The Parliamentary Ombudsman of Malta, Judge Joseph Zammit McKeon, met Ms Leanne Smith, Chief Executive of the Australian Human Rights Commission, at the Office of the Ombudsman in Valletta.

During the meeting, the Ombudsman gave an overview of the institution’s functions and explained the Office’s ongoing efforts to advocate for Malta to establish a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI). He outlined the process through which the Office of the Ombudsman drafted and submitted a new Ombudsman Bill to Government in November 2024. The proposed legislation would widen the institution’s current remit to include the promotion and protection of human rights in line with the Paris Principles.

Judge Zammit McKeon also spoke about the upcoming international conference being organised by the Office of the Ombudsman in October 2025 to commemorate its 30th anniversary. One of the key panels at the conference, “Protecting the Vulnerable – The Role of the Ombudsman in Upholding Human Rights,” will feature several prominent speakers from the international Ombudsman and human rights community.

Ms Smith provided an overview of the work of the Australian Human Rights Commission, which serves as the country’s NHRI. She explained that the Commission investigates and conciliates human rights and discrimination complaints, advises government and parliament on human rights law and policy, raises awareness through national education and outreach campaigns, and conducts research and inquiries into systemic issues. The Commission also works with courts as amicus curiae in discrimination cases, provides guidance to employers on diversity and inclusion, and delivers international training programmes across the Asia-Pacific region. Additionally, the Commission monitors Australia’s compliance with its international human rights obligations and reports independently to the United Nations.

The meeting concluded with a shared commitment to cooperation and exchange between institutions. The Ombudsman remarked that “the observance of human rights comes from a caring society—if we stop caring, then there is a real risk.”

Nella cornice della Sala Tinozzi del Palazzo della Provincia di Pescara, si è svolto venerdì 03 Ottobre 2025 il primo appuntamento delle “Giornate di studio della Difesa Civica regionale”, organizzato dal Difensore Civico della Regione Abruzzo, Umberto Di Primio. L’incontro, parte di un percorso dedicato a valorizzare le esperienze e le buone pratiche della Difesa Civica, ha avuto come tema centrale:
“Conosci le Istituzioni…Conosci i Tuoi Diritti. Trent’anni di Difesa Civica in Abruzzo – Il silenzio della Pubblica Amministrazione: conseguenze e rimedi”, con l’obiettivo di approfondire le criticità e i rimedi legati all’accesso ai diritti dei cittadini.

Alla giornata hanno preso parte autorevoli rappresentanti istituzionali e giuridici:

• Nazario Pagano, Presidente della Prima Commissione della Camera dei Deputati;
• Marino Fardelli, Presidente del Coordinamento Nazionale dei Difensori Civici delle Regioni e Province Autonome Italiane;
• Giacomo Bernardi, Difensore Civico della Provincia autonoma di Trento;
• Angela Erspamer, Segretario del Comune di Montesilvano;
• Annarita Mantini, Procuratore Aggiunto presso la Procura della Repubblica di Pescara;
• Vincenzo di Baldassarre, Presidente TAR Abruzzo – Sezione Pescara.

“Sono estremamente soddisfatto di questa prima giornata di studio – ha dichiarato Umberto Di Primio Difensore Civico della Regione Abruzzo – che ci ha permesso di confrontarci con esperti e istituzioni sul tema del silenzio della pubblica amministrazione e delle sue conseguenze sui cittadini. Iniziative come questa rafforzano il ruolo della difesa civica e dimostrano quanto sia importante condividere esperienze e buone pratiche per garantire i diritti di tutti.”

L’evento ha rappresentato un’occasione significativa di dialogo e confronto sul ruolo della Difesa Civica, sulla tutela dei diritti dei cittadini e sulle buone pratiche regionali, con un focus particolare sulle criticità derivanti dal silenzio della Pubblica Amministrazione.

