Remarks by Dave Elseroad, Human Rights House Foundation
Democracy Defender Initiative Seminar
8 April 2025
Excellencies, colleagues, friends. Thank you to the DDI group for convening us this morning and to Sweden for hosting us.
I would like to start this morning by congratulating the DDI group for choosing to recognise the work of the Georgian Young Lawyers Association. It is well-deserved. GYLA has been an important voice for the defense of democracy and promotion of human rights in Georgia for more than 30 years. At a moment when both of these ideals are under very real attack in Georgia, it’s important to recognise the role that human rights and civil society organisations are playing as they stand up to rising authoritarianism. It is my hope that the DDI group will follow this recognition up with concrete action to support embattled Georgian civil society and push for the immediate invocation of the Moscow Mechanism.
The organisation I represent, Human Rights House Foundation, has been active across the OSCE region for 35 years. We started in Oslo, where the first Human Rights House was formed in 1989. Human Rights Houses are coalitions of local independent civil society organisations and the concept is one which was first picked up by partners in Moscow and Warsaw in the beginning of 1990’s and spread from there. Today, we serve as the secretariat for a Network of more than 80 human rights and civil society organisations which stretches from the UK to Azerbaijan. We work in 11 countries and support local coalitions – Human Rights Houses – to promote and protect human rights.
One of our key areas of focus is supporting the human rights policy objectives of our partners in the Network. Our partners have, more often than not, engaged directly with their governments to pursue new legislation to enshrine human rights protections or strengthen other policies to make their countries more free, fair, and democratic. We have worked with them to strengthen international human rights standards as a basis upon which to advocate for domestic legislation or for new or strengthened international human rights mechanisms to hold those responsible for human rights violations accountable when and where domestic remedies aren’t available.
In recent years, though, the balance of our partners’ work – or the pendulum of that work – has gradually swung away from domestic level advocacy and towards international advocacy. The reasons for this are perhaps quite relevant for our topic and investigation this morning. For HRDs and civil society organisations in many countries in the OSCE region domestic advocacy is increasingly difficult or outright impossible. While independent civil society in these countries still exists – and should be supported – their work can no longer exist in the public sphere.
Rather than focus on the state of civic space in the OSCE region, I am taking for granted that that space is rapidly closing and that those here today – and I’m speaking directly to the representatives of like-minded States – are looking for ways to meaningfully respond. It is how to do so that is the thesis for my remarks.
First and foremost, we must accept that this conversation takes place as the United States has seemingly abandoned its position as a global defender of human rights. The US government is turning its back on traditional allies and increasingly siding with authoritarian States. As the resilience and steadfastness of the Western alliance is tested, Europe is moving towards rearmament and prioritising hard power over soft for the first time in generations.
It has become critical to clearly link support for domestic civil society, particularly human rights organisations, to policies addressing European security challenges. Many discussions on peace and security focus on immediate threats, overlooking the root causes of conflict. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine laid bare the consequences of an on-going degradation of domestic human rights on regional and international security. Decades of repression against political opposition, human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, and dissenting voices, coupled with a stifling of peaceful protest and independent media, created the enabling environment for Russia to launch its unprovoked attack in 2014 and full-scale invasion eight years later. By integrating human rights considerations, underlying factors contributing to instability can be addressed, making conflict prevention and resolution more effective. We can’t just buy more guns, build more fighter jets, and erect higher walls.
The OSCE has developed its own cooperative security approach. The Swiss academic and OSCE observer, Victor-Yves Ghebali, wrote, “the distinguishing features of cooperative security epitomises the concepts of prevention and what could be termed consensual interference.” It takes for granted that States are accountable to one another and that there is a collective right of scrutiny.
What then does an integrated security policy – a cooperative security policy approach – which also addresses the root causes of conflict look like? I argue that it must include comprehensive support to civil society on the frontlines of the fight against autocracy.
Within the OSCE, I offer the following recommendations to States which all seek to lead and support efforts to preserve and expand space for independent civil society at the OSCE. The OSCE remains an important multilateral body for civil society. But it will only continue to be if the unique space afforded to civil society is protected.
- Employ an integrated human rights and security strategy which approaches multilateral and international organisation engagement holistically.
In 2022, reporting submitted after the Moscow Mechanism was launched at the OSCE informed the text of the resolution at the UN Human Rights Council mandating the establishment of the Special Rapporteur on Russia. This offers an important lesson for how the multilateral system offers complementary tools to achieve broad international human rights gains.
Last night, two dozen Georgian civil society organisations, including GYLA, called on States to invoke the Moscow Mechanism on Georgia and to time it with the annual Human Rights Council resolution process on Georgia.
