We spoke to young people from the Western Balkans about how their access to sexual and reproductive health and rights was affected by the COVID pandemic, and asked them about their vision for re-designing a more youth-friendly future in which young people can flourish.  Alex is a 19-year-old LGBTIQ girl, studying at university in Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria. As a peer educator, she supports other young people to learn and develop crucial life skills relating to their sexual and reproductive health.   Alex, describe your experience of access to SRHR* education, information and care before and during COVID.  My access to sexual and reproductive healthcare before COVID was relatively normal, for example a gynaecologist visit, but during the pandemic, it was rather harder to go because I had to present a negative COVID test to be examined. At some point, in-person consultations with doctors were extremely limited, unless it was with reference to COVID or life-threatening - so regular check-ups were not really happening. I didn’t receive any adequate sexuality education either before or during the pandemic. The only time sexual health was discussed in my 12 years of schooling was back in elementary school and it only included only a talk with the girls on menstrual pads and periods. I believe online information became more accessible because of COVID. As a result of the limited consultations with professionals, more people sought answers on the Internet. Of course, we must keep in mind that information has to be checked carefully. Also, reliable information in Bulgarian is very limited.   Did anything change for the better during the pandemic in terms of access to SRHR? I suppose more information regarding SRHR became available online because of the huge demand. A good thing is that the information is still relevant today even though COVID is no longer an urgent crisis. Personally, I got into the habit of looking for answers myself and checking if the source was reliable or not. Other than that, I would not say that COVID had any positives.   What was the biggest challenge to young people’s SRHR during the pandemic? How could decision-makers/medical professionals have removed this obstacle?   One of the biggest problems was the misleading and unreliable sources of information about sexual and reproductive health. In addition, adequate information is mostly in English. I believe a fact-checking system to verify all factual information could be helpful in preventing the spread of misinformation. I faced that problem when I and other 3 friends conducted a few educational workshops on the topic of comprehensive sexuality education. While putting together the information we needed, we came across numerous invalid data and false statements.   What lessons should governments and professionals who work with youth learn from the pandemic about how to look after young people’s health and wellbeing in a crisis?   From what I have seen, many adults do not seem to understand the burden this crisis has had on us and therefore neglect our mental health. Affordable and regular psychologist appointments should be a priority. There is this stigma around mental health that you seek help only if you are “not normal”. That is completely false and puts our generation under pressure and makes us not take proper care of our well-being (which often includes going to a psychologist). Also, many of the professionals (both teachers and medical practitioners) were sharing their personal and controversial opinion on the pandemic and vaccinations which has to be limited. A personal experience I had was when I went to get vaccinated and my GP would not allow me to, saying that it was unnecessary and even “dangerous”.   What is your number 1 recommendation on what is needed to make services more youth-friendly? What difference would this make in the life of a young person like you? More young and inclusive professionals working in the sphere are needed. For example, many of my female peers insist that female gynecologists examine them. LGBT+ inclusivity is also important, as currently many of us cannot share a key part of our life neither with a gynecologist nor a psychologist. The difference would be that we will be more open and share what really concerns us so we can seek adequate help. It is much easier to talk to someone close to your age or background.   What helped you to become engaged as an activist? How has this experience been so far? The idea that I can do something about the desperate need for a change and make my voice heard was what helped me get involved. So far, I mostly enjoy working with other young people and seeing them as determined and hopeful as I am. Every new idea has been welcomed with enthusiasm and encouragement by many of my peers, which makes it clear that youngsters are looking forward to a change and improvement. However, as I mentioned, we held several workshops about comprehensive sexuality education and we faced many obstacles. The project was very scarcely funded, which made it very hard to implement properly and exactly how we have envisioned it. Also, finding people to attend the workshops was fairly hard as well and we could not get any support from our teachers and school staff. They did not welcome the idea because the topics of sexual health and LGBT+ inclusivity are still taboo in our society - so they were scared of how the parents would react. On the other hand, the people that came to the workshops had very encouraging feedback and even a demand for more similar events. * SRHR = sexual and reproductive health and rights Interview conducted by Viktoria Nikolova, a member of the regional youth group of the IPPF EN project Youth Voices, Youth Choices, funded by MSD for Mothers

