Illegitimate NGOs are undermining the EU’s democratic process

In Brussels, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are often seen as champions of civil society, advocating for critical causes like the environment, human rights, and public health. Their presence in the European Union’s policymaking process helps ensure that the voices of citizens and communities are heard alongside those of corporations and governments. However, concerns are emerging that not all NGOs operate with the same level of transparency and genuine intent.

While legitimate NGOs continue to play a vital role in advancing public interest, recent discourse within the EU has pointed to a rise in organizations that allegedly masquerade as civil society actors but may, in fact, pursue opaque agendas. Critics argue that these so-called "fake NGOs" risk distorting policy debates, eroding trust in authentic organizations, and undermining the EU’s democratic processes.

A misguided focus on legitimate NGOs

Recent actions by the European Commission and political groups such as the European People’s Party (EPP) have placed legitimate NGOs under increasing scrutiny. For example, funding rules have been tightened, and some health NGOs have reportedly faced funding denials, with the Commission citing concerns about blurring the lines between advocacy and lobbying.

Civil society organizations have voiced concern that such measures may inadvertently suppress advocacy on vital issues like public health and the environment. Commentators have noted that these policies could send a troubling signal that industry interests are being prioritized over public welfare.

The EPP has criticized some environmental NGOs for allegedly acting as de facto lobbyists and for using EU funds to promote Green Deal policies. This narrative has contributed to a wider perception among some policymakers that NGOs wield disproportionate and unaccountable influence. Yet, while scrutiny of legitimate organizations increases, some observers argue that more urgent threats remain insufficiently addressed.

Concerns over alleged 'fake NGOs'

According to a recent report by EPACA, the European Public Affairs Consultancies' Association, there is growing concern about organizations that present themselves as NGOs while allegedly serving undisclosed corporate or political interests. The widely reported "Qatargate" affair involved the NGO "Fight Impunity," which, according to ongoing investigations, was allegedly used by former MEP Pier Antonio Panzeri for illicit lobbying activities.

Similarly, concerns were raised about the "Democracy Centre for Transparency," which reportedly lobbied on behalf of the Qatari government under the guise of civil society work. Another organization, the "Fondation Democratie et Gouvernance," has been accused in media reports of distributing misleading information to Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) concerning private firms like Dentsu Tracking. Some MEPs, including Anne-Sophie Pelletier and Michèle Rivasi, subsequently raised parliamentary questions based on the disputed information. There is no evidence these MEPs were aware of the controversy surrounding the source.

An individual named Gregory Mathieu, director of "Fondation Democratie et Gouvernance", has been referenced in connection with some of these campaigns. Civil society monitoring groups have identified him as being involved in activities allegedly designed to spread disinformation or influence perception. However, these claims remain allegations, and no formal charges have been reported at the time of writing. Nevertheless, this outlet has confirmed that Mathieu was not registered on the EU Transparency Register, making any lobbying activities legitimate or not, illicit under EU rules. 

These incidents highlight the complexity of the EU's NGO landscape, where a minority of organizations may use deceptive tactics to influence policymaking. Such practices can confuse public discourse, discredit legitimate actors, and steer policy outcomes in undisclosed directions.

A better way forward

Rather than increasing restrictions on well-established NGOs, policymakers could focus on improving transparency across the NGO sector. Stricter disclosure requirements concerning funding sources, governance structures, and affiliations could help differentiate credible organizations from questionable ones.

Institutions such as EU DisinfoLab have already begun work in this area, conducting investigations and raising awareness about disinformation practices tied to the misuse of civil society platforms. The European Commission's "Defence of Democracy" package is another positive step, aiming to bolster transparency and prevent covert influence operations.

Protecting the integrity of EU policymaking

The EU's commitment to democracy requires that all actors in the policymaking space operate transparently and in good faith. As cases of alleged misuse of the NGO framework come to light, it is essential that the response distinguishes between legitimate civil society groups and those acting with hidden motives.

The integrity of EU policymaking depends on the participation of informed, representative, and accountable stakeholders. Strengthening transparency mechanisms and supporting authentic NGOs must be prioritized over broad-brush restrictions. Only through a balanced and evidence-based approach can the EU safeguard both democratic engagement and institutional trust.

Photo by Julia Taubitz on Unsplash

Share this article: