Listen: No evidence of wrongdoing, yet EU NGO funding inquiry sparks turmoil

Wednesday’s inaugural session of the European Parliament’s new scrutiny working group, the one set up to investigate transparency around NGO funding, did not exactly go as planned. The meeting descended into chaos within the first half hour. Progressive and left-leaning MEPs walked out almost immediately, calling the probe a politically-motivated assault on civil society. 

Production: By Europod, in co-production with Sphera Network.

EUobserver is proud to have an editorial partnership with Europod to co-publish the podcast series “Long Story Short” hosted by Evi Kiorri. The podcast is available on all major platforms.

You can find the transcript here if you prefer reading:

So, Wednesday’s inaugural session of the European Parliament’s new scrutiny working group, the one set up to investigate transparency around NGO funding, did not exactly go as planned. The meeting descended into chaos within the first half hour. Progressive and left-leaning MEPs walked out almost immediately, calling the probe a politically-motivated assault on civil society.

MEPs said the scrutiny group aimed at a far-right “witch hunt,” pointing out that no NGO had been found to have broken any rules, while accusing the European People’s Party of enabling the far-right’s narrative.

Inside the room, according to the EUobserver, the atmosphere wasn’t much calmer. The chair struggled to maintain order amid shouts of “shame, shame” and even a stray remark comparing the scene to a Hollywood production.

Greens, Renew Europe, and The Left either walked out or refused to attend altogether. Their argument is that a working group on “transparency” was refusing to share documents and had built its mandate in a way that singled out NGOs while ignoring other EU fund beneficiaries, from corporations to consultancies.

Meanwhile, commission officials, including the heads of climate and environment directorates general, were grilled by right-wing MEPs. The accusations centred on the idea that the commission had used environmental NGOs to lobby for the European Green Deal. But once again, officials repeated that there was no evidence of this. Instead, they explained that NGOs receiving operational grants help support policy work, but are not funded to lobby on the commission’s behalf.

Environmental NGOs say this entire process is political theatre: unnecessary, biased, and designed to undermine their legitimacy. They point to existing oversight mechanisms, to a recent European Court of Auditors report, and to the Parliament’s own budgetary control procedures, all of which found no misuse of funds.

Now this is important because civil society groups, from environmental watchdogs to human-rights organisations, play a crucial role in EU policymaking. They provide expertise, support communities, and help hold both governments and corporations to account. Public funding allows them to exist independently and work for the public interest, not private profit.

A probe that focuses only on NGOs, and not on all EU fund beneficiaries, risks painting a distorted picture: as if civil society is the suspicious actor, while everyone else is beyond scrutiny. And as many MEPs pointed out, this selective approach comes at a time when far-right parties across Europe have been ramping up “foreign agent” rhetoric and pushing policies that shrink civic space.

So, this is more than a budget dispute, it’s an early test of how the Parliament intends to treat civil society. Because when mistrust is stirred without evidence, it doesn’t just weaken NGOs. It weakens public participation, oversight, transparency, and ultimately democracy itself.

And while this working group focuses on hypothetical wrongdoing by environmental NGOs, no similar urgency seems to apply when it comes to investigating large corporate beneficiaries, despite repeated calls from some political groups.

So, what now?

This scrutiny working group is expected to continue its work for the next six months. But with most progressive groups refusing to participate, its political legitimacy is already under question.

The commission, meanwhile, says it will keep applying the existing rules, which, according to both auditors and the Parliament’s own discharge procedures, are robust and already working as intended.
NGOs say they will continue to cooperate with all legitimate oversight, while also calling out what they see as a targeted political campaign.