We spoke to young people from the Western Balkans about how their access to sexual and reproductive health and rights was affected by the COVID pandemic, and asked them about their vision for re-designing a more youth-friendly future in which young people can flourish.  Greis Osmani is a 23-year-old from Tirana, Albania. She is a medical student, peer educator and activist for young people’s sexual and reproductive health and rights.   Greis, describe your experience of access to SRHR* education, information and care before and during COVID.  Before the pandemic, I used to take part in a lot of workshops, projects and volunteer work in national NGOs. As a volunteer, especially with the Albanian Center for Population and Development (ACPD), I was trained in subjects like abortion stigma, gender equality and rights, contraceptive methods and sexuality education. I was well informed about other topics such as HIV/AIDS. The first year of the pandemic, the focus of the government and NGOs etc shifted more towards COVID and general health issues, not related to SRHR. Step by step, young people and the general public started getting used to online platforms, which gave us other opportunities to hold trainings online and carry on sharing safe information with other youth.   Did anything change for the better during the pandemic in terms of access to SRHR? I believe it had pros and cons. First, we had to learn how to properly use new digital platforms and tools such as Zoom, Google Classroom and Meet, and add more interesting activities such as Murals and Quizzes. This made our online experience much more fun, aside from basic informative meetings, and we continue to use these platforms. Online platforms enable us to create a broader network of young people from different countries who connect more quickly, and for free, to share personal experiences as SRHR activists and empower one another. We are still learning and developing digital communication skills. We hope the moment will come when all young people feel comfortable using online tools, without facing a single barrier.   What was the biggest challenge for SRHR during the pandemic? One of the biggest challenges I personally faced was the inability to express myself freely online and completely share personal experiences. Face-to-face meetings connect young people more with one another. One feels freer to talk with peers in person rather than share with those you may never meet in real life. It’s hard to break the ice in digital meetings that make people feel uncomfortable speaking directly and opening up. Also, it is very important that, as educators, the things we share in theory with other peers come to life in practical ways. For example, online we can’t distribute free condoms, and it’s harder to teach young people how to use them correctly.   What lessons should governments and professionals who work with youth learn from the pandemic about how to look after young people’s health and wellbeing in a crisis?   They need to understand the realities of young people’s access to SRHR, the gaps we face, our needs etc. They need to carry out more surveys to see how young people are coping with all the changes since the pandemic. They need to give us youngsters more opportunities to raise our voices, to engage in activities, to work as volunteers, to give us more hope for our future. It’s extremely hard for a teenager to stay at home distancing him/herself from everyday life and joy. COVID-19 was devastating for young people and had a big impact on their perspectives on life and desire to do more. Mental health was affected. Young people need to be able to maintain a healthy life, to experience happiness, and to invest in their future to become good doctors, lawyers, engineers and so on, to build a better lifestyle. Social connections and communication are key to mental health - that’s why creating safe platforms with adequate and necessary information for young people’s needs is crucial for their well-being.   What is your number 1 recommendation on what is needed to make services more youth-friendly?  For services to be youth-friendly, it is crucial to build trust between young people and health professionals. Youth-friendly services are included in our primary health care package and are provided by other private institutions and NGOs such as ACPD through its own clinics. However, trust and communication need to be built. The role of health mediators is also very important, especially if they are young themselves. This facilitates communication with youth as it is easier to share with someone your age; you feel more understood and can open up when the service is presented in a friendly way. It’s also important to create positive environments where young people can engage with each other, for example reading or studying in groups to make it less hard for them to express their true selves. It makes a big difference when a young person finds a reliable service, and seeks help when they are feeling lost. So social workers and innovative communication methods in my opinion are the key.   Tell us about your experience as an activist for young people's health and rights! My experience has been great. It started in high school taking part in a social experiment and then I got more interested in topics like human rights, comprehensive sexuality education and SRH. I have learned so much from people I met during my activism years, I feel like my public speaking skills have gotten better with time. I have found subjects like SRHR which I feel are close to me because I’m about to become a doctor next year and my contribution started long ago in young people’s health. I’m constantly inspired by different projects to keep doing what I am doing now and create a stronger and empowered future for next generations here in my country Albania and beyond. I am happy that I have found role models in this journey of mine, I have heard speeches that are quotes for me to live by. I am grateful that there have been individuals that have pushed me to do better and engage more. I’m looking forward to the next chapters... * SRHR = sexual and reproductive health and rights Interview conducted by Marjo Rabiaj, a member of the regional youth group of the IPPF EN project Youth Voices, Youth Choices, funded by MSD for Mothers  

