Czech Human Rights Agenda Faces Conservative Pushback Under Babis Government

When researchers studied the provision of assistance to victims of domestic violence in the Czech Republic in 2020, they described a system rife with communication gaps. Since then, explains one of the researchers, anthropologist Dana Moree of Charles University, the progress made over the past five years is evident. “New data shows that today police officers, social workers and intervention centres communicate with one another much more routinely," she says. Yet just as the data confirms for the first time that the interdisciplinary network has in fact accelerated assistance in the regions, the government is, paradoxically, dismantling it. Experts say that reassigning officials to individual ministries signals a return to isolated decision-making. “One piece of good news regarding domestic violence is that, according to the data collected, cooperation has become almost automatic,” says Moree, referring to the research findings. She says that organisations regularly meet at inter-agency meetings to discuss specific cases, which was far from the norm in the past. “They know about each other and have each other’s phone numbers. This helps them resolve specific cases more quickly and often more effectively. In short, cooperation makes sense.” Experts are therefore critical of the fact that these responsibilities are now being spread across individual ministries. “In this context, the current shift of responsibilities to individual ministries is absurd – instead of celebrating this success, the central authority is destroying what has been built through cross-system collaboration,” says Moree, who has been researching domestic violence since 2018. A sudden change This fundamental change to the human rights agenda came suddenly, and without the usual public comment period. Civil servants and experts learned about the reassignment of responsibilities and the de facto breakdown of inter-ministerial coordination from the media; some even found out while on holiday. On May 18, Prime Minister Andrej Babis’s cabinet approved the transfer of certain responsibilities from the Office of the Government. According to media reports, some ministers had been made aware of the planned change two weeks earlier. “The whole thing was cooked up behind closed doors so that no one would have a chance to influence or slow down this plan,” says Klara Simackova Laurencikova, a former government human rights commissioner. She describes the cabinet’s decision-making process as “absolutely unacceptable” and disrespectful towards state employees. In response to the decision, civil servants went on a one-day strike on June 5. At a press conference on the industrial action, Ondrej Medal, a spokesperson for the Straka union at the Office of the Government, said that the planned changes violated the principle of social dialogue and were not merely technical. Civil servants and unions are now considering legal action in a bid to force a review of the manner in which the reorganisation is being carried out. Although Tunde Bartha, head of the Office of the Government, has apologised for the lack of debate, she stands by the decisions. In an interview with Denik N, she admitted that the move was political. “Why all of a sudden? Because, as I said, otherwise we wouldn’t have done it under that media barrage and the pressure from the expert community. It took political courage.” To understand exactly what Babis’s shake-up changes, we need to break down how the state apparatus functioned to date. Key to advancing the agenda was the professional Human Rights Department at the Office of the Government: government employees who actually drafted legislative proposals, administered grant programs and coordinated cooperation among individual ministries. The departments oversee government councils and committees – advisory bodies composed of external experts, academics, and individuals from the non-profit sector, with whom the government consults on its policies. The reorganisation shattered this ecosystem. The leadership of the Office of the Government claimed that officials were simply being moved from one position to another on a one-to-one basis and that the agenda would not suffer. However, in a matter of days, that turned out to be untrue. “Some people aren’t included in these plans. This mainly concerns those working under contract. Some contracts are being transferred, but others expire with the redeployment,” says one source from the Office of the Government. Moreover, the approach to transferring working positions varies from ministry to ministry, the official says. “They tell us that the details will be worked out at the ministry level. We’re talking about people who have expertise and have worked here for decades.” iROZHLAS repeatedly requested comment from the Office of the Government and from the current human rights commissioner, Tatana Mala of Babis’s ANO party. Neither the ministries nor their top officials responded to numerous requests over several weeks. Photo: Kristina Roháčková | Source: iROZHLAS Coordination under threat The human rights agenda is inherently cross-sectoral. Human rights issues arise in healthcare, education, social affairs, criminal procedure and similar areas. If it were transferred to a single ministry, it would lose its inter-ministerial authority, as well as the ability to provide input on government-level work. At the same time, this area is subject to a number of international agreements and state commitments. “Through the Office of the Government, we had the opportunity to amplify the voices of vulnerable groups, promote dialogue and encourage their participation in public policy-making,” says former commissioner Simackova Laurencikova. “We served as a forum for dialogue among civil society, non-governmental organizations, academia and government agencies, so that these people could genuinely meet, listen to one another and work together effectively. Not just alongside one another, but together.” In Simackova Laurencikova’s view, this society-wide coordination has been the main reason for the significant progress made on the issue of domestic and sexual violence in recent years. “We succeeded in drafting and enacting a redefinition of rape and in drafting a new, comprehensive law on domestic violence, which, for the first time ever, establishes a uniform definition of what constitutes domestic violence,” she says. According to Simackova Laurencikova, if officials find themselves in a subordinate position within a ministry, their bargaining power will be