European Democracy Shield: Contribute by 26 May
This past weekend was a stress test for European democracy, as voters in Romania, Poland, and Portugal headed to the polls. The results paint a complicated picture for the political centre.
In Romania’s presidential election, liberal Nicușor Dan came out on top, ahead of the far-right candidate George Simion, much to the relief of many in Brussels. In Poland, the presidential race is headed to a second round as centrist and right-wing candidates run neck and neck. In Portugal, parliamentary elections showed a significant surge in support for the far-right party Chega.
Europe’s electoral landscape is under pressure from Russian interference, populist narratives, and growing social polarisation.
That’s why, back in 2024, Ursula von der Leyen announced the European Democracy Shield, the EU’s upcoming strategy to counter foreign interference and safeguard democratic values. Michael McGrath, Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law, and Consumer Protection, recently outlined four main pillars for the future European Democracy Shield.
- Tackling foreign disinformation and manipulation. McGrath proposed creating an EU network of fact-checkers and introducing a new directive on transparency for interest representation by third countries. The approach to disinformation will include both prebunking (warning people about disinformation before they see it) and debunking (correcting fake news after it spreads). ‘Freedom of expression does not apply to bots, trolls, or fake accounts,’ he added.
- Ensuring fairness and integrity in elections. The Commissioner wants to ensure the safety of political candidates and elected representatives, female politicians in particular. Political parties should have equal opportunities to campaign, especially online. McGrath also called for greater transparency around political content promoted by algorithms. The Digital Services Act and the Regulation on the transparency and targeting of political advertising will require political ads to disclose their sponsors through labels and transparency notices.
- Building societal resilience and preparedness by supporting civil society organisations and independent media, promoting digital and media literacy, and protecting independent research from external interference.
- Encouraging active citizen participation. McGrath stressed the need to involve citizens more directly in elections, democratic debates, and policymaking through tools like citizens’ panels and youth dialogues.
Culture Action Europe believes that culture must be an integral part of the Democracy Shield. We presented our main arguments in the letter about culture as part of the EU’s security and preparedness agenda.
On May 7, 2025, we took part in an online focus group discussion on the European Democracy Shield, which focused on civil society. The event was organised by the Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (DG JUST) of the European Commission.
What does Culture Action Europe propose for the European Democracy Shield?
- A strong, standalone Creative Europe programme in the next EU budget
Since cultural content rooted in democratic values helps counter disinformation, hybrid threats and psychological warfare, we call for a robust and independent Creative Europe programme in the upcoming EU Multiannual Financial Framework 2028–2034. The programme should continue to support cross-border cultural cooperation, networks and platforms, international mobility, and expand access for young and emerging artists.
One concrete proposal is the introduction of micro-grants (from €5,000 to €15,000) for first-time applicants and young artists in the next edition of Creative Europe. These grants could follow a simplified lump-sum model with a short, accessible application process. This light-touch scheme would offer young professionals an opportunity to lead micro-cooperation projects, gain experience with EU funding, and build capacity for future international collaboration.
The next Creative Europe programme should also have its own standalone budget line in the next MFF. If the EU expects culture to safeguard democracy, it needs to provide the sector with its own funding stream. Merging Creative Europe with other programmes—particularly with the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) programme—would pressure cultural projects to meet criteria designed for civic engagement, rather than recognise culture’s role as a space for reflection, critique, and experimentation. It would also mean that cultural organisations must compete with civil society organisations for the same funding pool, although both require dedicated support to do their work well, in ways that complement each other. The full creative and experimental potential of the arts depends on their autonomy and independence in decision-making and content creation.
- Include artistic freedom in the Rule of Law report
Freedom of artistic expression and the autonomy of cultural institutions are increasingly under pressure across the EU. According to the Eurobarometer on Europeans’ attitudes towards culture, 20% of Europeans disagree with the statement that artists in their country can freely express their ideas without fear of censorship or retaliation by the government.
Censorship, political dismissals of cultural leaders, budget cuts aimed at cultural institutions that present non-traditional or experimental work—many of these infringements originate from ruling parties, leaving artists with little protection at the national level.
To address this, Culture Action Europe recommends including a dedicated section on Artistic Freedom in the Rule of Law Report. This could either be a separate section alongside the current four, or part of a broader Freedom of Expression pillar that should cover media, academic, and artistic freedoms. As the Commission is already reviewing the structure of the Report to potentially include the Single Market dimension, this is the right moment to address the current gap and ensure artistic freedom is fully recognised.
- Safeguards for democracy in the implementation of the AI Act
AI has been instrumentalised by autocracies. For example, Russia feeds pro-Kremlin narratives into AI training datasets, as exposed by the Atlantic Council. Their network of propaganda websites, branded as Pravda (Truth), is repeatedly cited on Wikipedia, one of the key data sources for training language models.
AI systems do not discern between truth and falsehood; they amplify statistically common content. If authoritarian narratives dominate training data, AI will inevitably reproduce and reinforce them.
As the EU begins gradually implementing its Artificial Intelligence Act, Culture Action Europe proposes, among other measures, focusing on the following actions:
- Implement mandatory labelling of AI-generated content and deepfakes, in line with Article 50(4) of the AI Act.
- Adopt a more granular and transparent approach to disclosing training data sources for AI models. The current draft version of the AI Code of Practice and summary of data used for training does not provide meaningful detail.
To ensure culture is recognised in the European Democracy Shield, we encourage cultural organisations to contribute to this call for evidence until 26 May. You can provide your vision for the content of the European Democracy Shield and share real examples from your country: cases of foreign manipulation, disinformation, or the weaponisation of culture.