San Marino recently legalised abortion care, one year after the landmark referendum. In 2021, 77% of citizens voted overwhelmingly to overturn the 150-year-old law to make abortion legal in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Abortion care is also available after the 12 weeks mark if serious foetal anomalies put a woman’s life or health -- physically or psychologically -- at risk. The cost of the procedure will be covered by San Marino’s public health system. Previously, women living in San Marino, were forced to travel to Italy or somewhere else to access the care they needed. We sat down with Karen Pruccoli, activist and President of the Union of San Marino Women to discuss the changes in the microstate. Karen is an entrepreneur and advocate for civil rights and women’s rights. How does it feel to have legal abortion in San Marino after 150 years of criminalisation? It feels great – incredible that we have this law. We are celebrating this long journey to get this law, but also we are also feeling sad we have this law only after so many years of trying to convince our politicians that San Marino’s citizens deserve to have this kind of law. Italy had its abortion law from 1978, so we were very behind. I am satisfied and happy, but unfortunately it arrived after too many years. What was the combination of factors that led to a win on abortion rights in San Marino despite having such a strict past on the issue? The main factor why we have this law is Unione Donne Sammarinesi – Union of San Marino Women - which was re-vitalised in 2019, but originally dates from the early 70s and started as a movement for women’s rights. The Union was revived in 2019 and geared its efforts towards trying to convince politicians that a new law on abortion was necessary. Once we realised it was difficult to gain political support, we courageously decided to ask for a referendum. It would have been nearly impossible to get legal abortion in place with the current makeup of the parliament, having a conservative majority, against reproductive freedom. If we were waiting for the parliament to be more progressive and pro-women’s rights, it would have taken another 20 years. So I think the main reason why we have this law is because of the Union which fights for women rights, civil rights, and human rights in the Republic of San Marino. What are your thoughts on the new abortion law in San Marino? We are very happy with the quality of this law, but it was a difficult journey. We met with conservative parties and groups against abortion to discuss how the new law would look like. They initially wanted to propose a law that was much more conservative and stricter. We were very worried at this stage. Those involved in the drafting of the San Marino law on abortion even considered implementing conditions similar to those in Hungary - where women are now forced to listen to the embryonic cardiac activity before being able to access care. It was indeed difficult to push for a modern law, a progressive law that would respect women’s freedom of choice and place it at the centre of the legislation. However, Unione Donne Sammarinesi did not give up and advocated daily on social media, in the press, and by reaching out to communities and the country at large.  The resulting law is in line with the decision of the referendum – where 77% voted YES to ‘women being able to make reproductive choices in their lives’. To a certain extent the current San Marino law is better than the Italian one. In San Marino, we have family planning centres where women, men and young people can receive unbiased sexual and reproductive care. We also tried to mitigate the risk of medical professionals denying care based on personal beliefs, a huge problem in Italy. In San Marino, in the event doctors are not willing to provide abortion care, the state is obliged to find doctors who will, even if they need to bring them from aboard. What are the next steps for your advocacy work? Next, we will be working on combatting violence against women and domestic violence. An expert group on the topic from the Council of Europe visited San Marino and produced a report on how the Istanbul Convention (on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence) was implemented in the country. We had a lot of issues and are currently working on amending these. What is your opinion on deciding rights through popular vote?   We had two referendums on human rights: one asking to include the protection of sexual orientation in our human rights charter and one on abortion. This first referendum was in 2019 and 72% were in favour of non-discrimination based on sexual orientation. And we know the result on the referendum on abortion. But, I think it is dangerous to have a referendum on human rights especially in Italy as it is a Catholic state, with strong conservative parties. We had no statistics that could could help us understand if people in San Marino were ready to legalize abortion. At that point we were asking for legal abortion for the past 20 years and we saw no other solution than to put it in the hands of the people. We followed closely what happened in countries like Gibraltar and Ireland and took inspiration from their successes. So, we decided to take the risk and go for the referendum. But, as far as I am concerned, a referendum on human rights or civil rights is risky.   What is your message to those still fighting for their reproductive freedom? Never give up! I think it is important to have at least one big and strong organisation of women’s rights activists that include women, men and young people. It’s also important to create a conversation, provide information and keep the attention on the topic. For so many years in San Marino, abortion was not discussed. Same as topics like domestic violence and medical assisted suicide (euthanasia). Even today, misleading information on abortion exists out there, so we need to be a strong organised group that is able to share accurate information and create a space for conversation.   Illustration: Ipsita Divedi for IPPF EN x Fine Acts

