—

a safe and enabling environment for civil society;

—

sustainability and independence (through funding); and

—

stronger civic participation and civil dialogue (by structuring and reinforcing existing mechanisms).

—

guide dialogues (facilitated by the governing bodies) on democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law, and later contribute to key political processes, for example to the Commission’s annual work programme;

—

be host to an annual civil dialogue conference to present and refine draft recommendations together with all involved stakeholders;

—

monitor civil dialogue through an annual scoreboard, feeding into biennial civil dialogue reports; and

—

lay the groundwork for an interinstitutional agreement on civil dialogue, facilitated by the EESC, to ensure consistent civil dialogue practices across EU institutions and following the principles listed in point 3.7.1.

—

EESC Information report on The Citizens’ Europe of 8 April 1992, which opened the topic of dialogue with citizens and their representatives.

—

Own-initiative opinion on The role and contribution of civil society organisations in the building of Europe of 22 September 1999, which stimulated and accompanied the adoption of Article 11 TEU.

—

The creation of the Liaison Group in 2004 (with European civil society organisations and networks) to provide a framework for political dialogue and cooperation on cross-cutting issues of common interest. The group is made up of EESC members and 47 European organisations and networks. It should be noted that the EESC was the first EU body to adopt a participatory democracy process.

—

The annual Civil Society Week event hosted by the EESC to engage with civil society organisations and civil society in a broader sense to foster dialogue on key issues facing Europe. The EESC is the house of organised civil society, providing a platform for these groups to voice their opinions and contribute to EU policy-making.

—

The establishment of the Ad hoc group on the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) in 2013, which is tasked with steering the EESC’s policy on the ECI and making recommendations for institutional actions to further develop this instrument. The ad hoc group maintains regular contacts with both ECI organisers and civil society organisations that actively support the ECI and active citizenship. Several of these are permanent partners in the EESC’s flagship annual event, ECI Day (held during Civil Society Week since 2024).

—

The EESC’s external relations bodies, which monitor the EU’s trade and development policies through dialogue with civil society organisations from the non-EU countries and regions with which the EU has formal relations.

—

The establishment of the Ad-hoc group on Fundamental Rights and the Rule of Law in 2018 to counter the rise of populism and shrinking civil society spaces. The FRRL group aims to assess the state of fundamental rights, democracy and rule of law in the Member States. It pays particular attention to the rights that are key to civil society, including the social partners, such as freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of expression (including freedom of the media), the right to non-discrimination, and the more general rule-of-law situation. Its final annual report feeds into the Commission’s annual Rule of Law Report.

—

The EESC’s long cultivation of a network of national economic and social councils (NESCs). These links helps build trust between citizens, civil society and public authorities, and ensure economic and social stakeholder participation in public decision-making.

—

EESC opinion SOC/526 of October 2016, which first put forth the possibility to convene an annual forum for CSOs to discuss democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law. In SOC/627, adopted in June 2019 (5), the EESC reiterated its proposal to establish an ‘EU-level annual forum on fundamental rights and the rule of law’.

—

Proposal 39 of the Conference on the Future of Europe, held between 2021 and 2022, which recommends ‘reform[ing] the way the European Union works by better involving social partners and organised civil society. Strengthening the existing structures in order to better reflect the needs and expectations of EU citizens in the decision-making process, given their importance in the European democracy life. Within this framework, enhance[ing] the institutional role of the EESC and empower[ing] it as facilitator and guarantor of participation democracy activities like structured dialogue with civil society organisations and citizen panels’. It goes on to say that ‘a lively civil society is crucial for the democratic life of the European Union’. Proposal 36 recommends including ‘organised civil society and regional authorities and existing structures such as the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the Committee of the Regions (CoR) in the citizens participation process’.

—

EESC opinion SOC/728 on The EU Youth Test, which is a tool designed to strengthen youth participation and youth mainstreaming in policy-making based on consultation, impact assessment and mitigation measures, making the EESC the first EU institution committed to its implementation. At the EESC, this means involving youth representatives in opinions. In April 2024, the EESC Bureau approved a methodology drafted by the EESC Youth Group for applying the EU Youth Test at the EESC.

—

The 2017 establishment of the EESC’s Ad hoc group on the European Semester, which is a horizontal body that strengthens and supports the work carried out in the EESC’s sections. It focuses on examining proposals from European civil society on sustainable growth and employment, ensuring a continuous EESC contribution to the annual European Semester cycle.

—

EESC opinion SOC/782 on Strengthening civil dialogue and participatory democracy in the EU: a path forward, which is a strategic opinion on civil dialogue that was adopted in February 2024 and includes many essential elements for creating a strategy for civil dialogue.