Marino Fardelli – Presidente del Coordinamento Nazionale, ha così dichiarato:
“Queste giornate di studio confermano quanto la difesa civica rappresenti un presidio fondamentale per i cittadini e per la trasparenza della pubblica amministrazione. Ringrazio calorosamente i colleghi abruzzesi per l’ospitalità e l’impegno nell’organizzazione di un evento così importante, che valorizza le esperienze regionali e rafforza la rete nazionale dei Difensori Civici.”

Il Coordinamento Nazionale dei Difensori Civici conferma il proprio impegno a promuovere iniziative di formazione e scambio di esperienze tra le diverse realtà regionali, rafforzando la tutela dei diritti dei cittadini in tutto il territorio nazionale.

El Defensor del Pueblo, Ángel Gabilondo, ha asistido este martes al desayuno informativo Nueva Economía Fórum ofrecido por la presidenta de Cruz Roja Española, María del Mar Pageo.

Durante su intervención la presidenta de Cruz Roja, que ha sido presentada por el presidente de Cáritas Española, Manuel Bretón, ha hecho un llamamiento para mantener la “sociedad humanitaria”. Así, ha asegurado que “estamos en un momento clave para plantearnos si queremos vivir en una sociedad humanitaria” y ha destacado que tenemos “la responsabilidad” de no caminar hacia la “deshumanización”.

Entre los asistentes al desayuno se encontraban el presidente de la Once, Miguel Carballeda, y la directora general de Protección Civil, Virginia Barcones.

The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) is concerned about the recent amendment to the Constitution of the Slovak Republic. The amendment introduces provisions that may conflict with the shared values and legal obligations underpinning the European Union. The constitutional changes risk undermining the principles of equality, human dignity, and respect for fundamental rights enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, as well as the commitments Member States have undertaken under the Treaty on European Union.

FRA recalls that by acceding to the European Union (EU), Member States have freely and voluntarily committed themselves to the shared values set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) – respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Constitutional changes that risk limiting equality or other fundamental rights challenge these common values and may weaken their protection across the Union.

The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, in its recent urgent opinion, warned that amendments referring to “national identity”, particularly in relation to “fundamental cultural and ethical issues”, must not provide grounds for discriminatory treatment and must remain consistent with the state’s duties under ECHR and EU law.

These developments are of particular concern for the rights of LGBTIQ+ people, which have come under pressure in other parts of the EU as well. They emerge against the backdrop of an already dire situation for LGBTIQ+ people in Slovakia. Evidence from FRA’s EU LGBTIQ Survey (2024) points to an increase of hate-motivated violence, harassment, and discrimination against LGBTIQ+ people in the country. Trans, non-binary and gender diverse, and intersex people are disproportionately affected.

The rights of LGBTIQ+ people have also come under pressure in other parts of the EU. Restrictions on parental rights for same sex couples, bans on LGBTIQ+ contents in schools, and restrictions on civil society work and the right to peaceful assembly have been imposed in several EU Member States. Such developments risk undermining the gradual progress enjoyed by some groups, and the increase of social acceptance of same-sex couples, as shown by recent FRA and Eurobarometer surveys.

In this context, FRA raises the following specific concerns:

• The amendment provides that only married couples, namely a man and a woman who are married (or in certain other specified legally recognised relationship) may adopt a child. This poses clear risks to the fundamental rights of same-sex couples. For instance, it restricts their right to form a family (C-127/08 Metock), and their freedom of movement by making it harder to move freely as a family across the EU (C-673/16 Coman).
• The amendment recognises only the “biologically determined sexes of male and female". This definition ignores the lived experiences of transgender, non-binary, gender diverse and intersex people, and may lead to discrimination and violations of their fundamental rights.
• The amendment introduces a requirement for parental consent for a child's participation in sex education. At a time when bullying and harassment of LGBTIQ+ people are frequent across the EU, such restrictions can make it harder for schools to provide objective, reliable and age-appropriate information. This can help promote understanding and respect and prevent hate and violence in schools.

