04/06/2025
The Good Lobby and Compassion in World Farming EU brought together EU officials, civil society representatives, legal experts, and engaged citizens to take stock of the European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) after more than a decade of use. Against a backdrop of growing scepticism towards participatory tools and ongoing attacks on civil society, speakers examined whether ECIs are fulfilling their promise as instruments of democratic engagement, and what might be done to reinvigorate them.
Setting the Scene: A “Reality Check” on ECIs
The event opened with a “reality check” presentation by Professor Alberto Alemanno, Founder of The Good Lobby, on the history and performance of ECIs since their inception in 2012. The ECI was conceived as a groundbreaking innovation: for the first time, seven citizens from seven different EU Member States could come together to ask the European Commission to propose (or refrain from proposing) European legislation. In theory, ECIs enable citizens to shape the Union’s policy agenda directly, offering more democratic leverage than any other world region. In practice, however, uptake has been modest:
- 119 ECIs registered between 2012 and 2024 (averaging fewer than 10 per year)
- Only 14 ECIs have ever reached the 1-million-signature threshold (an 11% success rate)
- Of those 14, only two—the “Water Is a Human Right” initiative and “Save Bees & Farmers”—resulted in visible policy shifts, though neither directly led to binding legislation
Low public awareness and the complexity of running a transnational campaign have deterred many NGOs and citizen groups from even attempting an ECI. Many admit being dissuaded by stories of past efforts that stalled, fizzled out, or became bogged down in bureaucracy. In this context, the day’s central question was whether ECIs still offer genuine democratic potential—and, if so, how that potential might finally be realised.
Keynote by the European Ombudsperson: How to preserve the ECI as a meaningful tool of democratic participation
European Ombudsperson Teresa Anjinho then delivered a keynote address, underscoring the ECI’s unique role as a collaborative, non-competitive tool for setting the policy agenda. In her view, ECIs have the potential to close the growing gap between citizens and “Brussels”—particularly at a time when major decisions on AI governance, climate resilience, and energy security can feel increasingly technocratic and remote.
- ECIs vs. Traditional Lobbying: ECIs allow citizens, regardless of financial means, to work together to raise issues of shared concern. Unlike interest-group lobbying or electoral campaigning, a successful ECI reflects grassroots support for change.
- Democratic Credibility: When an ECI secures over a million signatures, it signals lasting trust in EU institutions. However, the Ombudsperson warned that if such efforts repeatedly fail to prompt legislative action, public confidence—in both ECIs and democracy more broadly—will erode.
- Transparency & Communication: She urged the Commission to provide prompt, clear explanations when it decides against a legislative follow-up. Long delays or vague responses risk deepening public cynicism, which she described as “a democratic risk.”
- Ombudsman as Ally: Anjinho also noted her office’s role in ensuring procedural fairness—overseeing how ECIs are registered, how signatures are validated, and how follow-ups are handled. In cases such as the “End the Cage” initiative (discussed later), petitioners have already turned to the Ombudsman for intervention. Her team stands ready to act when citizens demand accountability.
In short, the Ombudsperson argued that ECIs remain worth defending. By fostering transparency, accountability, and accessibility, the EU can still harness the democratic energy that ECIs were designed to unleash.
Case Study: “End the Cage” ECI—From Broad Coalition to Court Challenge
The “End the Cage Age” ECI has become emblematic of both the promise and the limitations of EU participatory democracy.
Why It Gained Traction
- Ambitious Scope: The campaign sought to ban cages for all farmed animals, highlighting them as cruel and unnecessary.
- Broad Support: Launched in 2018, it brought together more than 170 NGOs across the EU.
- Political Endorsement: 21 MEPs supported the initiative at launch; in 2020, 80% of MEPs voted in favour of a resolution to end cage farming.
- Public Mobilisation: The campaign collected 1.4 million validated signatures from all 27 EU Member States.
From Commitment to Delay
The European Commission pledged in 2021 to propose relevant legislation by 2023. However, by late 2023, no proposal had materialised. President von der Leyen omitted the measure from her State of the Union address, citing underestimated costs for farmers.
- Lack of Transparency: No detailed impact assessment or formal justification was issued, fuelling suspicions of political interference.
- Civil Society Disillusionment: Many campaigners felt ignored—raising serious doubts about the ECI’s value if even high-profile efforts can be shelved without explanation.
Legal Action
In 2024, the Citizens’ Committee filed a case at the Court of Justice of the EU, claiming the Commission had breached its obligations under the ECI Regulation. Their main complaints included:
- No binding legislative timeline
- No formal explanatory communication
- No sufficient justification for abandoning the proposal
A ruling is expected in late 2025. If the Court finds in favour of the petitioners, it could significantly strengthen the ECI process. If not, it risks deterring future campaigns.
Reflections & Next Steps: Can the ECI Be Revived?
By the time the closing panel began, several themes had clearly emerged:
- Awareness Remains Low: Too many Europeans still do not know what an ECI is, or how to start one. Even active NGOs often find the process of verifying and coordinating signatures across 27 Member States daunting.
- Clarity Is Crucial: Both community organisers and the Ombudsperson stressed the importance of procedural transparency. The Commission can restore trust by setting clear timelines, explaining why some initiatives do not proceed, and regularly updating campaigners on progress.
- Coalitions Are Key: The success of “End the Cage Age” was due in part to its broad alliance of over 170 NGOs. Future ECIs will likewise depend on cross-border coalitions—uniting environmental, consumer, youth, and labour groups.
- Use Complementary Tools: ECIs must be part of a wider advocacy toolkit. Petitions to the European Parliament, public consultations, and national initiatives all compete for scarce NGO resources. Rather than viewing ECIs as a “silver bullet,” speakers advised integrating them into a broader campaign strategy.
- Digital Infrastructure Can Help: The Ombudsperson noted the need for stronger online tools, such as multilingual templates, standardised signature collection systems, and a live tracker to monitor progress. Such tools could reduce administrative burdens and help younger generations engage more readily.
ECIs remain the world’s only formal mechanism allowing citizens from multiple countries to jointly call for legislative change. Had there been 1,000 or even 5,000 initiatives over the past decade instead of 119, the EU’s policy agenda might look very different today. By making ECIs more visible, transparent, and responsive, the EU has a real opportunity to revitalise participatory democracy—showing that policy is not merely “Brussels at work” but a process co-created with its citizens.