—

The EESC’s involvement in either organising or facilitating different civil society contributions and platforms, such as the European Migration Forum (EMF), the Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform (together with the Commission) and the youth round tables. During the implementation of the UN Agenda 2030, the EESC facilitated civil society’s contribution to the first EU voluntary review.

—

a safe and enabling environment for civil society;

—

sustainability and independence (through funding); and

—

stronger civic participation and civil dialogue (by structuring and fostering existing mechanisms and at EU level through a civil society platform, as described below).

—

promoting and communicating the role and specific features of organised civil society as a key pillar for democracy, cohesion, participation and social innovation at regional, national and European levels;

—

developing a protection mechanism for civil society players and human rights defenders within the EU;

—

strengthening the role of the EESC as a hub, bridge-builder, channel and facilitator for organised civil society at EU, international and national levels; and by

—

adopting the European Commission’s proposal for a directive on European cross-border associations (ECBAs) and discussing developing a similar legal instrument for foundations.

—

multi-annual, consistent and flexible funding is accessible for civil society players, and that adequate resources are provided in the multiannual financial framework;

—

CSOs are involved in implementing, monitoring and evaluating funding programmes that are relevant to them;

—

administrative, regulatory and fiscal obstacles to access to funding and donations are overcome, including across borders;

—

all laws that affect CSOs and their activities are fully compliant with EU and international legal obligations and fundamental rights, and that CSOs are consulted on legislative changes that affect them;

—

measures that restrict access to funding are not implemented, and that administrative, legal and financial mechanisms are not misused to restrict public participation, civic action or media freedom;

—

people are encouraged to report harassment or attacks against CSOs and human rights defenders, and that these violations are properly recorded, investigated and prosecuted to uphold the rule of law;

—

EU laws on protecting organised civil society are properly enforced, including through interim measures where necessary; and that

—

CSOs are supported through sustainable funding for their work and capacity-building mechanisms.

—

It must be meaningful. Civil dialogue is meant to be a real and concrete part of the decision-making process that provides for genuine exchanges and space for CSOs to express their views. It should be real, and not a simple window dressing for democracy.

—

It must be results-oriented and provide for civil involvement, both in debates on the aims and the content of legislative measures and provisions that concern civil society, and during the evaluation stages.

—

It must be regular.

—

It must be transparent, with publicly available rules and criteria on how stakeholders are selected and what the dialogue will cover, and ensure CSOs have access to all relevant information.

—

It must be legitimate. CSO accreditation must be based on real legitimacy and representativeness. CSOs must abide by the principles of internal democracy, autonomy, independence and transparency, follow a not-for-profit model, and work in the service of either general interests or specific interest groups.

—

It must allow all parties to share ideas. CSOs must be able to integrate their own initiatives and priorities into Member State and European institution agendas. Jointly deciding on dialogue timelines can increase impact and prevent capacity issues on all sides.

—

It must be inclusive and representative, particularly of the most vulnerable. Ensuring a Union of equality means ensuring that gender, LGBTIQ+, migrant, disability and Roma perspectives are considered.

—

It must be structured and coordinated. A coordinating service should be involved in the work and proposals of the CSOs.

—

It should involve an outcome and follow-up. At European level, the EU institutions should react to CSO contributions via a public scoreboard, detailing follow-up action or explaining why no action was taken. Feedback from participants should also be collected.

—

For the Council, the European Semester should be used, in addition to any other tool for continuous dialogue.

—

For the European Parliament, the role of the delegated vice-president and the ability to influence within the parliamentary groups and committees should be strengthened.

—

For the European Commission, the efforts of the delegated commissioner should be coordinated with the Directorates-General (DGs).

—

For the EESC, the role of the Liaison Group should be strengthened.

—

a report, to be drafted every second year, on the activities of the strategy and all civil dialogue activities carried out through the platform and by each DG;

—

setting up an annual scoreboard, in the form of a public forum for discussions on the results of the follow-up activities to the dialogues; and

—

an annual forum, organised in partnership with the European Commission, which could be part of Civil Society Week.

—

guide dialogues (facilitated by the governing bodies) on democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law, and later steer contributions to key political processes, such as the European Commission’s annual work programme;

—

be host to an annual civil dialogue conference, possibly during European Civil Society Week, to present and refine draft recommendations together with all involved stakeholders;

—

monitor civil dialogue through an annual scoreboard, feeding into biennial civil dialogue reports; and

—

contribute to the interinstitutional agreement.