Your governments’ global human rights strategies should reflect how and when these tools will be utilised and to what end.
- Challenge and pushback on US government rhetoric about waste, fraud, and abuse in the NGO sector.
In just the last month, authorities in Serbia have raided independent media outlets citing Trump Administration rhetoric. Georgian legislation pulls directly from the Trump Administration rhetorical pulpit. In Bosnia, the authorities in Republika Srypska repeat comments from the White House. At the high-level week in Geneva, the Hungarian Foreign Minister cited favorably actions by the US government and called into question the legitimacy of civil society.
This rhetoric must be challenged and pushed back against. Embattled civil society needs counterbalancing rhetoric that highlights their legitimate work and credible role in the promotion of democracy and human rights.
- Establish a mechanism for tracking and reporting on reprisals against civil society for engaging with the OSCE.
Last year, a member of our Network, Anar Mammadli, participated in the SHDM. He was arrested shortly after returning to Baku and remains in pre-trial detention. Reprisals are taking place against HRDs who engage with the OSCE. Yet, unlike the UN or the Council of Europe, there is no system for tracking and reporting on reprisals. If the OSCE is to remain a place for open dialogue between States and civil society, like-minded States should work to protect the HRDs who face real risks engaging with it.
In this situation, let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The CiO can establish a process for tracking reprisals and offer an annual report. This might not survive when autocracies serve as the CiO but through the end of 2026, we have strong democracies with commitments to human rights in the CiO seat.
- Strengthen and utilise regional or thematic groupings to advance human rights goals at the OSCE.
The Nordic and Baltic 8 and the Benelux countries are important groupings working together to promote human rights.
We must be building new alliances and partners to advance human rights goals at the OSCE. The DDI group is one. Perhaps this can be the group to advance creative thinking about an informal OSCE reprisals mechanism.
- Support participation of independent civil society in human dimension pillar events and activities.
The OSCE remains a unique space in the multilateral system for engagement by civil society. States should support deeper and fuller participation by civil society in the human dimension pillar.
Actively involve civil society in the planning of supplementary human dimension meetings and the Warsaw Human Dimension Conference or HDIM. And here I take a page from the UN Human Rights Council. Host an organisational meeting ahead of each HD event where States share their priorities for the upcoming event: key topics of interest, planned side events. Share this so that civil society can plan accordingly. Expect civil society to then get in touch to coordinate. Civil society is competing with States on topics, spots, and speakers. We can do better.
Share agendas and other working documents sufficiently ahead of time so that civil society has time to consider participating and how best to do it.
Broaden the scope of HD events to appeal to the broadest cross-section of civil society.
Work to counter the effort of GONGOs and here I take some practical ideas from a recent paper published by Sebastian Peyrouse at GW. Establish a working group of independent NGOs, experts, and researchers well-versed in OSCE issues. Mandate the group to scrutinise, fact check, and analyse GONGO’s statements and activities at OSCE events; as well as their operations and government connections. Culminate in an annual report detailing those observations.
- Maintain dialogue with independent civil society from authoritarian countries, such as Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Russia, including human rights defenders, and prioritise dialogue with them on the sidelines of HD events.
For civil society in highly repressive countries, engagement with the international community is critical. States should prioritise their engagement with organisations from these countries when we come together under the Human Dimension pillar. Ensure that there are safe spaces to meet and listen to their concerns and recommendations. Consider establishing contact groups and formalise such interaction.
- Create enabling environments for HRDs and their organisations to work from exile; including issuing visas for HRDs at risk, and their families, facilitating efficient processes to register NGOs and open bank accounts, providing psychosocial support.
Finally, across the OSCE region we are seeing that HRDs at risk and their families are increasingly in need of opportunities to go abroad to continue their work or, indeed, for short-term rest. HRDs going into exile want to continue their work, we want them to continue their work, and your governments should provide pathways for them to continue their work. Visas are important – critical even – but so too are streamlined processes for establishing organisations and opening bank accounts so that external grants and other support can be quickly shifted to allow HRDs to continue their work.
In closing, let me thank the DDI group for continuing this tradition of recognising exceptional contributions to the promotion of democracy and the defense of human rights. The award is important for civil society and the groups you have selected over the years – from ZMINA in Ukraine to the Union of Informed Citizens in Armenia – represent some of the highest ideals and principles of the OSCE. GYLA is no exception. As we move further into a period of enormous challenges for the promotion and protection of human rights, recognising the work and commitment of civil society organisations across the OSCE region will be more important than ever. We look forward to the on-going support of the DDI group in this regard.
Thank you.
