Council of Europe move targets antisemitism, anti-Muslim hatred, and wider religious intolerance
As hate incidents and polarisation spill across borders, Council of Europe Secretary General Alain Berset has tied the protection of religious minorities to the organisation’s core post-war promise of “never again” — and to its day-to-day work on anti-discrimination and democratic resilience. The approach is both symbolic and institutional: from Holocaust remembrance and interreligious dialogue to the practical coordination of Council of Europe bodies that monitor racism, intolerance, and member states’ human-rights compliance. :contentReference
On 5 December 2025 in Strasbourg, the Council of Europe announced that Irene Kitsou-Milonas had begun her mandate as the Secretary General’s Special Representative on antisemitism, anti-Muslim hatred, and all forms of religious intolerance, having assumed duties on 1 December. In the announcement, Berset framed the post as a response to forces of hate that “weaken democracy and divide communities,” calling this work “fundamental” to protecting the Council of Europe’s “peace project.”
The appointment matters for religious minorities because it is designed as a coordination and influence role across the Council of Europe’s machinery — not just a one-off statement. The mandate includes building regular dialogue with religious leaders and communities, supporting Holocaust remembrance initiatives, and working closely with bodies such as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) and the anti-discrimination steering committee CDADI.
That institutional emphasis became clearer again on 27 January 2026, during the Council of Europe’s Holocaust commemoration in Strasbourg. Berset warned that hatred targeting people “for their faith” persists, and argued that remembrance must translate into refusing “all forms of religious intolerance, here and now.”
Where “religious minorities” fits into the Council of Europe’s toolbox
Unlike the European Union, the Council of Europe’s leverage is grounded in human-rights standards and monitoring across 46 member states — most visibly through the European Convention on Human Rights system and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. In practice, religious-minority protection often intersects with wider issues the Council tracks: hate speech, discrimination in education or employment, security-driven restrictions, and unequal treatment by public authorities.
In addition, the Council’s minority-protection architecture includes the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, widely described in Council of Europe proceedings as a central legally binding instrument in this field. While the treaty is not limited to religion alone, it frequently overlaps with religious identity in minority communities and is part of the broader rights landscape Berset’s office operates in.
What changes now — and what to watch
The Special Representative’s mandate is not an enforcement power in itself; it is a political and administrative lever: setting priorities, keeping pressure on coordination, and shaping how the Council engages with member states and partners. The announcement explicitly points to cooperation with other international fora — including EU and OSCE platforms — and to producing strategy papers and proposals for Council of Europe action.
For minority communities, the test will be whether this role leads to measurable outcomes: stronger implementation of ECRI standards, more consistent follow-up when governments tolerate or minimise religiously motivated hate, and clearer public guidance on protecting freedom of religion or belief while safeguarding public order without discrimination.
In recent weeks, Berset has also been a visible figure in Council of Europe debates on Europe’s “democratic security” and the resilience of the continent’s legal framework — themes that, in practice, determine whether minority protections hold firm when politics hardens. For background, see The European Times’ earlier coverage of his address to the Parliamentary Assembly. Read more.
A contrast with Brussels: the EU’s FoRB envoy gaps
Berset’s decision to install a dedicated Special Representative at the Council of Europe also lands against a sensitive backdrop in Brussels: the European Union has, for long stretches, operated without a continuously active Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the EU. In a series of briefings, Human Rights Without Frontiers director Willy Fautré argues that the post has repeatedly been left vacant or underpowered for extended periods, creating what he describes as a credibility gap between EU rhetoric and sustained diplomatic follow-through.
Fautré’s reporting points to long interruptions after the Juncker-era mandate ended in late 2019, a short-lived appointment in 2021, and renewed uncertainty after the two-year mandate of Frans van Daele (appointed in December 2022) concluded in late 2024. The European Commission’s own public page on its Article 17 dialogue still notes that van Daele was appointed in December 2022, while civil-society groups and some MEPs have pressed the Commission to clarify when — and how — a successor will be chosen.
- Council of Europe: Berset’s office appoints a Special Representative on antisemitism, anti-Muslim hatred and all forms of religious intolerance, designed to coordinate work across Council of Europe monitoring and standards-setting.
- European Union: According to Fautré’s compilation, the EU FoRB envoy function has faced repeated vacancies and limited continuity since 2019, prompting repeated calls from civil society and parts of the European Parliament for a transparent appointment process and regular public reporting.
The divergence matters for religious minorities because both institutions shape Europe’s wider “human-rights ecosystem”: Strasbourg through legally anchored standards and monitoring across member states, and Brussels through external action, trade leverage, and enlargement partnerships. Critics say prolonged EU gaps weaken sustained engagement on persecution and intolerance abroad; supporters of reform counter that any renewed EU envoy mandate should be tightly anchored to universal rights — including protection for non-believers and against discrimination justified in the name of religion — an argument echoed in public calls from MEPs and NGOs. Humanists International summarised one such cross-party letter urging stronger transparency and safeguards around the next appointment.
