as a side issue. That mainstreaming matters, and it should be preserved in the next cycle. But a foundation is not enough if the walls are crumbling around it.

The gap between words and practice

Here is the uncomfortable truth: the EU’s stated commitment to civil society is not matched by what actually happens with its money and its programmes.

A recent CONCORD study, Who Still Holds the Lion’s Share?, analysed over €26 billion in EU external action funding. The findings are striking. Only 10% of the budget reviewed is explicitly earmarked for civil society organisations. For 70% of the funding, there is simply no publicly available information to even assess whether any of it reaches civil society at all. Indirect management – where the EU delegates implementation to large pillar-assessed organisations such as UN agencies or development banks – now accounts for 62% of the budget, and CSOs are structurally excluded from this modality under EU financial rules.

The picture does not improve when you look at the EU’s flagship infrastructure investment initiative, the Global Gateway. On paper, democratic values and high standards are among the core principles guiding Global Gateway investments through the 360° approach.  In practice, it is difficult to ascertain the degree to which the principles are integrated in projects and with what impact. According to recent research by CONCORD, despite the stated importance of the 360° approach, its components do not yet constitute systematic features of investment-led cooperation, nor are they properly followed up and reported to the public. Additionally, the Global Gateway Civil Society and Local Authorities Advisory Platform has a mandate to “hold the EU to account for respecting and fulfilling EU values”, yet with no real influence over strategy, no say in project selection, and no mechanism to hold anyone accountable for the recommendations it makes, it is difficult to categorise it as anything more than another box-ticking exercise.

Meanwhile, the European Commission’s proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework would discontinue the dedicated Civil Society Organisations and Human Rights and Democracy Thematic Programmes: the very funding streams that currently provide the most accessible and predictable resources for civil society work. Removing them without a credible replacement would not simplify things. It would fragment support and weaken the partnerships that have been built over years.

Taken together, these trends point in a troubling direction: civil society is being slowly moved from the role of independent actor to that of occasional consultant. Present at the launch event. Absent from the decisions.

What the new Action Plan should set in motion

The Human Rights and Democracy Action Plan is not a funding instrument. But it is not without weight: endorsed by Member States, it defines what the EU publicly commits to on human rights and democracy, and holds institutions accountable for following through. That is precisely why the next plan needs to go further on civil society, not pull back. This matters all the more because CSOs are in fact a key channel for implementing the Action Plan itself: the majority of funding that does reach civil society flows through governance, human rights, and democracy programmes – exactly the areas the AP prioritises. Three things matter most:

1. First, name the threats honestly, including the ones closer to home. The new Action Plan should explicitly acknowledge that civic space is shrinking inside the European Union too, and that this has consequences beyond Europe’s borders. When EU Member States restrict foreign funding for NGOs, criminalise protest, or treat civil society as a political opponent, it undermines the EU’s credibility when it raises the same issues with partner countries. But this is not just a matter of political coherence. The EU has a legal obligation, under Article 11(2) of the Treaty on European Union, to engage with civil society both internally and externally. Protecting civil society actors inside the EU also directly legitimises their role in partner countries: when the EU tolerates restrictions at home, it weakens its own argument abroad.
   
   
2. Second, make the funding real. Political commitments without resources are just words. The new Global Europe Instrument should call on the EU to push for ring-fenced allocations, at least 15% of programmable external funding implemented by civil society organisations. It should also push back on the tendency to replace grants with financial instruments and blended finance in contexts where these tools simply do not work: fragile states, closed civic space environments, and organisations working with marginalised communities. For many of the most important human rights and democracy programmes, grant-based, flexible, multi-year funding is not a preference. It is a necessity. Equally, the instrument should explicitly recognise advocacy and network-building as legitimate activities for civil society under EU funding – not risks to be managed, but core contributions to democracy that the AP itself depends on.
   
   
3. Third, make engagement meaningful, not ceremonial. The European Union should ensure that EU delegations have the mandate, the capacity, and the resources to work with local civil society, including organisations led by and representing women, people with disabilities, LGBTIQ+ communities, and other marginalised groups. In this regard, the ongoing restructuring of EU Delegations is a real and immediate risk: if it reduces the presence and capacity of CSO and human rights focal points on the ground, it will make meaningful engagement harder in exactly the places where it matters most. To make this engagement real, the EU should support a strong programming process that involves civil society throughout the project cycle and in human rights dialogue – not only at the start of a programme, and not only with the same well-connected organisations in capital cities – ensuring the plan is actually implemented through and with the people it is meant to empower.

