The right to peaceful protest is essential to our democracies, allowing people to come together with a unified voice to support or oppose key issues. It serves as a powerful mechanism for individuals to hold their governments to account and is often the last resort when prior messages go unheard. However, politicians often perceive this right as a threat, especially when force of numbers demonstrates support for an issue.

In our recently published Rule of Law report, Liberties’ members reported an increase in restrictions on the right to peaceful protest in all countries - from bans on individual protests to the disproportionate use of force by the police and legislative changes. A widespread trend emerged of restricted pro-Palestine protests and environmental defenders receiving particularly harsh penalties.

Bans on Protests

Restrictions on various protest movements justified on public safety grounds were documented in many member states. In Germany, the Berlin Assembly Authorities implemented a temporary blanket ban targeting pro-Palestine demonstrations. Initially, the ban targeted celebrations of the mass murder and pro-Hamas demonstrations but later extended to all pro-Palestinian protests. Similarly, in Latvia, an unregistered Free Palestine movement protest was banned after an assessment by the state security service that the event would, among other risks, harm the country’s international interests.

The Estonian police banned a protest in support of Palestinians, which was later declared unlawful by the administrative court. In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán publicly prejudiced support for Palestinians by linking it with terrorism, equating solidarity with civilians victims to threats to the public order. As the fifteen attempts to organise protests were successively banned, the government and the Prime Minister re-asserted their power by deciding what can be demonstrated for, namely, topics in line with their political interests. Following the Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, the Hungarian government has repeatedly declared and extended the state of danger, allowing for the adoption of emergency decrees restricting, among other rights, the freedom to assemble. Both the Hungarian Supreme Court and Constitutional Court upheld the protest bans on the basis of public safety and security, legalising the practice of police-authorised restrictions in times of conflict.

Further restrictions, including bans on slogans and signs during demonstrations, sought to criminalise protesters. Several individuals were arrested or fined for displaying signs or slogans related to Palestine. In Belgium, activists faced administrative sanctions for carrying a Palestinian flag or the keffiyeh. Similarly, in the Netherlands, attendees of an Extinction Rebellion demonstration were prohibited from mentioning the conflict in the Middle East. The enforcement of restrictions went as far as arrests, as Croatian activists were charged with misdemeanor after projecting a message in support of Palestine on a building across from the Israeli Embassy in Zagreb.

In Hungary, a demonstrator faced criminal charges after wearing a gas mask and removing it after being asked by the police. In a worrying trend of criminalising protest activities, several activists were arrested and charged with sedition before an Extinction Rebellion demonstration in the Netherlands.

Disproportionate use of force by the police

The criminalisation of environmental and pro-Palestine protesters was worsened by the violent repression of the police through excessive use of force. This was particularly notable in Sweden, where student encampments in support of Palestinians were forcibly displaced and participants were charged with criminal offenses. Pain grips, water guns and water cannons were used against environmental activists, pro-Palestinian and anti-immigration demonstrators in Germany, the Netherlands and Ireland.

Environmental activists faced similar fates, The NGO ‘France Nature Environnement’ reported concerns to the UN Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders following the violent repression of protesters during a demonstration against the A69 highway. In Sweden, a woman was dismissed from her job at the Swedish Energy Agency for participating in an environmental demonstration and a growing number of eco-activists were fined for participating in peaceful protests.

Restrictive laws

With the normalisation of restrictions on the right to peaceful protest, several countries have proposed or implemented legislative changes to legalise protest bans, increase police powers and criminalise basic protest actions. In Estonia, the Ministry of Interior proposed an amendment to the Law Enforcement Act to give police forces the authority to ban protests. The Italian government introduced two bills severely undermining the right to protest. Law No. 6/2024 and Bill No.1660 on public security both reinforce the criminalisation of individuals attending protests, specifically targeting eco-activists with disproportionate fines and prison sentences of up to 6 years.

The ‘Lex Assassination’ act in Slovakia amends the basic legal regulation of the freedom to assemble, introducing further restrictions on this fundamental right. Most notably, it prohibits holding assemblies within 50m of state bodies and institutions, and extends the grounds to limit or prohibit protest.

Most recently, the Hungarian government passed a new bill banning any assemblies that could ‘endanger minors’ by advertising homosexuality, such as the annual pride march. Adopted in just one day through the fast-track legislative procedure, it creates a constitutional basis to restrict the right to peaceful protest and while primarily targeting the Pride march ahead of its 30th anniversary in 2025 could also be used against other protests.

These restrictive patterns mark an alarming normalisation of systemic curbs on peaceful protest. Individual bans translated into blanket restrictions, eventually becoming cemented into law through legislation and court judgments. As a powerful form of collective action in the human rights toolbox, urgent action is needed to preserve the right for people to gather and speak out.

Trend Analyses

• Shrinking Civic Space: How Attacks on Human Right Defenders Undermine the Rule of Law
• Caged In: How The Growing Politicisation of Public Service Media and The Repression of Journalists Threaten Media Freedom in Europe
• The Cost of Corruption: How Weak Oversight Enables Wrongdoing in Europe
• States Shun Human Rights Law, Further Marginalise the Vulnerable
• Governments Cut Corners to Avoid Accountability, Steamrolling Checks and Balances: Trend Analysis

Reads & Resources

• Download the full Liberties Rule of Law Report 2025
• Press Release: Decline of Democracy Deepens, EU Tools Toothless: Report
• Op-ed: The EU Should Reinforce Democracy’s Guardrails Before it's Too Late
• Previous annual rule of law reports: 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020

Photo by Luke Braswell on Unsplash