EU Rights Chief: Governments Resist Scrutiny
Daily Monitor
September 17, 2026
EU Rights Chief: Governments Resist Scrutiny
Governments across Europe are increasingly resistant to scrutiny, raising concerns about the uneven implementation of fundamental rights.
In a candid discussion with EUobserver, Sirpa Rautio, director of the European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), shed light on the challenges surrounding the implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Speaking in Brussels ahead of her presentation of the 2025 Fundamental Rights Report to the European Parliament’s LIBE committee, Rautio emphasized that while the charter’s content remains robust, its uneven application across member states continues to undermine its potential.
Rautio explained that the charter, proclaimed 25 years ago, consolidates pre-existing human rights frameworks and binds both the EU and its member states within its scope. However, she noted that the real challenge lies not in the charter’s substance but in its implementation. “Implementation means you already have a directive or national law, but the actual lawmaking—whether at the EU or national level—can also be problematic if fundamental rights assessments or safeguards are insufficient,” she remarked.
The FRA has worked extensively with the European Commission to bolster the charter’s application, serving as a knowledge hub for its provisions. While the charter is well-recognized at the EU level, Rautio highlighted the complexities at the national level, where understanding the scope of EU law remains a hurdle. She credited the Luxembourg Court’s growing body of case law for enhancing the charter’s significance, noting that its judgments have increasingly influenced national courts and parliaments. “Ten years ago, I would have been skeptical about its importance at the national level, but awareness-raising and case law have made it more relevant,” she admitted.
Rautio also pointed to specific cases where the charter has proven pivotal, such as Finland’s legislative reforms on internal security and surveillance. In these instances, the Luxembourg Court’s judgments provided critical guidance on balancing privacy rights with security measures, underscoring the charter’s practical utility.
On broader societal issues, Rautio reflected on the evolving debates around gender equality, anti-discrimination, LGBTQI+ rights, and civil society. She traced the erosion of the rule of law in some member states to a decade ago, exacerbated by crises such as 9/11 and Covid-19. “Strange alliances and conspiracy theories have sown seeds of division,” she observed, warning that these fault lines threaten the cohesion of fundamental rights across Europe.
Rautio explained that the charter, proclaimed 25 years ago, consolidates pre-existing human rights frameworks and binds both the EU and its member states within its scope. However, she noted that the real challenge lies not in the charter’s substance but in its implementation. “Implementation means you already have a directive or national law, but the actual lawmaking—whether at the EU or national level—can also be problematic if fundamental rights assessments or safeguards are insufficient,” she remarked.
The FRA has worked extensively with the European Commission to bolster the charter’s application, serving as a knowledge hub for its provisions. While the charter is well-recognized at the EU level, Rautio highlighted the complexities at the national level, where understanding the scope of EU law remains a hurdle. She credited the Luxembourg Court’s growing body of case law for enhancing the charter’s significance, noting that its judgments have increasingly influenced national courts and parliaments. “Ten years ago, I would have been skeptical about its importance at the national level, but awareness-raising and case law have made it more relevant,” she admitted.
Rautio also pointed to specific cases where the charter has proven pivotal, such as Finland’s legislative reforms on internal security and surveillance. In these instances, the Luxembourg Court’s judgments provided critical guidance on balancing privacy rights with security measures, underscoring the charter’s practical utility.
On broader societal issues, Rautio reflected on the evolving debates around gender equality, anti-discrimination, LGBTQI+ rights, and civil society. She traced the erosion of the rule of law in some member states to a decade ago, exacerbated by crises such as 9/11 and Covid-19. “Strange alliances and conspiracy theories have sown seeds of division,” she observed, warning that these fault lines threaten the cohesion of fundamental rights across Europe.
Drafted & Edited by Investigative Desk | AboMatrix