The opportunity ahead: building on a strong foundation

The EU has built something worth defending in its Human Rights and Democracy Action Plan. The recognition that civil society is not just a service provider but a democratic actor in its own right, that civic space matters, that human rights defenders need protection, and that independent CSOs are essential to resilient societies, is the right framework.

But frameworks only hold if the EU is willing to back them up.

The renewal of the Action Plan is a moment to do exactly that. To close the gap between the EU’s stated values and its actual practices. To move civil society from the footnotes of policy documents to the centre of implementation. And to acknowledge that you cannot credibly champion democracy abroad while sidelining the people who build it.

This piece draws on CONCORD’s advocacy work on the EU Civil Society Strategy (September 2025), the MFF Analysis (December 2025), Who Still Holds the Lion’s Share? (March 2026), and Unlocking the Potential of the EU’s Global Gateway: Meaningful Engagement with Civil Society (March 2026).

The project “Towards an open, fair and sustainable Europe in the world – EU Presidency Project 2024-2026” is  co-funded  by the European Union and implemented by Global Focus, Grupa Zagranica, CARDET, and CONCORD, the European Confederation of NGOs working on sustainable development and international cooperation. Project Number: 2024 / 459-484. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of CARDET and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.

Acknowledgment Article Contributions: Salomé Guibreteau and Jaimie Just

Camilla Falsetti,
Communications and Media Adviser, CONCORD

The article was published at the PolicyPress.

In 2026, the concepts of the rule of law, democracy, and human rights continue to constitute fundamental values of Europe and the international community. However, contemporary developments on a global scale raise legitimate concerns regarding their protection and effective implementation.

Ongoing conflicts, humanitarian crises, hate speech, and attacks against vulnerable social groups, such as the LGBTQI community, highlight the serious challenges currently facing human rights. According to a recent survey by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 14% of LGBTQI individuals in Europe reported having been victims of physical or sexual assault over the past five years, an increase compared to previous years, demonstrating that, despite institutional progress, the social reality remains alarming.

At the same time, the questioning of democratic institutions, pressures on the independence of the judiciary, and limited tolerance toward differing opinions further intensify concerns regarding the safeguarding of the rule of law. In its 2025 Annual Rule of Law Report, the European Commission notes that, despite reforms implemented in several Member States, significant challenges persist in areas such as media freedom, transparency, institutional checks and balances, and the protection of civil society.

The rule of law, democracy, and human rights are inextricably linked. The existence of democratic institutions presupposes respect for fundamental freedoms, while the effective protection of human rights strengthens democratic participation and social cohesion. Likewise, institutional independence and freedom of expression constitute essential prerequisites for maintaining a strong rule of law.

At the same time, the spread of disinformation, the targeting of journalists, and the rise of extremist narratives create an environment of heightened uncertainty for the democratic functioning of societies. Recent European reports record increasing pressures on media freedom and declining public trust in information institutions across several European countries.

In an era where words often seem to lose their true meaning and facts themselves become distorted, reminding many of the dystopian reality depicted in “1984” by George Orwell, the need to defend democratic values becomes even more urgent. Safeguarding the rule of law and human rights is not only the responsibility of states and institutions, but also the collective duty of every democratic society.

Within this context, alongside the actions of the Cypriot Presidency of the Council of the EU, the European programme EU Presidency Project 5 (EUPP5), implemented in Cyprus by CARDET, contributes to strengthening democracy and the rule of law by promoting the active participation of civil society in public dialogue and decision-making processes. Through collaboration among citizens, organisations, and institutions, as well as the organisation of workshops and public discussions on critical issues, transparency and participatory governance are reinforced, thereby contributing to the protection of democratic values and fundamental rights in Europe. Preserving an open, inclusive, and tolerant Europe depends on constant vigilance against every form of authoritarianism, discrimination, and restriction of fundamental freedoms.

Therefore, within an environment marked by uncertainty and challenges, the protection of human rights remains a beacon of hope, democracy, and change for a society founded on respect, equality, and human dignity.

The project “Towards an open, fair and sustainable Europe in the world – EU Presidency Project 2024-2026” is co-funded by the European Union and implemented by Global Focus, Grupa Zagranica, CARDET, and CONCORD, the European Confederation of NGOs working on sustainable development and international cooperation. Project Number: 2024 / 459-484. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of CARDET and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.  

Foteini Sokratous,
Project Manager, CARDET

The article was published at the PolicyPress.