FRA calls on EU Member States to:

• Ensure that all laws affecting LGBTIQ+ people are developed and implemented in full compliance with fundamental rights, and with EU and international law. Laws and measures should respond to the experiences of LGBTIQ+ people highlighted in FRA’s EU LGBTIQ Survey, and must ensure effective protection of their rights.
• Guarantee that the best interests of the child are prioritised in all decisions affecting children. This principle should be enshrined in the design and implementation of legislation and public policies, as required by the Charter and confirmed by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU).
• Balance conditions on sex education with the state's obligation to provide accessible, objective, and non-discriminatory education, and with the right of the child to receive information essential for their well-being and development, which is guaranteed by the Charter.
• Examine the impact of national legislation on international legal obligations, to avoid and address potential incoherence, fragmentation and legal uncertainty, which may undermine the rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights.
• Ensure effective legislative scrutiny and public consultation in the adoption of such measures, including with the EU, and national human rights and child protection bodies.

FRA also calls on EU institutions to:

• Act decisively to address the urgent need to protect fundamental rights under threat across the Union.
• ensure the effective implementation of rulings of the Court of Justice of the EU and the full respect of EU law. 

Transcript of the keynote speech delivered by Commissioner O’Flaherty at the 2025 Warsaw Human Dimension Conference on 06/10/2025

Chairperson, President of the Parliamentary Assembly, Secretary-General, leadership of the OSCE, Excellencies, friends,

Yesterday, I went to the new magnificent Museum of Modern Art here in Warsaw. And while wandering around, I stumbled on a set of portraits. They are known as the Helsinki Series. Portraits by the Polish artist Jurry Zielinski. Portraits of all the signatories of the Helsinki Final Act and they are quite striking.

In the first place, it is all men, a testimony to the reality back then.

Secondly, they are all men of an age. Every one of them was alive in the Second World War, many as adults. And I think that they knew that, and it was very much part of their presence in that room on that day.

And of course, they also came with many very diverse preoccupations. There was the then Portuguese President, Da Costa Gomes, who was literally in the death throes of the military dictatorship. There was President Archbishop Makarios of Cyprus, a world figure back then, who obviously was preoccupied with the situation of his island. And then to take my own country, Ireland, there was its Taoiseach, its Prime Minister, LiamCosgrave, preoccupied with the possible impact of Helsinki for the situation in Northern Ireland.

But notwithstanding all that diversity, one common thread, I think, was shared across every one of the signatories and that was the effort to bring about an end to the Cold War.

It is well beyond my capacity to assess how well that objective was delivered, but there were some successes delivered that I suggest were well beyond the imagination of the signatories.

I have in mind the delivery of so much of the third basket in terms of contributing to a culture of human rights on our continent. I have seen this personally over the years.

First, back in the 1990s in Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially the role of the OSCE field operation in terms of its contribution to embedding human rights and a culture of human rights, which in turn contributed to the consolidation of peace.

I have seen it across the years in how the High Commissioner for National Minorities has headed off conflict through often invisible and quiet diplomacy.

I have seen it in the work of the Representative on Freedom of the Media. I have seen how successive representatives have become global leaders on free speech.

And now in my current job, and most recently when I was Director of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency, I see it in the cooperation with ODIHR across multiple areas of human rights engagement. And the one common thread I see in all the cooperation with ODIHR is its deep expertise and its capacity to be listened to and to be impactful.

There is one further dimension of OSCE achievement I would like to mention, and that is one that was absolutely not in the minds of those original signatories, and that is the extent to which what was signed in 1975 triggered a burgeoning of civil society, of organisations established, inspired, driven on by the Helsinki Final Act. I want to acknowledge the vital role of that civil society ever since.

And now at 50, the stocktaking is well underway, and I very much appreciate the important conference in Helsinki during the summer. As we continue our stocktaking, I would like to mention five dimensions of why I see that the situation in our world today is quite frankly dreadful.

First, there is the violence, the violence all around us, in Ukraine, against Ukraine, in Gaza, elsewhere as well, as well as the persistent real risk for all of us of a nuclear war.

