April 8, 2026

Categories 

Tags 

This webinar series will take place online on

• 22 April
• 23 September
• 9 December

It is aimed at members of the Equinet Gender Equality Working Group.

This three-part webinar series aims to explore the growing pressures on democracy and gender equality across Europe in the context of rising disinformation, anti-rights narratives, and organized backlash against equality. While significant progress has been made in advancing gender equality, at the same time recent years have seen a resurgence of gendered disinformation campaigns, the politicization of gender identity, and the strengthening of online and offline movements hostile to women’s rights and LGBTIQ+ equality.

The series will examine key dynamics driving this backlash, including the spread of misinformation and disinformation targeting women and minority groups; the role of men and masculinities, including the mobilization of anti-gender narratives and the weaponization of masculinity in populist rhetoric; and the growing threats to trans and intersex rights in public discourse, policy-making, and law. These developments will be analysed in relation to broader challenges to democratic values, institutions, and social cohesion.

In line with Equinet’s ongoing work to monitor, reflect, and address the ongoing backlash, this webinar series aims to bring together Equality Bodies, researchers, civil society, and policy actors to foster a shared understanding of these interconnected challenges. The series will spotlight strategies and strengthen the resilience of democratic institutions, including National Equality Bodies, against regressive narratives.

In line with Equinet’s ongoing work to monitor and address the anti-equality backlash, the webinar series will bring together Equality Bodies, researchers, civil society actors, and policymakers to foster a shared understanding of these interconnected challenges. It aims to identify strategies to strengthen the resilience of democratic institutions — particularly National Equality Bodies — against regressive narratives and coordinated attacks on equality and human rights.

Objectives

• Reflect on the current challenges facing European democracies and their links to the ongoing backlash against gender equality and fundamental rights
• Strengthen the knowledge and capacity of National Equality Bodies to understand, prevent, and respond to these challenges
• Foster dialogue, peer learning, and cooperation to support the resilience of democratic institutions dedicated to the promotion of equality

Participants

Members of the Gender Equality Working Group, together with selected external partners, including civil society organizations, researchers, and experts.

The webinars

The series is structured around distinct but interconnected thematic sessions.

Webinar 1 (22 April): Understanding the Backlash. A Toolbox for Equality Bodies in Europe

The first webinar will provide a foundational reflection on the nature of the backlash: what it entails, who is driving it, and how it manifests across different contexts. It will explore how Equality Bodies and their partners can respond by preventing and countering anti-gender discourse and action.

14:00 – 14:10     Welcoming Remarks (Marta Pompili, Policy Officer, Equinet Secretariat)

14:10 – 14:55     Setting the Scene: What is the Backlash?

This session will provide a conceptual and evidence-based overview of the current backlash against gender equality in Europe and beyond. Drawing on recent research and policy analysis, expert speakers will explore how anti-gender movements are organized, the narratives and strategies they deploy, and how these dynamics intersect with democratic erosion, disinformation, and populist politics. The discussion will aim to establish a shared analytical framework to support Equality Bodies in identifying and understanding backlash dynamics in their national contexts.

• Neil Datta, Executive Director, European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights, Author of the Reports The Next Wave: How Religious Extremism Is Reclaiming Power (2026), The Tip of the Iceberg (2021), and Restoring the Natural Order (2018)
• Constanza Tabbush, Research Specialist, UN WOMEN, Author of the Report Understanding Backlash Against Gender Equality: Evidence, Trends and Policy Responses (2025)

14:55 – 15:15     A Focus on Hate Speech and Misinformation: Challenges and Responses from Equality Bodies

This session will focus on how gendered hate speech and misinformation manifest in practice, from the perspective of Equality Bodies. It will explore institutional experiences in monitoring, responding to, and communicating about hate speech and disinformation, in light of the findings of the Equinet training Communicating in hostile environments: hate speech, polarization, misinformation, and politicisation of equality. The session aims to connect the broader analysis of backlash with Equality Bodies’ day-to-day operational realities, as well as to underscore self-care strategies and tactics for professionals who are exposed to harmful content or increasing pressure and hostilities in this line of work.