In the world of strategic communication and marketing, we know well that trust is the only currency with real value. Today, Artificial Intelligence, while acting as a driving force for innovation, has simultaneously evolved into the most effective tool for the spread of hybrid threats. Disinformation is no longer an amateur effort aimed at impression-making; rather, it has become an industrialized operation targeting the erosion of institutions and the destabilization of the democratic sphere. From our position as professionals working in the field of information management, we must recognize that protecting the truth is our duty in order to ensure social cohesion.

Digital Erosion and Hybrid Threats

The use of algorithms to generate convincing yet false narratives creates an environment in which the average citizen struggles to distinguish fact from fabrication. This “gap” creates opportunities for exploitation by organized crime and terrorism, while corruption accelerates. With the sheer speed of the digital space, it becomes easy to spread fear or conceal illegal activities. Therefore, the field of cybersecurity cannot be limited to the protection of systems alone; it must also extend to safeguarding the integrity of information itself.

Strategic Solutions and Dynamic Resilience

The transition from merely diagnosing the problem to effectively fortifying against it requires concrete, actionable solutions. A modern democracy must operate with the reflexes of an organism in a constant state of readiness. Crisis preparedness and management in the digital age now rely heavily on our ability to anticipate attacks before they occur. With the help of predictive analytics, we can identify behavioral patterns that signal an impending hybrid attack on infrastructure or a coordinated attempt to manipulate electoral processes.

At the same time, investment in “reverse verification” systems is essential, where Artificial Intelligence itself acts as an auditor, identifying the source and authenticity of content before it influences public opinion. However, the solution is not only technical or technological, but also structural. A robust legislative framework is required to enforce transparency in the algorithms of major platforms, ensuring the protection of citizens’ rights in the digital space. Resilience is not a static condition, but a dynamic process of continuous reinforcement.

Digital Rights as a Value-Based Shield

In our effort to safeguard society, we must not sacrifice the principles that make it free. The protection of rights in the digital space must remain our red line. The use of Artificial Intelligence for security purposes must be governed by transparency and ethics, ensuring that technology serves to protect citizens rather than becoming a tool for indiscriminate surveillance.

Return to Authenticity

For those of us engaged in strategic communication, the message is clear: responding to technological deception requires not only more technology, but also greater authenticity. Safeguarding democracy against hybrid threats and crises can only be achieved when citizens themselves feel safe, informed, and protected. The challenge is to use Artificial Intelligence as a “verification shield”, restoring the value of truth in a digital world that risks losing it.

The project “Towards an open, fair and sustainable Europe in the world – EU Presidency Project 2024-2026” is co-funded by the European Union and implemented by Global Focus, Grupa Zagranica, CARDET, and CONCORD, the European Confederation of NGOs working on sustainable development and international cooperation. Project Number: 2024 / 459-484. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of CARDET and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.  

Ourania Pavlou
Head of Marketing and Communications, CARDET

The article was published at the PolicyPress.

Young people as part of the solution

Across Europe, many young people say they feel overwhelmed by crises, stigma, and uncertainty – yet a significant share also say they want to actively support the well‑being of others. In other words, the same generation carrying a heavy mental health burden is also ready to be part of the solution.

In mental health, we often focus on professionals, clinics, and individual treatment plans. These are vital. But if young people are not part of deciding what support should look like, even the most sophisticated system can miss the mark. Under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, children and young people have the right to be heard in all matters affecting them – and mental health policy clearly falls within that scope.

A new direction for Cyprus

Through the EU‑funded project “Supporting Mental Health and Care for the Well‑Being of Vulnerable Children and Youth,” implemented by UNICEF and CARDET Center Center with the support European Commission, Cyprus has taken an important step in changing how decisions on youth mental health are made. Youth participation was built into the heart of the reform: it was not an “add‑on”, it was part of how the system was governed.

The Cyprus Youth Council sat as a full member of the Project Steering Committee alongside the Ministry of Health, the Youth Board of Cyprus, and European Commission and UNICEF. Young people were also formally included in the National Mental Health Strategy Working Groups, where they discussed evidence, debated recommendations, and helped shape the final strategy. They did not just “validate” conclusions; they influenced them.

From consultation to co‑governance

Too often, youth participation is limited to a survey or a one‑off focus group. These tools are useful, but they are not enough. Meaningful participation begins when young people sit at the same tables where decisions are taken and have clear roles, responsibilities, and follow‑up.

In the Cyprus reform, youth representatives came prepared with consultation results, policy proposals, and lived experiences gathered from diverse youth communities, including those facing socio‑economic challenges or exclusion. They helped identify gaps in services, contributed to research and outreach, and took part in governance meetings that oversee implementation. Participation became a collective process, not a token invitation to one or two “youth voices”.

