For the first time, troubling details are coming to light about how the European Commission is funding non-governmental organizations and civil society groups aligned with its political agenda. This strategy, resourced by several million euros, is being deployed particularly in sensitive areas such as online hate speech and gender ideology.
europeanconservative.com has obtained access to various documents, including a recent European Commission tender valued at €4.4 million and specifically aimed at “supporting, preventing, and countering illegal hate speech, particularly online.” This project aims to strengthen the “Code of Conduct on hate speech,” a voluntary regulation agreed upon with digital platforms to remove problematic content. Although the declared goal is to protect fundamental rights and prevent social conflicts, the true scope of this initiative raises serious concerns regarding its potential impact on freedom of expression and democratic debate in Europe.
The tender published by the EU Commission explicitly stipulates that contractors must create and manage a “European Knowledge Centre on Hate Speech,” a platform that will include a centralized database of reported cases of alleged hate speech. According to the official document, this catalog will have restricted access. It will be administered by a carefully selected network of civil organizations whose role will be to monitor and identify specific cases that can be reported to technology platforms adhering to the EU’s Code of Conduct. The database will categorize this content according to multiple criteria, including “anti-Semitism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, hatred against LGBTIQ persons, and misogyny,” as well as recording the language and type of content.
Noticeably, hatred against Christians is neither included nor expected, despite Christianity being the continent’s majority religion and the most persecuted religious group worldwide.
These organizations will not be independent (‘non-governmental)’: they are funded and selected by the Commission itself, inevitably calling their neutrality and credibility into question. The contract description specifies that any organization participating in this network must strictly adhere to “the fundamental values and rights defined by the Commission itself,” limiting pluralistic and critical participation in the project.
Furthermore, as part of this framework, events and activities will be organized in key cities such as Brussels and Dublin. An annual conference in Dublin, coinciding with the International Day Against Hate Speech, will bring together representatives from digital platforms and Commission-funded organizations. Workshops and specific training for police and judicial officials are also planned in cities such as Paris, Rome, or Budapest, officially aimed at “enhancing national capacities to prosecute hate speech crimes,” but whose practical effect could lead to the imposition of criteria defined by Brussels on national sovereignty.
This strategy is complemented by parallel initiatives of the Council of Europe, an institution distinct but politically close to the EU, which has launched another tender worth €4.5 million for consultancy on sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression (SOGIESC).
These joint actions reveal a troubling modus operandi: European institutions not only finance ideologically aligned initiatives but also create structures (such as the “Democracy Shield”) which, although presented as defensive mechanisms against alleged external interference, could in practice, serve to directly intervene in internal democratic processes, censoring contrary discourses and creating covert political control over national debates.
The combined effect of these initiatives poses a direct challenge to national sovereignty and democratic pluralism in Europe. By deciding what constitutes legitimate speech and what should be silenced, the EU is creating a dangerous infrastructure to limit dissenting voices, strategically supporting NGOs to give a false appearance of democratic legitimacy to its political decisions.
Commenting on the actions to europeanconservative.com, the legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom said:
Democracy is impossible without free speech.
The argument that in order to “save democracy” we must kill it by cracking down on freedom of expression, is totally contradictory.
Europe must give up the attempt to impose their power and control on others and allow free speech to be protected online, especially as the global nature of social media means a threat to free speech anywhere is a threat to free speech everywhere.
Meanwhile, in America, the new administration has made its commitment to free speech clear.So, it’s all the more important to end attempts to impose censorship in Europe now, to avoid unprecedented tensions within the West on the fundamental human right of freedom of expression.
The seriousness of this situation lies in the fact that democratic and judicial mechanisms proper to each member state for handling sensitive issues such as freedom of expression or education in values are not being adequately respected. Instead of fostering open democratic debate, European institutions use economic power and political influence to shape public opinion through entities funded directly or indirectly from Brussels.
What should be a legitimate and transparent effort to protect fundamental rights has become a covert operation to impose an ideological agenda and censor uncomfortable discourses.