• Vedrana Perišin, Legal Affairs and Strategic Litigation Advisor, Office of the Ombudswoman, Croatia
• Päivi Ojanperä, Communication Specialist, Ombudsman for Equality, Finland

15:15 – 15:50     Open Discussion

This interactive session will provide space for participants to engage directly with the themes and inputs presented in the previous sessions, including by asking

questions to the speakers. Building on this exchange, the discussion will then open more broadly to reflect on how anti-gender backlash, hate speech, and disinformation manifest in different national contexts. Equality Bodies and partners will be invited to share experiences, identify common challenges, trends and strategies to prevent and counter anti-gender narratives and actions.

15:50 – 16:00     Key Takeaways and Closing Remarks – Aleksandra Szczerba, Legal Expert, Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights, Poland

For further information and if you wish to attend, please contact Marta Pompili (marta.pompili@equineteurope.org).

Dr Simona Drenik Bavdek, the Human Rights Ombudswoman of the Republic of Slovenia, has submitted her views on the proposed amendment to the Personal Assistance Act (Zakon o osebni asistenci – ZOA) to the Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. While welcoming certain improvements aimed at greater legal certainty, she also points out key shortcomings that may limit the rights of persons with disabilities.

While welcoming the preparation of the proposed amendment to the ZOA and certain solutions that contribute to greater clarity and legal certainty, the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia also points out several important shortcomings. Key concerns relate primarily to the excessive linkage of eligibility for personal assistance to formal disability status rather than to the individual’s actual needs, and to interference with already acquired rights. In this context, the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia reiterates the need for adequate reasoning of decisions and for the simultaneous strengthening of other forms of support. The Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia also highlights possible limitations on the right to independent living and inclusion in society. The Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia further emphasises the need for a more individualised approach, greater clarity of the provisions and more consistent alignment with international standards, particularly the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Ombudswoman Dr Simona Drenik Bavdek welcomes the steps towards greater clarity in the Personal Assistance Act. “We expect the Ministry to take our recommendations into account and thereby take an important step towards ensuring the effective enjoyment of the fundamental human rights of persons with disabilities, particularly the rights to dignity, equality before the law, social security, the rights of persons with disabilities, and the right to independent living and inclusion in the community.”

Personal assistance is one of the key instruments for ensuring the effective enjoyment of the fundamental human rights of persons with disabilities. It is a highly important area of regulation that is crucial for ensuring the equal inclusion of many individuals in society. The Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia therefore considers that, as the legislative process continues, an appropriate, thorough and professional examination of all comments received during the public consultation must be carried out, and the comments and recommendations of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia must be taken into account. The final legislative solution must ensure the full, non-discriminatory exercise of the right to personal assistance as one of the key conditions for independent living of persons with disabilities. At the same time, the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia reiterates that different forms of support must be strengthened, as personal assistance is not the only form of support needed by vulnerable groups.

Introduction

There are instances where an Ombudsman has doubts as to whether the actions of the institution are being effective enough, or are being sidelined for anything but good reasons, or finds in the way unyielding and stubborn attitudes.  Doubts of this nature are the result of reflection, not a weakness.  On the one hand they encourage moral serenity and on the other highlight an awareness of challenges ahead.

The question for an Ombudsman to ask is: 

in times of distrust and persistent conflict, do bodies legally entrusted with the oversight of public services really have a modest influence on the people responsible for those services or are their tools structured in too gentle a manner to enable the institution to carry out its mandate fully and well?

I shall be answering this legitimate question in clear terms and with an open mind. 

“Soft law”

The Office of the Ombudsman has been described as a creature of “soft law” because it does not impose executive orders, but investigates, recommends and persuades.  Nonetheless the choice of the adjective “soft” is not misplaced. The Ombudsman speaks the truth to the public administration, without the need to resort to the sharp instruments of executive enforcement. 

In troubled times, when loud and uncompromising voices tend to dominate public statements and debate, the Ombudsman could appear to be ineffectual.  And yet, experience has repeatedly shown that institutions like the Ombudsman, that are grounded in fairness, transparency and reasoned dialogue, are never weak, but have steadily gathered relevance and standing. 

Dignity

The foundational role of the Ombudsman is the pursuit of justice for the person in its relations with the administrative functions of the State.  That includes ensuring that the public administration is not merely efficient but fair, not merely lawful but respects the dignity of the person. 