Learning from European practice

Low‑threshold youth mental health services across Europe already show what it looks like when young people are trusted as partners, not just patients. Models such as @ease in the Netherlands, Jigsaw in Ireland, Peaasi in Estonia, and soulspace in Germany offer walk‑in, youth‑friendly spaces where peer supporters and young volunteers play a central role in early support. These hubs prove that when services are co‑designed with young people, more of their peers feel safe enough to seek help early.

Despite their differences, these initiatives share a core principle: young people are involved in how services are designed, communicated, and delivered. They serve on advisory groups, help shape opening hours and communication, and act as bridges between professional systems and their communities. Cyprus can draw inspiration from these models as it strengthens its own low‑threshold, youth‑friendly services and peer support networks.

A call to action for Cyprus

Cyprus is already on the map of countries that treat youth participation in mental health as a serious governance tool, not just a public relations exercise. The new Youth Engagement Framework and #ΜίλαΑνοιχτά #ΕίναιΟΚoτιΝιώθεις youth‑led awareness campaign co-designed with young people show what is possible when political will meets structured mechanisms.

The next step is to deepen and widen this approach: into schools, youth centers, digital spaces, local services, prevention programmes, and community‑based supports where peer supporters stand side by side with professionals. For public institutions, this means opening decision‑making spaces and resourcing youth structures to participate meaningfully. For professionals and civil society, it means recognising young people as partners with expertise rooted in lived experience.

And for young people themselves, it is an invitation: your voice is needed not only to describe the problems you face, but to design the solutions that will carry Cyprus into a more inclusive, mentally healthy future. If we want mental health strategies that work, we must co‑create them – not for young people, but with them.

Diamando Zisimopoulou,
Project and Policy Officer, Cyprus Youth Council

Contributions: Anahit Minassian, Youth Mental Health Technical Support Coordinator at UNICEF Europe and Central Asia

---

About the Project

The project Supporting Mental Health Resilience among Youth in Cyprus is funded by the European Commission via the Technical Support Instrument (TSI) and implemented by UNICEF in collaboration with the Ministry of Health of Cyprus. CARDET coordinates the research component with the support of the Youth Board of Cyprus (ONEK) and the Cyprus Youth Council (CYC). Project Reference: ECARO/PCA202294/SPD2024252

As the European Union enters a period of intense geopolitical shifts and fiscal pressures, the discussion on the priorities of the current Cypriot Presidency of the Council of the EU becomes critically important. While the agenda often focuses on security and the digital transition, there is one area that touches the very core of human dignity and social cohesion: health and patients’ rights.

In Cyprus, the implementation of the General Healthcare System (GeSY) has been a landmark social achievement, grounded in the principle of solidarity and universal coverage. However, the existence of a system does not automatically guarantee the full safeguarding of its users’ rights in every aspect of their lives. True democracy in health requires continuous improvement, protection of the welfare state, and above all, the active participation of citizens themselves in shaping the policies that affect them.

Within this context, the European project EU Presidency Project 5 (EUPP5), implemented in Cyprus by the research centre CARDET, acts as a bridge. It conveys the concerns and proposals of civil society to decision-making centres, ensuring that citizens’ voices contribute actively and constructively to shaping a fairer European agenda.

Such a meaningful intervention took place last April.

Through the “Open Dialogue Series” organised by CARDET on the topic “Patients’ Rights in Cyprus”, a platform for vibrant public dialogue was created, highlighting both the immense potential and the challenges of the current system. Moderated by journalist Mr. Constantinos Constantinou, the speakers—Ms. Marina Nicolaou, Member of Parliament and member of the Parliamentary Health Committee, and Mr. Eftychios Papamichael, Secretary General of EKYSY,—addressed the issues that concern the grassroots of our society on a daily basis.

One of the main conclusions of the consultation was the need for a system that effectively protects the most vulnerable groups of the population. Despite significant progress, the cost of certain medications continues to create inequalities, placing a particular burden on low-income pensioners and patients with chronic conditions.

At the same time, the pressing needs in the field of mental health highlight the state’s obligation to substantially strengthen public structures for rehabilitation, reintegration, and support. No patient should feel helpless.

The importance of these consultations, however, extends beyond our national borders. As the EU advances the vision of a “European Health Union”, with the central aim of strengthening the resilience of public health systems, the experiences of Cypriot patients and the evidence-based proposals of civil society can make a meaningful contribution to this dialogue.

