Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen’s response reveals the European Commission’s intention to keep a sharp eye on Greek legislation affecting civil society organizations involved in migration matters, signaling a delicate balancing act between EU oversight and Greek sovereignty. This policy stance is set to impact civil society actors, Greek authorities, and the broader EU framework for migration and asylum, likely stirring reactions from NGOs and member states alike.
The reply is an answer to a parliamentary question by six MEPs across diverse political groups—the Left (Konstantinos Arvanitis, Estrella Galán), S&D (Birgit Sippel, Cecilia Strada), Renew (Fabienne Keller), and Verts/ALE (Tineke Strik)—who raised alarms over Greece’s new law targeting civil society organizations working on migration. They highlighted serious breaches of EU and international legal standards and a disturbing concentration of discretionary power in Greek ministries.
Von der Leyen’s statement refrains from presenting exact legal countermeasures or deadlines, instead emphasizing ongoing dialogue and monitoring. Concrete steps include dialogue during public consultations, engagement in the Rule of Law report process, and scrutiny of law implementation, with the next report expected in July 2026. This constitutes a cautious approach, relying on procedural pressure rather than immediate sanctions or interventions.
Policy-wise, the Commission is advocating for structured, continuous engagement with civil society and simplification of NGO registration requirements, reflecting a preference for openness and transparency over heightened national control. It also demonstrates hesitation to escalate enforcement powers, opting to observe how Greece applies the law in practice.
Greek civil society bodies face uncertainty and potential operational constraints; Greek authorities wrestle with monitoring and compliance expectations under EU scrutiny; EU regulatory bodies gain a precedent for oversight in member states’ asylum frameworks; and EU taxpayers indirectly support monitoring mechanisms without immediate budget increases. This dynamic underscores the tension between national discretion in migration policy and EU commitments to fundamental rights and civil society inclusiveness.