Every complaint is not just a file to be processed. It is a human story, often one of frustration, vulnerability and exclusion. When matters are resolved and solutions are found following investigations, proper public administration and trust are restored. Without these essential components, people are tempted to view rules with suspicion and public institutions as adversaries with the risk that people retreat into diffidence or worse anger. 
Bridge

By providing accessible and independent oversight, the Ombudsman acts as a bridge between persons and the State. That effort might not dominate the headlines, but it quietly prevents fractures from becoming chasms.  And the Ombudsman has an obligation by the use of its persuasive powers to contest all who might have an interest in demolishing that bridge carefully built with courage, patience and determination. 

Defence

The rule of law is not secured solely in courtrooms. It is upheld in the daily conduct of public officials, in the fairness of procedures, and in the clarity of reasons given for decisions. 

When the Ombudsman identifies maladministration, recommends corrective action, or calls attention to systemic shortcomings, there is a strong ripple effect: public bodies have to refine their processes, public officials have to become more respectful where the rights of people are concerned, and policies have to be adjusted to better reflect legal and ethical standards. This is what disciplined and tangible improvement is all about.

When persons experience what it means to be unheard, dismissed, or treated unjustly, that can give rise to resentment. Institutions like the Ombudsman, that can offer fair hearing and impartial review, provide an alternative to despair, and send out the message that disputes can be resolved within impartial and constitutional institutions that need not necessarily be the courtrooms.

Attention

Every complaint deserves attention. Every person has the right to be treated fairly. This moral and policy statement, put in practice daily, strengthens a culture that human dignity is non-negotiable.

When recommendations are ignored, including (but not only) because of political pressures that may be subtle but persistent, doubts on effectiveness can arise. But any doubt should not lead to submission.  Instead, it should reinforce the sense of purpose.

Quality

The influence of the Ombudsman lies in its credibility, on the quality of its reasoning, on the fairness of its procedures, and the consistency of its principles. When findings are meticulously grounded, when the tone in investigative reports is measured and constructive, and when commitment to impartiality is unwavering, then moral authority becomes all the stronger and that authority becomes extremely difficult to put aside.

Collaboration

Ombudsmen across jurisdictions share best practices, comparative insights, and collective standards. Networks of oversight institutions contribute to a broader culture of accountability that goes far beyond national boundaries. While each Office may appear modest in isolation, when together Ombudsmen form a global community dedicated to good governance and human rights, because they are offices that do not exist simply for self-preservation but first and foremost for an upright service to the public. 

Challenges

The challenges of our trouble times worldwide require  patience, independence, integrity, and courage : the patience to examine complex cases to the extent they deserve ; the independence to resist external influence, be it rightful or otherwise ; the integrity to insist on the adherence of principles (including the principles of good administration of worldwide application) even when they are inconvenient ; and the courage to express where necessary even publicly uncomfortable truths.

Resilience

The Ombudsman has shown to all that disagreement in the administration of public affairs can be addressed through structured inquiry rather than confrontation. The institution has been a proven instrument of meaningful accountability because it firmly believes that governance is not a contest of dominance, but a shared endeavour grounded in the respect of rights. 

This resilient approach in favour of accountability might not be so much visible for all, but it is an enduring influence. For the persons whose grievance has been resolved, the effect is deep; for the public body that re-addresses its procedures, the benefits extend to future interactions; but for the broader society, each instance of improved administration upholds the rule of law.

Democracy is sustained by countless acts of fairness, transparency, and accountability.  The Ombudsman is committed to the principle that power must answer to reason, that authority must be exercised with fairness, and that every person has the right to seek redress without fear.

Conclusion

The powers of the Ombudsman have been described as “soft”. But all the principles that the Ombudsman defends are not.  They are firm, steadfast and essential.   As long as there are persons who seek justice in their dealings with the State in a non-judicial framework, then the role and mandate of the Ombudsman will not only remain relevant but also indispensable.

Published on newsbook.com.mt on 7th April 2026

Ahead of International Roma Day, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Michael O'Flaherty, issued the following statement: 

On International Roma Day, and every day, I stand in solidarity with Roma and Travellers across Europe. I pay tribute to their rich cultures and their contributions to our societies. This day is both a moment of recognition and a call to action, highlighting Roma and Travellers’ resolve to reclaim a narrative anchored in dignity and equal rights.

Roma and Travellers still face entrenched racism. Inflammatory rhetoric, including from those in positions of power, normalises exclusion and hatred. Entire communities are stigmatised, while some laws and policing practices reinforce discrimination, deepen marginalisation, and erode trust.

