Could you introduce the Austrian League for Human Rights and its background?

“The League is the oldest human rights organization in Austria. It was founded in 1926 in the context of an international movement that led to the creation of the International League for Human Rights in Paris in 1921. This International League remains our umbrella organization to this day.” The original idea was “to have a League in every country advocating for human rights.” At that time, “human rights were not yet formulated in international treaties as they are today.” The Austrian League was dissolved with the Anschluss in 1938 and re-established within a year after WW2, in 1946.

Looking back, what types of issues did the League address in its early decades?

“In the interwar period up until 1938, the League’s activities focused on the plight and legal protection of persecuted individuals, advocating for the abolition of the death penalty, combating anti-Semitism, and opposing discrimination in all its forms. In addition, the League was an early advocate for reforms to abortion and marriage laws. After the war, and particularly from the 1960s onwards, the League campaigned strongly for multilingualism and for the rights of minorities in Austria, especially in the nation’s outer regions where borders had been redrawn. To this day, because we are so old, we have not specialized in one particular area. Unlike many NGOs in Austria that focus only on a specific issue such as refugee protection, disability rights, or women’s rights, we have this very broad approach. This allows us to address urgent issues, but also to keep the meta-level in view. This means looking at civil society and the human rights sector as a whole and asking what is needed there to strengthen human rights advocacy overall.”

How does this broad approach translate into concrete, day-to-day work?

“A key instrument is our annual human rights report. Every year on 10^th December, which is Human Rights Day, the League publishes a review of the year (…) to assess the human rights situation in Austria. We invite experts from various fields and ask them to give us an insight, including where gaps remain, even though Austria is at a high level internationally.”

Many people may assume that a wealthy EU member like Austria has few domestic human rights challenges. What would you consider to be the main challenges?

“Austria has a fundamentally good understanding of human rights. The question is always how much political will there is to fill these rights with life. Children’s rights are one example: We lobbied for children’s rights for a very long time and they were ultimately included at the level of the Austrian constitution in 2011. But there is still room for human rights improvement, particularly regarding the rights of persons with disabilities. Another major area is asylum and migration. The asylum law is the second most frequently amended law in Austria, because it is constantly tightened and made more complicated.  This is often driven by political motivations instead of thoughtful consideration. There are also serious gaps in care. For example, the shortage of adequate accommodation and attention for children and teenagers who require psychiatric care is a pressing issue.”

National elections changed the political landscape in Austria in 2024. Has this affected civil society?

“Yes, definitely. The type of government makes a big difference for civil society. Governments are key interlocutors for NGOs, and some political parties are more willing to cooperate and listen -and perhaps even implement our suggestions- than others. From the perspective of civil society, the current government is much better than what we could have expected if the ÖVP and FPÖ had formed a coalition.”

For our international readers less familiar with Austrian politics, could you explain the party-political context?

“The strongest party in Austria is now the FPÖ, the Freedom Party of Austria, which pursues very right-wing, populist policies. The ÖVP is a conservative party that is increasingly moving to the right. Although these two parties attempted to form a coalition government, they failed. Instead, there is now a three-party coalition of the ÖVP, together with the Social Democrats and the neoliberals.”

Despite being in opposition, has the FPÖ, as the biggest party in parliament, affected civil society in any way?

“The FPÖ submitted an inquiry to government ministries, asking in regard to around 700 organizations (…) what state funding these organisations received. This was marketed under the slogan ‘Where do our millions in taxes go?’, even though there already is a transparency portal where you can see where all the funding goes. The aim of the inquiry was only to create artificial scandals by selectively picking information [and using that on social media]. At the same time, they distinguish between ‘good’ civil society, such as volunteer fire departments or marching bands, and the human rights sector portrayed as ‘the evil part of civil society, doing left-wing, woke, and queer things.’ This is meant to pit people against each other [and] is extremely dangerous.”

Do you see potential in cooperating with or including these traditional local civil society groups in rural areas?

“Fundamentally, that would be exciting, because human rights need to be discussed wherever people sit together and talk about their regular, daily lives. That is where frustration emerges and is expressed. The question is whether there is a voice that brings human rights to the table [and] tries to counteract hatred, division, and narratives are spread by populist parties.”

Continuing on the subject of representing different voices, Austria is a federal state made up of 9 individual states. However, over one-fifth of the population live in Vienna alone. How does this imbalance affect your work?

“You are addressing a pertinent problem in Austria. Human rights work is unevenly distributed and (…) most of it takes place in Vienna. This also goes for the League. Although our statutes allow regional offices in every state, we actually only have one in [the state of] Styria. We are trying to broaden our representation, but it is very, very difficult because we lack the structure for it.”

Which human rights frameworks are currently under pressure in Austria?

“One is the European Convention on Human Rights. Some politicians argue that it needs to be reconsidered, mainly because of issues like the non-refoulement principle and the desire to deport foreign nationals who have committed crimes, even when their lives are in danger. If you start discussing which specific provisions [of human rights frameworks] you do not like, then you quickly get from bad to worse. This weakens the very foundation of human rights protection.”

Finishing on a new development, Austria recently introduced a body to investigate alleged police violence. How do you assess this development?

“We are very glad that this body exists. It was a long-standing demand from the League and other NGOs. However, this body is located within the Ministry of the Interior, which raises questions about its independence. Nonetheless, investigations are in practice carried out independently, with the police officers involved [in the investigations] not under the chain of command of the police force. There even is an NGO advisory board. From what we hear, it seems to be working quite well. It is definitely progress that this body exists and that NGOs are involved.”

Thank you for your time and the interview.