Civic Space as a Site of Conflict: Human Rights Defenders, Illiberalism, and the Enduring Tension within International Human Rights Law in Europe

In recent years, Europe has witnessed an intensification of political polarisation, ideological radicalisation, and the consolidation of populist and illiberal forms of governance. These developments have transformed civic space into a contested arena of conflict, where states and non-state actors increasingly challenge democratic institutions, the rule of law, and the universality of human rights. Human rights defenders (HRDs), civil society organisations, and independent institutions have become focal points of this conflict, frequently portrayed as elitist, unpatriotic, or as threats to national sovereignty. Such narratives have facilitated the instrumentalisation of domestic and international legal norms, contributing to the progressive erosion of civic space and exposing structural vulnerabilities within international and regional human rights regimes.

This paper examines how political polarisation and ideological confrontation generate enduring tensions within the European human rights paradigm and assesses the capacity of international human rights law to respond effectively to these dynamics. It argues that, despite Europe’s comparatively dense legal framework—including the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Union legal order, and the Council of Europe system—human rights norms are increasingly reframed, resisted, or selectively complied with in polarised political environments. Governments and political movements have invoked security, migration control, religion, and national identity to justify restrictive measures affecting freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, disproportionately impacting minorities and those defending their rights.

Drawing on selected case studies from Hungary, Poland, and the United Kingdom, the paper analyses how HRDs operate within civic spaces shaped by illiberal governance, hostile public discourse, and regulatory and procedural constraints. It explores how international and regional mechanisms—such as the European Court of Human Rights, EU rule of law procedures, and UN treaty bodies—are mobilised by HRDs both as tools of resistance and as sites of legal and political conflict. Attention is paid to the strategic use of litigation, compliance narratives, and accusations of “lawfare,” revealing how international law itself becomes a terrain of contestation rather than a neutral arbiter.

The paper concludes that the shrinking of civic space in Europe reflects a broader crisis of the international legal order, characterised by shifting power relations between states and non-state actors and the growing malleability of core legal concepts. By situating the struggle over civic space within the broader tension between conflict and cooperation in international law, the paper highlights the urgent need to reinforce the protective, and legitimacy-conferring functions of international human rights law in an era of deep political division.