By leveraging the momentum of the current Cypriot Presidency, we have the opportunity to showcase the social dimension of Europe, demonstrating in practice that citizens’ true security is inherently linked to social justice and equal access to healthcare. It is precisely here that civil society, through organisations such as CARDET and initiatives like EUPP5, proves to be the catalyst that transforms policy declarations into tangible results. Active citizen participation is not merely a right, but the cornerstone of a resilient welfare state.

Health is a public good, and the protection of patients’ rights must remain at its core. Only through participatory democracy, empathy, and tangible solidarity can we build a society—and a Europe—that truly leaves no one behind.

The project “Towards an open, fair and sustainable Europe in the world – EU Presidency Project 2024-2026” is  co-funded  by the European Union and implemented by Global Focus, Grupa Zagranica, CARDET, and CONCORD, the European Confederation of NGOs working on sustainable development and international cooperation. Project Number: 2024 / 459-484. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of CARDET and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.   

Nikolas Athinis,
CARDET Project Manager

The article was published at the PolicyPress.

Private capital is gaining ground in development finance, but without sustained public  investment and structural reform, development finance will never meet its ultimate goal of poverty eradication.

Across policy spaces and international forums, one question keeps returning: how do we finance sustainable development in a world where needs are rising, and public budgets are under pressure?

One approach gaining traction is blended finance. By using public funds to reduce risk, it aims to attract private investment into sectors and regions that would otherwise struggle to access capital. The idea is simple: stretch limited public resources and unlock new flows of funding. And while the concept is appealing, its impact remains limited, and it is far from sufficient to close the growing financing gap.

According to the OECD, the global gap for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals is estimated to be 4 trillion USD annually and expected to rise in the coming years reaching 6,4 trillion USD in 2030. At the same time, development aid is declining. Governments across the globe are cutting aid budgets. In 2025 alone, every fifth dollar of development assistance was cut, including significant reductions for the world’s  most vulnerable countries.

Blended finance is often presented as part of the solution. Yet in practice, the scale is still modest. Estimates suggest that only between 15 and 70 billion USD was mobilized globally in 2023, far below what is needed amounting to 4200 billion USD. Even at the highest estimate, blended finance accounts for less than 2 percent of the total financing gap.

The challenge is not only about the money available, but also about how the global economic system is structured.

Many countries receiving development finance face high debt levels, limited fiscal space, and unstable capital flows. At the same time, large amounts of wealth remain untaxed or are shifted across borders. Each year, an estimated 500 billion USD in tax revenue is lost globally – more than global official development aid. 

This matters for the debate on development finance because if structural imbalances are not approached, the gap between the available finance and the needs will persist – regardless of how much private funding gets mobilised.

Blended finance can play an important role by supporting investments in areas such as renewable energy and infrastructure, and it can contribute to stimulating markets where they might not otherwise exist. However, it is not an all-encompassing tool, and it cannot replace public finance that remains essential for basic services and rights such as health, education and social protection, as well as strengthening institutions and governance.

A recent study from the Danish civil society platform Global Focus reveals that private capital mobilized in Denmark has mainly supported financial services, large infrastructure projects and energy transition project, while less than 2 percent of the blended finance has been directed towards health, education and sanitation. The same picture emerges in Oxfam, Counterbalance and Eurodad’s examination of EU funding under the high-profile blended finance initiative Global Gateway with the large majority of projects being on climate and energy, closely followed by transport.

The point is not to reject blended finance, but to be clear about what it can and cannot deliver.

Closing the financing gap requires both sustained and predictable public investment and realistic expectations of private capital. But it also requires concrete steps towards a fairer global economic system including stronger tax cooperation and a more sustainable approach to debt. These are not competing priorities; they are interconnected.

As global discussions on development and climate finance continue, the challenge is not only to mobilise more money, but to ensure that it works for those who need it most. Blended finance may be part of the answer, but it cannot close the gap on its own.

The project “Towards an open, fair and sustainable Europe in the world – EU Presidency Project 2024-2026” is co-funded by the European Union and implemented by Global Focus, Grupa Zagranica, CARDET, and CONCORD, the European Confederation of NGOs working on sustainable development and international cooperation. Project Number: 2024 / 459-484. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of CARDET and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.

Read more in Globalt Focus’ new analysis on blended finance: https://globaltfokus.dk/images/Analyser/Blended%20finance_English%20version.pdf

Signe Marie Obel,
Policy Advisor, Global Focus

The article was published at the PolicyPress.