These challenges are well known, yet largely unresolved. Meanwhile, new issues are emerging:  from the digital sphere, where AI can amplify existing biases, to environmental injustices that disproportionately affect vulnerable communities. The shrinking space for civil society, including Roma and Traveller-led organisations, is also a serious concern.

States can no longer delay addressing this unacceptable situation. I call on authorities to turn commitments into action: to remove barriers, tackle poverty and exclusion, invest in equality, and work with Roma and Traveller communities. The full implementation of the relevant judgments of the European Court of Human Rights must be a priority, backed by political will and adequate resources.

Representation is key. For too long, Roma and Travellers have been excluded from decision-making spaces and misrepresented in public life. Their narratives - reclaimed with pride - must be recognised and respected. Supporting the participation of Roma and Traveller women and girls, who are so often catalysts of change, is essential to building more inclusive societies.

With focus and dedication, and smart strategies and action, we can build a future together where the rights of all are respected.

For insight into the stories of resilience of Roma and Traveller communities and the women driving change, I invite you to read my book THE UNHEARD 12 MILLION (also available in French).

The right of people with disabilities to vote must be a genuine one, whereas at present it is more of a formality—if not merely a facade.” With these words, Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva opened the forum “Accessible Electoral Environment: Information and Technology Solutions for Voters with Visual and Hearing Impairments,” organised by the Ombudsman Institution.

3 April 2026

Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva: The right to vote for people with disabilities must be a genuine right, not just a facade

“The right of people with disabilities to vote must be a genuine one, whereas at present it is more of a formality—if not merely a facade.” With these words, Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva opened the forum “Accessible Electoral Environment: Information and Technology Solutions for Voters with Visual and Hearing Impairments,” organised by the Ombudsman Institution.

The purpose of the discussion was to assess, on the eve of the upcoming parliamentary elections, the readiness of government institutions and local authorities to ensure an accessible electoral environment and adequate voting conditions for people with disabilities. The focus was on the need for accessible information, digital solutions, and physical aids to guarantee the secrecy of the vote and the right to an informed and independent choice.

The discussion focused on options for accessible solutions for blind and visually impaired voters, including Braille templates and audio instructions for machine voting, providing sign language interpretation and video instructions for deaf and hard-of-hearing voters, as well as conducting information campaigns in accessible formats and training polling station election commissions.

Velislava Delcheva highlighted the fact that the Ombudsman Institution had been raising these issues for years—through recommendations, opinions, and reports to the relevant institutions—with her most recent recommendation, dated 25 February, addressed to the Central Election Commission and the acting Prime Minister, in which she insisted on concrete measures.

In her statement, she emphasised that the issue of voting rights for people with sensory disabilities remained sensitive and long overdue. Although the Constitution and the law guarantee every citizen the right to participate in elections, in practice the conditions have not yet been created for this right to be exercised with dignity, independently, and on an equal footing.

Delcheva expressed her hope that concrete and effective measures would be taken to improve this situation as early as the next election.

During the discussion, Rumyana Dimitrova—author of the project “The Voice Behind the Eyes”—presented a study on best practices for accessible voting in countries such as Estonia, Ireland, the United States, Australia, and others.

The Central Election Commission emphasised the need for significant improvements in accessibility at polling stations. It was noted that the current organisation of the electoral process often prevents people with sensory disabilities from voting independently and without the risk of having to rely on an assistant. In this regard, reports of unethical practices were also noted.

The Ministry of eGovernment presented QR codes designed to provide access to information for election participants via mobile devices and assisted technologies. They pointed out that the solution would be free of charge, require no additional resources, and could be provided to district election commissions. It was noted, however, that while it would help inform voters with visual impairments, it would not fully resolve the issue of physically exercising the right to vote.

A concept was also presented for developing a remote voting solution for the visually impaired using mobile devices, while ensuring the anonymity of the vote. Work on this is expected to begin after the conclusion of the current election cycle.

CEC Chair Kameliya Neykova expressed readiness to analyse all proposals and take specific measures, including the introduction of tactile ballot templates, the activation of audio features in machine voting, and the strengthening of cooperation with organisations representing people with visual and hearing impairments.

“The ideas gathered will be submitted to Parliament to be incorporated into future amendments to the Election Code, which should come into effect for the upcoming presidential elections this fall,” the Ombudsman noted.