Written by Rosamund Shreeves,
© sunsdesign0014 / Fotolia
This year’s International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women on 25 November marks just over a year since revelations about harassment by a prominent film industry executive and the resulting global sharing of women’s personal experiences on social media raised public awareness of the scale and omnipresence of sexual harassment. Over this time, the issue has remained in the public eye. The Pew Research Center estimates that the initial #MeToo hashtag on Twitter has been used around 19 million times over this period, whilst national variations have emerged, for instance in France, Italy and Spain. Similar hashtag campaigns have also emerged around other forms of gender-based violence. In Spain, for instance, #cuéntalo and nationwide protests were ignited this May, following a court decision to acquit five men of the crime of rape after they performed non-consensual sex with a teenager.
Are these movements prompting concrete and lasting change? A 2018 European Parliament study on bullying and sexual harassment in the workplace, public spaces and political life found that the #MeToo movement has not only been successful in evidencing and raising awareness of the magnitude of the phenomenon but also led to debate about its underlying causes and possible responses. Looking at the reaction in nine EU countries (Sweden, Finland, UK, Spain, Italy, Poland, France, Denmark and Greece), it concludes that the movement has led to the standards of what is considered acceptable being redrawn. The campaign has also been credited with providing the momentum to push through a new law in France outlawing street harassment (‘wolf-whistling’), and new legislation in Sweden, clarifying what qualifies as consent and removing the requirement to provide evidence of force and/or resistance in order to establish rape. A similar law has been proposed in Spain, where the greater awareness brought by #MeToo is reported to be connected to a rise in the number of women coming forward to report rape and assault.
However, both this study and the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency caution that much remains to be done to arrive at a clear picture of sexual harassment across the EU, particularly to ensure that voices from marginalised groups such as women with disabilities, Roma women, women from rural areas and undocumented migrant women are heard, to change attitudes, and to ensure that sexual harassment is addressed holistically, in connection with wider gender inequalities, particularly in view of the current backlash against gender equality both globally and within the EU itself.
One specific area that has come under the spotlight is the nature and extent of online sexual harassment and abuse, particularly against women in the public eye and in politics and the potential impact on women’s political participation and the representativeness of our political institutions. The UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women has looked into both issues in her 2018 report to the UN General Assembly.
In October 2018, the IPU released a follow-up to its 2016 global study on sexism, harassment and violence against women parliamentarians, focusing this time on the European region and including respondents from all EU Member States except Malta and Slovakia. The study confirms that female members of parliament (MPs) in Europe are particular targets of online attacks. Of the 81 female MPs interviewed, 58.2 % had experience of abusive, sexual or violent content and behaviour on social networks. Most of the threats against female MPs were also made via electronic communication. A recent study for the European Parliament also finds that women who have a public role, including journalists and politicians are particularly targeted by online and offline harassment. Studies conducted for national Parliaments paint a similar picture. In the UK, a House of Commons inquiry into abuse, hate and extremism online found that all MPs were vulnerable to abuse, but that it particularly affected women MPs, and that it was possible to ‘break that down even further to ethnic minority MPs and, in particular, ethnic minority women MPs’.
The studies highlight that this level of abuse is one of the factors that can dissuade women from entering politics and hinder them from fulfilling their mandate when they do take office. The fact that younger MPs under the age of 40 and MPs from minority groups are more likely to have experienced abuse in the media and on social networks is particularly concerning, as it presents a real threat to progress towards making politics more representative. Research by the European Institute for Gender Equality has also flagged the extent of cyber-harassment against young women in general and the chilling effect on young women engaging in debates and being politically active online. Female MPs taking a stance on gender equality and gender-based violence were also a particular target.
Academic research in the UK has found that events such as general elections and referenda see a huge spike in online hate. With the European elections fast approaching and online campaigning using social media becoming an increasingly important channel, there is much to be done to ensure that women are genuinely able to participate.
Action by the European ParliamentIn the past year, the European Parliament has issued two resolutions highlighting the issue of sexual harassment:
EDA Chief Executive Jorge Domecq held talks today (23 November) in Kiev with First Ukrainian Deputy Minister of Defence Mr Ivan Rusnak, and representatives from other national authorities. Current and future opportunities for cooperation between the EDA and Ukraine were among the main topics of discussion.
Talks with the Deputy Minister of Defence mainly focused on the state of play of Ukraine’s participation in EDA projects and activities, via its 2015 Administrative Arrangement. Mr. Domecq welcomed Ukraine’s involvement in EDA projects and activities.
“Following the conclusion of the Administrative Arrangement between the European Defence Agency and the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine in December 2015, I am very pleased to visit Ukraine for the first time. It was an excellent opportunity to assess, along with Deputy Minister Rusnak, the good progress on the implementation within the four identified areas for cooperation namely Single European Sky, Standardization, Training and Logistics. This was also the occasion to exchange views on ways to further enhance and facilitate Ukraine’s involvement in EDA projects and activities within these four areas”, said Mr Domecq.
On his side First Deputy Minister of Defence noted: ‘I appreciate how EDA supports our aspirations and results’.
Mr. Domecq also held productive discussions with the Deputy Head of the Administration of the President of Ukraine, Mr. Kostiantyn Yelisieiev, the Vice-Prime-Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic integration of Urkraine, Ms. Ivana Klympush-Tsintsadze as well as with other officials form the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Citizens are asking what are the main common rules and national provisions for electing Members of the European Parliament. The procedures for electing Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) are governed both by European Union (EU) legislation, which defines certain rules common to all Member States, and by provisions specific to each Member State.
Common rules© Momius / Fotolia
Common rules for electing MEPs are defined in Article 14 of the Treaty on European Union, Articles 20, 22 and 223 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union, Article 39 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the Act of 20 September 1976, amended in 2018, concerning the election of the representatives of the Assembly by direct universal suffrage.
The main common rules include:
Furthermore, Directive 93/109/EC lays down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for citizens of the Union residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals.
National provisionsIn addition to the common rules, Member States set up their own provisions. For instance, Member States may establish constituencies for elections to the European Parliament and/or may set a minimum threshold for the allocation of seats. At the national level, this threshold may not exceed 5 % of valid votes cast.
Voting is compulsory in five Member States (Belgium, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Cyprus and Greece): both nationals and registered non-national EU citizens are under a legal obligation to vote.
Other matters are also governed by national provisions, such as the minimum voting age or the minimum age for standing as a candidate.
More informationThe ‘2019 European elections: National rules‘ infographic provides an overview of the national provisions for electing MEPs.
More information is available on the European Parliament website, in the section entitled ‘EU fact sheets – The European Parliament: electoral procedures‘.
The ‘European elections‘ section of the ‘Your Europe‘ website offers further insight into the various aspects of the European elections.
Continue to put your questions to the Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (Ask EP). We reply to you in the EU language that you use to write to us.