Freedom of association

A CSO representative presented findings of a 2021 report on abuse of power by the police in the context of assemblies. This report found that the 2020 legislative reforms regulating assemblies during the COVID period had been problematic in several respects. They had allowed the police to disperse peaceful assemblies on the grounds of an isolated act of violence – instead of concentrating the response on the individual provoking violence. The report indicated that peaceful protestors had been arrested apparently after having been randomly picked up by the police purely for being part of a rally going out of control. The report also considered that the obligatory regime of notifying the authorities of assemblies was below international standards, as was the fact that assemblies could be banned on the basis of broad references to protection of public order. It also pointed to the fact that the blanket bans on assemblies during the COVID period, in November and December 2020, as well as in January-February 2021, had led to protestors being arrested. The participant in question felt that the authorities considered abuse of power by police to be isolated cases and failed to show clear political willingness to address such a systematic issue and the general judicial impunity surrounding it. The Greek authorities indicated that possible abuses of force by the police were dealt with at several levels, through an internal police mechanism, the Ombudsman and the National Transparency Authority.

Participants felt that civil society had been impacted by years of austerity measures and that the effects had become almost permanent in this sector, as in the rest of society. The health system, labour 3 rights and vulnerable groups were presented as having been hit by several waves, with the COVID crisis following austerity measures.

In that context, participants regretted the rise of a suspicious narrative against civil society, in particular organisations and individuals working with migrants, including asylum seekers, which sometimes led to the individual targeting of CSO workers. They also regretted a lack of trust between CSOs and authorities and felt that the most active and vocal CSOs did not benefit from public funding, leading to an overall weakening and division of civil society. Access to public funding – especially for sums over EUR 50 000 – was subject to heavy financial audit requirements costing thousands of euro, which greatly complicated access to any funds for small or medium CSOs. Participants acknowledged that public consultation of CSOs existed but they regretted that it was generally too quick to be meaningful. Participants talked about the mandatory registry for CSOs working in the area of asylum and migration, established in 2020. They felt that demands set by authorities in that framework had become more and more strict and disproportionate with time, as had the scope of their responses. One such requirement concerned criminal records for employees and volunteers, which was seen as limiting the possibilities for reintegrating ex-offenders through employment. According to a participant, authorities could decide if a CSO was "beneficial" in the area of asylum and migration on the basis of vague criteria. Participants also regretted that a CSO could be deregistered if a deadline in the hefty registration procedure was not met. They considered that this situation indirectly affected migrants, including asylum seekers, as CSOs played a major role in them exercising their rights. The Greek authorities explained that their position with regard to the CSO registry was that no CSO failing to keep the law should be included in it or have access to it. Participants explained that Turkish and Macedonian minorities could not organise themselves as CSOs with explicit references to the name of their communities – a restriction which had been justified by the Supreme Court on grounds of protection of public order. Decisions by the European Court of Human Rights in that domain were not being implemented.