Freedom of assembly

Civil society representatives agreed that freedom of assembly was well protected in Czech law. One representative referred to the "Million Moments for Democracy" movement which had not been hindered by the authorities since its creation in 2018. A few cases of excessive use of power by the police had been brought to Court in the past few years and proceedings were ongoing. During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, mass gatherings were restricted but the threshold of the number of demonstrators allowed was adapted to the evolution of the situation.

Participants indicated that there was no legal restriction to freedom of association, but that concrete obstacles had increased in recent years. There was a trend towards more distrust of CSOs amongst the general public and a risk of polarisation of Czech society on this topic. Some politicians indeed adopted a confrontational attitude, claiming to be the only legitimate voices of society and denying the role of CSOs. They labelled CSOs active beyond the sphere of social services or sport as "political CSOs" and claimed that they lacked transparency. On this point, the Czech authorities noted that the positions of individual politicians were not those of the government, and the official work of the authorities aimed 
to support an enabling environment for all CSOs.

In such a context, access to funding had become increasingly challenging for CSOs. Participants explained that the majority of the budget allocated to civil society activities went to sport, at the expense of other topics, especially those related to non-discrimination, human rights, and advocacy. They felt that areas like the environment or the fight against corruption were underfunded and that it was particularly difficult to obtain funding for "hot" topics like gender equality or Roma integration. Participants pointed to the 2020 gap between the two EU Multiannual Financial Frameworks, which disrupted the work of CSOs and created an additional burden for them to find co-financing. A participant also pointed to important administrative and bureaucratic barriers in the registration process of CSOs. Reference was also made to studies showing that most CSOs considered that their activities had been seriously impacted by the COVID-19 crisis. The Czech authorities mentioned that funding was available for CSOs to lead anti-corruption awareness campaigns and that the Government AntiCorruption Council was also open to CSOs.

Participants felt that access to decision making needed to be improved. They considered that the government's strategy on cooperation with civil society was good but that it needed to be better implemented. CSOs were formally part of advisory committees but the nomination procedures differed amongst administrations in charge. CSOs considered that there was a lack of representativeness of their sector and regretted that authorities could freely decide to consider or discard CSO contributions without proper feedback. Over the last few years, some CSO representatives had resigned from the advisory body composed of CSOs and government officials. The Office of the Public Defender of Rights as an institution offered very good cooperation with CSOs. However, CSOs criticised the controversial public positions taken by the mandate holder. They considered that the Public Rights Defender's refusal to deal with some issues like minorities, and in particular Roma people, hindered the overall trust in the institution and its authority. On a more operational level, CSOs in the environment field faced restrictions in accessing land planning or related decision-making processes.

Participants also considered that the COVID-19 crisis further affected the effectiveness of CSO consultation procedures. CSOs considered that they were not properly involved in the preparation of the Czech National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) and that they had to turn directly to Brussels to obtain information.