the International Network Against Cyber Hate
INACH
INACH is the leading network within the EU and globally that combats cyber hate using a holistic approach that combines monitoring, content removal, educational methods, international cooperation, advocacy and cutting-edge technology.
ID: 725884747931-95
Lobbying Activity
Response to EU Civil Society Strategy
5 Sept 2025
We welcome the proposal for a comprehensive strategy, which is both timely and necessary. CSOs across the EU are increasingly confronted with legal, political and administrative restrictions and financial insecurity. These pressures jeopardise their independence, effectiveness and legitimacy, thereby undermining democratic values and fundamental rights that the EU is committed to uphold. Smaller organisations working to defend fundamental rights are particularly at risk, as they often lack access to structural and sustainable funding. Many CSOs are also directly targeted by their own governments or face financial exclusion due to conflicting interests with national authorities. In such cases, support from intergovernmental institutions such as the EU is not only important but indispensable. These organisations should be the main focus of the EU to support with this strategy. A clear need exists for predictable, continuous funding. Current EU calls often emphasise innovation and the development of new tools, yet there is insufficient provision for sustaining or scaling these initiatives beyond the initial funding period. Ensuring continuity is crucial to preserving impact and avoiding duplication of efforts. CSOs should furthermore be recognised as full partners in the policy cycle. Their practical experience provides unique insight into the real-world effects of policies, and this expertise should be integrated into policy formulation and evaluation. This requires moving beyond a consultative role and ensuring their equal participation in decision-making processes. Finally, the strategy must include concrete measures for the protection of CSOs, in particular legal safeguards, to guarantee that they can operate independently, safely and effectively across all Member States.
Read full responseResponse to Gender Equality Strategy 2026-2030
5 Aug 2025
In our view, the EU Gender Equality Strategy must explicitly acknowledge the digital dimension of misogyny. Online spaces are now key venues where misogynist narratives spread, recruit, and normalize. The strategy must reflect this reality and address it as a priority. Despite existing initiatives, such as the EU Directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence, more is needed to counter gender based hate. In order to accomplish gender equality, the strategy should incorporate a pillar focusing on online gender based hate. The online world does not exist in isolation; it mirrors and amplifies offline realities. Misogynist portrayals online normalize prejudice and silence minority voices, leading to self-censorship out of fear. This limits the participation of women in all aspects of society. This leads to lack of representation because women choose less often public jobs, political positions, activism or journalism. Online hate speech is often intersectional, targeting multiple identities and characteristics simultaneously (e.g., race and religion, gender and race). Therefore, the Gender Equality Strategy should adopt a broad, multi-layered, intersectional approach with a digital pillar aligned with other EU strategies, including the Anti-Racism and LGBTIQ Strategies. Part of the strategy should also be to enforce the tools already in place. The Digital Services Act (DSA) already requires social media platforms to carry out risk assessments and mitigation measures. The strategy should help to ensure platforms take gender-based hate as seriously as other forms of illegal content. They can also promote independent regulatory oversight via national Digital Services Coordinators (DSC) and involve civil society organisations in monitoring platforms moderation of gender based hate content. A critical challenge lies in the opacity of social media algorithms. These systems amplify content that evokes strong emotions, including hate, yet their lack of transparency prevents the identification and correction of gender bias in moderation. We urge the EC to require independent audits of algorithms and moderation systems to address such biases effectively. It is necessary to push for algorithmic transparency, ensuring that recommender systems do not amplify misogyny, harassment, or abuse against women and gender-diverse individuals. Trends in online hate speech and removal rates vary by platform, region, country, and language, yet data remains insufficient. We recommend funding longitudinal studies on online misogyny, especially in under-researched languages and regions, to inform stronger policies. Finally, we emphasize the need for education. Misconceptions about freedom of expression are often weaponized to defend hate speech. Educating young people on both rights and responsibilities within this principle - along with digital literacy skills with a gender-sensitive and intersectional focus - is essential for recognizing and online gender based hate.
Read full responseResponse to Anti-racism Strategy
8 Jul 2025
In our view, the EU Anti-Racism Strategy must explicitly acknowledge the digital dimension of racism. Online spaces are now key venues where racist narratives spread, recruit, and normalize. The strategy must reflect this reality and address it as a priority. Despite existing initiatives such as the new EU Code of Conduct on Countering Illegal Hate Speech Online (CoC+) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), online racism remains widespread and persistent. The CoC+ is reviewed annually through a Monitoring Exercise where NGOs assess platforms adherence to the rules over six weeks. Recent results show anti-refugee hatred ranks fourth among reported hate speech types, racism sixth, with anti-Gypsyism and antisemitism in the top three. Our data further reveals that too much illegal content remains online. The EC has the tools under the DSA to fine platforms for non-compliance, and we urge it to use them decisively. The online world does not exist in isolation; it mirrors and amplifies offline realities. Racist portrayals online normalize prejudice and silence minority voices, leading to self-censorship out of fear. This limits their participation in all aspects of society. Moreover, online spaces play a role in radicalization. Several terrorist attacksincluding Christchurch and Buffalowere carried out by individuals radicalized online, who also announced or live streamed their actions. Online hate speech is often intersectional, targeting multiple identities and characteristics simultaneously (e.g., race and religion, gender and race). Therefore, the Anti-Racism Strategy should adopt a broad, multi-layered, intersectional approach with a digital pillar aligned with other EU strategies, including the Equality and LGBTIQ Strategies. A critical challenge lies in the opacity of social media algorithms. These systems amplify content that evokes strong emotions, including hate, yet their lack of transparency prevents the identification and correction of racial bias in moderation. We urge the EC to require independent audits of algorithms and moderation systems to address such biases effectively. Trends in online hate speech and removal rates vary by platform, region, country, and language, yet data remains insufficient. We recommend funding longitudinal studies on online racism, especially in under-researched languages and regions, to inform stronger policies. Anti-refugee hatred has also become a political tool across the EU, used by far-right and mainstream parties alike. They spread online disinformation about immigration, use inflammatory language (e.g., a tsunami of refugees), and promote borderline contentmaterial not illegal under laws or platform terms but still harmful and divisive (e.g., videos of public fights captioned to blame refugees). Echo chambers form around such narratives, reinforcing intolerance and division, which politicians exploit for votes. Our findings show hate speech and disinformation are a dangerous mix that legal tools alone cannot fully address. While the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation is a good start, we recommend strengthening it by improving discoverability controls, adding labels to flagged content, and including clear fact-checking links. Political leaders must model fair, fact-based debate. Media outlets also bear responsibility for engaging in pre-bunking and debunking practices to prevent disinformation from distorting democratic discourse. The EC should not handle these two phenomena completely separately since they are so intertwined and we recommend financing studies that focus on the cross-section between the two. Finally, we emphasize the need for education. Misconceptions about freedom of expression are often weaponized to defend hate speech. Educating young people on both rights and responsibilities within this principle, along with digital literacy skills, is essential for recognizing and resisting disinformation, conspiracy theories, and online racism.
Read full response