significantly curbed. “Let’s say you’re drafting an action plan pointing out that social service facilities are failing to adequately address the protection of the human rights of clients with intellectual disabilities. If the parent ministry then tells you, ‘No, we think the system is set up properly,’ then as a rank-and-file official in that ministry, you have no chance of getting the issue off the ground.” She also cites a specific example from the past: “When the Ministry of Regional Development was drafting the Building Code, the requirement to make buildings and government offices accessible was omitted from all regulations. From our position at the Office of the Government, we had the opportunity to amplify the voices of vulnerable groups and set the dialogue on the right track.” Prime Minister Babis has attempted to defend the reorganisation by citing a 2023 analysis by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that assesses the state of the public administration. “Even the OECD says to consider placing councils that do not address a government’s priorities, or are not cross-sectoral, under individual ministries,” he said. A closer reading of the analysis, however, shows that Babis’s interpretation omitted important context. While the document does allow for the transfer of certain specific councils, it in fact calls for strengthening the coordinating role directly under the Office of the Government when it comes to cross-sectoral issues, such as the human rights agenda. Furthermore, the OECD emphasised that any changes must be preceded by an in-depth analysis of effectiveness – an analysis that Babis’s cabinet failed to conduct. Under pressure from experts, the prime minister finally agreed to a compromise: two new offices will be established within the Office of the Government: one for human rights and the protection of minorities, and one for mental health and addiction. Experts say, however, these will be merely empty shells. “It will be more like a secretariat. It will lack specialised teams and capacity. All that will remain are secretaries who send out invitations and take minutes at meetings, but expertise on the legislative process, policy concepts and action plans will vanish from the Office of the Government for good,” warns Simackova Laurencikova. According to information provided to iROZHLAS, even civil servants themselves have not had their concerns raised. “We still have questions about this. Honestly, I don’t know how it’s all going to work,” said one. At the same time, however, they said they considered the current discussions at the various ministries to be constructive, even if not all of them can be so described. The cabinet’s actions drew an immediate reaction, both from officials and from experts serving on committees and working groups. “As for advisory bodies such as committees and working groups, we know of dozens of people who have resigned at this stage or are seriously considering standing down. Some of them resigned immediately,” says Medal, spokesperson for Straka, the trade union organisation at the Office of the Government. Anna Smyslova, another representative of the union, says some agencies are already completely paralysed, including the Committee for the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Violence Against Women. Yet this committee included key figures in the field; of 20 members, eight came directly from the non-profit sector, which provides direct assistance to victims. Last week, Lucie Fukova, the government commissioner for Roma minority affairs, resigned from her post, citing her disagreement with the transfer of the Roma agenda to the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs. Following her departure, Vice Chair Marian Dancso and member Tomas Scuka also stepped down as of the end of June. According to a statement provided to the Romea website, there are serious concerns that placing the agenda under the ministry will reduce Roma issues to a purely “social issue” and reinforce harmful stereotypes. In the last two weeks, iROZHLAS repeatedly requested a statement from the current human rights commissioner, Tatana Mala. She did not respond to any calls, while her assistant, who could be reached by phone, stated that Mala was in meetings. Only Justice Minister Jeronym Tejc of the ANO party replied, asserting that the equality agenda will not disappear. “The Ministry of Justice is not only in charge of criminal law legislation, but also civil legislation. I believe that where the equality agenda concerns the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, we will find common ground,” he said. He added that when the agenda was located at the Office of the Government, the Ministry of Justice was also significantly involved in legislation related to domestic violence and the physical punishment of children. Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay ‘Children long for physical punishment’ Developments surrounding the Department of Gender Equality have garnered a lot of attention. The original government plan assumed that it would come under the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, helmed by Ales Juchelka of the ANO party. At the last moment, however, the department was assigned to the Justice Ministry. Human Rights Commissioner Mala is the person behind the change. “I personally asked the head of the Office of the Government that the equality agenda not be transferred to the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, as planned, but be moved to the Ministry of Justice. I am convinced that the agenda will find support there. I believe that it will work there and that justice will be receptive to this agenda,” Mala told iROZHLAS last month. According to sources from the state administration, this sudden turn was sparked by fear on the part of experts about the ideological orientation of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. They were concerned that the leadership of the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs under Juchelka would prioritise a conservative concept of family policy over equal opportunities, while suppressing the human rights dimension of the agenda. A key adviser to Minister Juchelka is the lawyer and former vice-chairman of the conservative Alliance for the Family, Jan Gregor. The group has been fighting against the rights of sexual minorities for a long time and rejects the legislative ban on physical punishment of children, which it calls “nonsense”. The ideological background of people connected to the Alliance for the Family is illustrated by the texts they publish