Second, I see the impact of COVID still under-acknowledged in terms of the extent to which it has harmed and damaged our societies, above all for young and old people, but for everybody else as well.

Third, and closely related, there is the rising levels of global inequality. The ten richest men in the world, and it is men, own more than the bottom 3.1 billion. This dreadful inequality is getting worse and is destabilising societies.

Fourth of my five, we have the onset of AI, with its remarkable capacity for good, but also its remarkable capacity for damage and for risk. All of this compounded, exacerbated, by the role of the private sector, with the entire industry driven ultimately by just five private businesses, all of them motivated not by the well-being of society, but by profit.

And final of my five, we have the triple planetary crisis, where arguably we have already gone past the tipping point.

To sum it all up, I would borrow the words of philosopher Paul Preciado, who has said recently that we are in a moment of dysphoria mundi.

The question then is how to engage the dysphoria. I greatly welcome the voices of the OSCE, including today, in terms of saying that the engagement with the dysphoria must be based on a profound commitment to multilateralism and respect for and insistence on respect for human rights.

But I ask, what would that look like in practise? Let me suggest 5 elements of what that would look like in its delivery. I am also describing what I am attempting to do in my role as Council of Europe Commissioner.

The first is that we must of existential significance, stand up for the human rights of the people of Ukraine. My focus right now is seeking to embed attention to human rights in the pathway to peace for Ukraine, something on which I recently published a Memorandum.

Second, we have to seek to embed human rights as we engage the great issues of the day.. It is why I welcome the recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights around issues of the climate.

My own focus has to do with AI and the need to push back against those loud voices saying, “less regulation, less control”. To the contrary, we need smart oversight directed to human well-being.

Third, there is the issue of who we focus our human rights efforts on. Who are the beneficiaries? It must be the most forgotten and marginalised people.

I spend a lot of my time working on and with the situation of the Roma communities. But it must also be about our general populations. We must work across our street to help show that human rights is about everyone, about my neighbour as much as somebody far distant.

In that way, not only do we do good, but we build communities of support for human rights and that is the context, for instance, of the need for efforts to tackle poverty and promote equality.

By the way, when here in Poland, I am reminded of the importance of this when I look back at the story of solidarity. Of the 21 demands that solidarity made in the Gdansk ship yards back in 1980, 18 of them, were about what we would describe as socio-economic rights.

A fourth and a penultimate consideration has to do with the way in which, not who we work with, but how we work with them. It is important that we be principled and consistent in standing up for international human rights law. My friends, it is not à la carte. Law cannot be ever subordinated to other considerations.

What am I thinking of? I am thinking of the way we behave increasingly on our borders. It is vital that we preserve the right to seek asylum, that we avoid the risk of refoulement. In so doing, we have to push back against the false arguments of a zero-sum game vis-à-vis respect for international law and the protection of national security. Or to put it in OSCE language, we have to re-embed the notions of human security in our understanding of national security.

And fifth and finally, we have to recognise the degree of threat to that essential element of our human rights architecture, civil society.

I spent the last week in Strasbourg and in Brussels meeting with NGOs. I met with NGO activists who are in exile, because they have to be in exile. I have met with those who are on the brink of leaving their country, still active, but only just holding on. I met with the families of human rights defenders in jail. And I met with so many whose organisations were in crisis because of absence of funding. And here I have to mention the huge implications of the withdrawal of USAID and indeed the large-scale pullback from Europe of the Open Society Foundations.

That is enough of my list. There is so much for us all to do. I wish OSCE all the very best as you embark on the next 50 years of your essential work. I will do what I can to support you and to play my own complementary and cooperative role.

In other words, friends, I look forward to being your partner in realising the sentiments that were so well expressed by the then US President Ford in Helsinki in 1975 when he said, and I quote, “We owe it to our children, to the children of all continents, not to miss any opportunity, not to malinger for one moment, not to spare ourselves or allow others to shirk in the monumental task of building a better and a safer world”.

Thank you for your attention.