No matter where you live, who you love or the content of your wallet, you have the right to the highest attainable standard of health, to gender equality and to health equity. Everyone has the right to access the care they need without fearing they will go bankrupt when they do. To guarantee this, the Universal Health Coverage (UHC), and at its core, access to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), must be achieved.  In May 2022, the European Commission announced that it would renew its Global Health Strategy, that was first published in 2010, and is now consulting all relevant stakeholders, including civil society organisations. The renewal of the EU Global Health Strategy had been a longstanding advocacy call from civil society organisations, as the strategy was not fit for purpose anymore, and did not include several important topics such as SRHR. The COVID-19 pandemic has clearly shown that we are members of an interconnected society - and we depend on each other. What affects one of us, affects all of us, and we are thus stronger together.  The pandemic has also shown the cracks in our systems and that we are not on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and especially SDG 3 on health, by 2030. The renewal of the EU Global Health Strategy therefore arrives at a critical moment to still reverse this trend and to put solidarity and the right to compassionate care for everyone front and centre.  The European Commission has a unique opportunity here to advance the right to health and move the world forward in achieving the SDGs and UHC. Advancing UHC is key to achieve SDG 3 on health and to realize the right to the highest attainable standard of health for all, without financial hardship. It includes the full spectrum of essential, quality health services. This standard cannot be achieved without including a comprehensive package of SRHR services, based on the Guttmacher-Lancet definition. It should include in particular antenatal, safe delivery and postnatal care; safe abortion and post-abortion care; contraception; prevention and treatment of sexually transmitted infections including HIV, infertility, reproductive tract infections and reproductive cancers; and services to address gender-based violence. In addition to being essential to achieving SDG 3 on health, SRHR are necessary preconditions for gender equality (SDG 5), ending poverty (SDG 1) and contribute also to better education achievements (SDG 4).  If the European Commission wants its Global Health Strategy to achieve its objectives and in particular to move the SDG and UHC agendas forward, it must:  Recognise SRHR as an indispensable and integral component of UHC and of the Global Health Strategy, critical to the realisation of the right to health, sustainable development and a necessary precondition for gender equality, non-discrimination and ending poverty;  Commit to a rights-based, intersectional approach to SRHR, promote the respect of everyone’s SRHR and support universal access to integrated and comprehensive SRH services for all individuals who need them, regardless of their age, marital or socio-economic status, disability, race or ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity and sex characteristics;   Actively engage communities in developing and implementing the Global Health Strategy, as their participation is key to building health services that are responsive to the local needs of communities;  Prioritise funding for SRHR in EU programmes at country, regional and global levels and financially supporting CSOs which implement community outreach, awareness raising, service delivery and advocacy programmes, all key to achieving SRHR and health for all;  Continue to speak up and support strong global, regional and national commitments in favour of SRHR in multilateral fora, including at the United Nations, and in political dialogues with partner countries.  We can decide as a society to act together for the health of all of us. Only by doing so will the European Commission and the EU as a whole guarantee the right to the highest attainable standard of health, to gender equality and to health equity for everyone, inside and outside of Europe.     Words by Marie Tempesta Illustration: Daniela Yankova - shadowschaser

As today’s hearing in the trial of human rights defender Justyna Wydrzyńska is postponed until October 14, we ask Poland’s Justice Ministry to immediately drop the charges against Justyna and stop oppressing woman rights defenders (WRDs). Justyna is charged with supporting Ania, a woman in an abusive relationship, to access abortion pills. A survivor herself of a similar situation to Ania, she took compassionate action to help the woman. Justyna’s efforts were reported to the police by the controlling husband. Ania was denied abortion care, but the stress caused her to miscarry. Now, Justyna, a member of Abortion Without Borders and the Abortion Dream Team, is facing up to three years in prison for facilitating an abortion that didn’t happen. Her case marks the first in Europe in which a WRD is being prosecuted for helping ensure abortion care by providing abortion pills.