themselves. For example, in a text on its blog, Alliance co-founder and vice chair David Floryk defends the physical punishment of children with a reference to The Bible. “Unrestrained and chaotic impulses lead a child to selfish behaviour. His problem is his foolish and rebellious heart… It is precisely in this context that The Bible understands physical punishment. Well-intended and correctly executed punishment restores order and atones for guilt… I believe that this is precisely what children long for deep down,” Floryk writes. Gregor himself challenged recently approved changes to the Civil Code, which newly declares that the human dignity of a child is impacted by physical punishment or mental hardship. In an article for Conservative News, Gregor warned that the law would lead to “mental suffering of the child” and the state would gain a tool for “bullying suspicious families” that are, for instance, “highly alternative or religiously based”. At the same time, the text of the law only states that educational resources must not endanger the health and development of the child – it does not contain a provision on inspections or sanctions for parents. Officials’ concerns stem from the axing of both personnel and projects at the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs after Juchelka took office. According to Denik N, these cuts were made without any expert justification. For instance, Juchelka’s team cut 370 million crowns (15 million euros) from grant calls promoting freedom of career choice and from funding allocated to childcare groups. Denik N wrote that all of these projects were designed to improve the labour market outcomes of women and other disadvantaged groups. The responsible departments were not consulted on these decisions, and members of the program partnership, including trade unions and civil society organisations, also opposed them. The cuts were a purely political decision by the ministerial leadership. Minister Juchelka defends the cuts on pragmatic grounds: “Since 2021, we have allocated a total of 16 billion crowns to soft and educational gender projects. If, as some say, we have still not achieved equality, then that 16 billion crowns clearly did not help us achieve it either.” Protester dressed as a character from ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ take part in a demonstration against government’s plans to terminate the Istanbul Convention in front of headquarters of the Ordo Iuris Organization (an independent legal organization) in Warsaw, Poland, 24 July 2020. EPA-EFE/RADEK PIETRUSZKA Goodbye to Istanbul In parallel with the dismantling of bureaucratic structures, the Babis government has taken a significant step backwards in foreign policy. It quietly revoked a non-binding resolution passed by the previous government concerning the adoption of the Istanbul Convention, which focuses on combating violence against women and domestic violence. The Czech Republic signed the document in May 2016 as one of the last EU member states. However, ratification – which would have made the document legally binding for the state – has repeatedly been delayed for political reasons over the past decade. Government spokesperson Karla Mrackova explained the step by saying that the signing of the convention was tied to the term of office of the previous cabinet and that its revocation would occur “automatically”. The Office of the Government did not respond to follow-up questions. However, it may be assumed that no public authority will address the adoption of the document during the current electoral term. Representatives of the coalition government have attempted to soften media criticism by arguing that human rights committees and NGOs have been nothing but financial resources for themselves. “It is necessary to ask whether the outcry on the part of some is not precisely because they are afraid of the fact that tens to hundreds of millions of subsidies are being paid out in this area,” said Tejc in a discussion on TV Nova. However, people in the field strongly reject this. “It is an absolute untruth and a most unfair attack on representatives of civil society. These people have worked on councils for years voluntarily, completely free of charge and provided expertise to the state. These councils never approved subsidies for specific organisations,” Simackova Laurencikova says. In her view, the councils issued only systemic recommendations. At the same time, compliance with the European directive against domestic violence may also be at stake. Its adoption is binding for all member states and the Czech Republic must introduce it into its legal system by 2027. “To a large extent, it copies the Istanbul Convention, so it affects a large number of areas, far from just criminal law. That is why it is unfortunate that right now there is such a fundamental weakening, or even paralysis, of the entire apparatus,” says sociologist Blanka Nyklova from the Institute of Sociology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic. The directive orders states to build capacities to help victims of domestic and sexual violence. Each country will have to provide a “sufficient number” of shelters, which must offer a safe haven and reflect the needs of children. Furthermore, specialised centres for victims of rape and sexual violence, which will ensure immediate care and secure evidence, must be established. However, Czech reality is far from European requirements. As findings in the previous instalments of this series have shown, there is a critical shortage of safe shelters in the Czech Republic, with a shortfall of up to 3,000 places in shelters for victims of domestic violence. What’s more, the housing crisis is drastically worsening the situation; due to the lack of affordable rental housing, victims have nowhere to go after leaving shelters, which often forces them to return to their abusers. The cost of this system failure is high. When the state is unable to provide a timely and safe solution, violence escalates at the most high-risk moment: separation. Women actually die – cases the system did not catch in time end up in courts as serious bodily harm or femicide. This article is part of a five-part series produced in collaboration between data journalists from Czech Radio and researchers from the Institute of Sociology and Charles University. Their shared goal was to identify barriers in the system of support for victims of domestic violence. Translated from the Czech original by Ian Willoughby The production of this investigation was supported by a grant from the Journalism Science Alliance.