We wholeheartedly welcome the decision of the French government to support the reproductive safety and freedom of Ukrainian refugees in Poland by financing Abortion Without Borders via IPPF EN. Abortion Without Borders is a civil society initiative working in countries with restrictive laws to help people access abortion care at home with pills or abroad in clinics. The French financial support will specifically be used for the management of help lines and to assist Ukrainian women in Poland travel abroad to receive the care they so desperately need. Concretely, it is expected that the 60.000 euros will help at least 150 women to received safe and legal abortion care outside Poland. Currently, Poland has one of Europe’s most restrictive abortion laws. In practice, it is almost impossible for those eligible for a legal abortion to obtain one. The barriers that have long faced Polish women now also affect Ukrainian refugees. We know that access to emergency contraception and safe abortion care is even more important following the increased threat and terrifying reported incidence of abuse, sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) and trafficking facing refugees and displaced people. Timing is also of the essence when treating victims of sexual violence and delays can prove dangerous for their physical and mental health. Civil society organizations and ordinary citizens are the ones providing this care to refugees, but this is not properly reflected in many funding schemes. This heroic effort is not sustainable. Without support, these solidarity networks will collapse, with devastating consequences for Ukrainian refugees in Poland.

IPPF members are working hand-in-hand with networks of actors from within and around diverse Roma communities in Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia. The common goal: to improve access to life-changing sexual and reproductive healthcare for girls, women and young people, and tackle some of the deep rooted obstacles that prevent people - especially women and youth - from living safer and healthier lives. We are proud to share highlights of our work, recommendations to decision-makers and impact story in the below brochure.

Happy Mother’s Day…?   Some weeks ago, many of us around Europe celebrated our mothers, often as strong women, always sacrificing their interests for the greater good, the pillars and foundation of our society (with all the usual – often harmful - gender stereotypes annexed). But beyond the clichés and catchphrases, how much are we truly ready to respect and honour motherhood from Day One - or even better, from Day Zero? Is choosing to become a mother only to be celebrated as instrumental to counter the ‘demographic winter’ of a continent growing older? Or should we ensure - as society, politicians and advocates for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) - that any (non)reproductive decision, including the experience of becoming mothers, is fully centred on choice, (self)love, respect, dignity and empowerment? Ahead of May 28th, International Day of Action for Women’s Health (intended as a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being), I’d like to share some thoughts around the circumstances of what is stereotypically considered as one of the ‘most important’ and ‘happiest’ events in a woman’s life: giving birth. I’ll leave for another time the dismantling of common myths, idealizations and taboos around such a moment (and what comes after that), to concentrate here on another still-too-silenced subject: the violence that many women experience around childbirth, also called gynaecological and obstetric violence.

Turkmen people were hoping that their newly appointed president, Serdar Berdymukhamedov, would pursue a more progressive path than his father, but they were sorely mistaken. Since April 2022, the government has taken policing over women’s bodies to a whole new level: imposing a virtual ban on abortion care, enforcing a ban on a range of beauty services, forbidding women from sitting in the front seat of private cars and prohibiting male taxi drivers from offering rides to women. Abortion care access has been restricted from 12 to just five weeks. Overnight, the government made public a law that had originally been passed in 2015, without any public consultation, meaning that it was practically passed and published in secret. This law effectively bans abortion care, as most people don't even know they are pregnant at 5 weeks. The result is agonising for women, forcing some to continue through pregnancies against their will, while others will have no choice but to go through the system and seek permission for care from a medical committee which delays critical healthcare and puts them at greater risk – with no guarantee that care will be provided. The committee can decide to approve care beyond the 5 weeks on social gounds, very linked to the family situation (eg allowed in case the husband dies, in case of divorce, but also in cases of rape). Women who are not able to access abortion in these circumstances might be forced to find a doctor who can provide the procedure illegally, often at huge costs. The terrifying truth is that women and girls living in countries with restrictive abortion laws are more likely to die because pregnancy is a major medical event where having choice over the care you receive is vital. This act of reproductive coercion is in line with the long held anti-rights agenda of the government, but this latest raft of restrictions are particularly brutal.  They stem from the government’s idea of nation-building, which hinges on harmful gender stereotypes that value women only as mothers and symbols of purity, beauty, and modesty. But make no mistake, at the core this is about control. Women are only valued for their capacity to give birth, raise healthy patriots and thus preserve traditional family values. The reproductive bullying of women is supported by state media propaganda encouraging women to have eight children and by the lack of relationship and sexuality education. Furthermore, 50% of women are denied access to contraception, and a recent study found that nearly 60% of women feel unable to make autonomous decisions on issues like healthcare, contraception, and giving consent to sex.   Turkmenistan failing women and girls on multiple fronts with the world watching Turkmenistan has an abysmal human rights track record with women being treated as second class citizens. With bodily autonomy being steadily stripped away, women and girls are subject to sexual and gender-based violence, virginity tests, forced marriages and prohibited from purchasing cigarettes and obtaining a driver’s licenses.  According to UNICEF and TürkmenStat (MICS), 59% of women in Turkmenistan aged 15-49 say that a husband has the right to hit his wife. There is no law against domestic violence in Turkmenistan, nor are there mechanisms and national programmes to prevent domestic violence. All this shows that women cannot expect support from anywhere and it is safer for them to be silent and tolerate the violence. Governmental agencies do not provide any statistics related to women’s health and gender equality. As noted on the UN Women’s website: “As of December 2020, only 20.6% of indicators needed to monitor the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) from a gender perspective were available, with gaps in key areas in Turkmenistan.”  Freedom House has consistently ranked the country at or near the bottom of its Freedom in the World rankings since its independence. And in its 2020 Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders ranked Turkmenistan as 179th out of 180 countries surveyed, only ahead of North Korea. Lastly, civic space in Turkmenistan is rated ‘closed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor. The country lacks anything resembling real civil society and the conditions for it to emerge.   Take action We cannot turn our backs on the people of Turkmenistan.The European Union, its Member States as well as other international bodies must not sit idly by in the face of such egregious attacks on women’s rights. The European Union in particular must uphold its values and use all tools and policies it has at its disposal, including the EU Gender Action Plan, to support Turkmen women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights. We must take urgent action, raise our voices, and put pressure on the Turkmen state, so that Turkmen women are not forced to suffer in silence.   Credit illustration: Martina Koleva  

The 8 March Institute, Slovenia’s largest feminist organization, has been the target of harassment and intimidation coordinated by Slovenia’s ruling party, SDS, during the pre-election campaign period. The Institute has been doing a ‘Let’s vote’ campaign, to increase voter turnout for the Slovenian parliamentary elections and to collect signatures for a bill they have prepared for consideration by the newly elected parliament. The bill lays out a series of measures to ensure the respect for the rule of law and protect citizens from increasing inequalities. The Institute is now being falsely accused by the government of conducting a ‘political campaign’, even though they are not promoting any specific candidate or party. They could face a large fine and the possible suspension of their activities – essentially censorship. The Institute alleges smear tactics by SDS. The leader of the organisation, Nika Kovač, has faced threats and misogynistic insults from the Prime Minister himself, Janše Janša. SDS MPs have falsely accused Institute volunteers of sending them death threats, a claim which activists say is a deliberate attempt to discredit their work. The Institute has filed two civil lawsuits against SDS as a result. The Institute has also applied for an investigation of the ruling party for alleged misuse of public funds in its electoral campaign. It accuses the ruling party of using state infrastructure for “its own propaganda” during the pre-election campaign period. The Institute submitted an application to the Court of Auditors, which oversees the delivery of free and fair elections, in March. Slovenia has seen a rapid decline in civic freedoms in the past few years. The ruling party, SDS, has been accused of undermining the work of the Slovenian Press Agency and the largest public broadcaster, RTVSLO (through political appointments at the head of the agency), of slashing funds for civil society organisations and media critical of the current government, and restricting the right to protest using the excuse of the Covid-19 pandemic. Slovenia is rated "Narrowed" on the CIVICUS Monitor which means that while the state generally allows individuals and civil society organisations to exercise their rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of speech and freedom of association, violations of these rights also take place. There have been multiple reports of activists, independent journalists and protesters being harassed and intimidated by the state. The State Prosecutors’ office seems to be instrumentalised to bring cases against those protesting the current government and slapping them with fines higher than 40.000 Euros in some cases. This retaliation against civil society organisations, such as the 8 March Institute, are reminiscent of repressive measures taken in Poland and Hungary against human rights defenders. Far-right actors try to score political points through the public vilification of civil society groups, by spreading political homophobia and attacking women human rights defenders. Any type of intimidation and orchestrated oppression targeting activists, independent media and civil society organisations points to the degradation of the rule of law. The European Union must take action to ensure that civic freedoms and the rule of law are protected and that human rights defenders are politically and financially supported.   Photo by Luka E on Unsplash