Cover Political Participation of People with Disabilities Report HTML
Lisa F. Young/Adobe Stock
29
May
2024

Political participation of people with disabilities – new developments

Ahead of the EU elections, this report explores the political participation of people with disabilities. Although some Member States removed restrictions on the right to vote and to stand for elections, barriers still exist. This report is an update of new developments following FRA’s last report published in 2014. It sets out ways forward to ensure people with disabilities have equal opportunities, in line with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.


Accessibility is a precondition for persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully and equally in society. … Barriers to access to existing objects, facilities, goods and services aimed at or open to the public shall be removed gradually in a systematic and, more importantly, continuously monitored manner, with the aim of achieving full accessibility.

CRPD Committee, General comment No 2 (2014)

Accessibility is one of the underpinning principles of the CRPD. Article 9 of the CRPD lays down the States Parties’ obligations related to accessibility: ‘To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communication’.

In the view of the CRPD Committee, information and communications technology (ICT) relates to any information and communication device or application and its content, ‘such as radio, television, satellite, mobile phones, fixed lines, computers, network hardware and software’. Furthermore, ‘to introduce policies that allow better accessibility for persons with disabilities, it is necessary to change attitudes towards persons with disabilities in order to fight against stigma and discrimination, through ongoing education efforts, awareness-raising, cultural campaigns and communication’ (General comment No 2 – Article 9: Accessibility (2014), paragraphs 5 and 3, respectively).

The effective exercise of the right to participate in political life in Article 29 of the CRPD is ensured by providing voting procedures, facilities and materials that are appropriate, accessible, and easy to read and use, according to the CRPD Committee. Political meetings and materials used and produced by political parties or individual candidates participating in public elections must likewise be accessible. Accessibility requirements also apply to elected persons with disabilities, who must have equal opportunities to carry out their mandates (General comment No 2 – Article 9: Accessibility (2014), paragraph 43).

During the reporting period, the CRPD Committee has noted that voting procedures, facilities and material, and information about elections, are not accessible in

It has recommended that, among other actions, the states produce information about elections, in accessible formats, including in easy-read format, and allocate financial and technical resources to improve the physical accessibility of polling stations.

Promising practice – What are accessible formats?

Easy-read presents information to people with intellectual disabilities in an understandable way – Inclusion Europe.

Audio description is a narrative description of visual content to people with a visual disability – European Blind Union.

Subtitling, text transcripts and captioning convert audio information into text for deaf people or people with hearing impairments – European Federation of Hard of Hearing People.

Sign languages are the languages that are central to the Deaf community and those who consider themselves culturally Deaf – European Union of the Deaf.

The Fundamental Rights Survey result shows that people with severe activity limitations have a less favourable view than people without severe limitations on matters concerning the accessibility of information that public administrations and local authorities provide (20 %) and ways to make formal complaints (28 %). Furthermore, the perception that ‘mainstream parties and politicians do not care about me’ is more pronounced among people with severe limitations (69 %).

The following sections look at EU policy developments on accessibility. They analyse the data from the human rights indicators that relate to the accessibility of polling stations, websites and mobile applications, audiovisual media, public buildings and political parties.

In its concluding observations on the initial report of the European Union (2015), the CRPD Committee recommended that the EU take the necessary measures, in cooperation with its Member States and representative organisations of persons with disabilities, to enable all persons with all types of disabilities to enjoy their right to vote and stand for election, including by providing accessible communication and facilities (paragraphs 68–69). In the light of these observations, the present section looks at the EU’s action on improving the accessibility of electoral processes in the EU.

Prior to the submission of the second and third periodic reports of the EU, the committee issued a list of issues, requesting information on the measures taken to implement the CRPD. In its reply to the list of issues, the European Commission referred to the European disability strategy, which aims to foster the participation of persons with disabilities in the democratic process. The Commission noted that it has been facilitating the exchange of good practices in the European cooperation network on elections, which brings together representatives of Member States’ authorities with responsibility for electoral matters. In 2023, the Commission prepared a ‘Guide of good electoral practices in Member States addressing the participation of citizens with disabilities in the electoral process’ and a ‘Compendium of e-voting and other ICT practices.

The EU made progress in ensuring digital accessibility across borders by adopting the web accessibility directive in 2016. It obliges websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies to meet a minimum standard of accessibility, with some exceptions that include broadcasters and live streaming. ICT products and services have to follow harmonised European standard EN 301 549 v3.2.1 (2021-03)to conform with the directive (Article 6) (European Commission, Implementing Decision (EU) 2021/1339 of 11 August 2021 amending Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/2048 as regards the harmonised standard for websites and mobile applications; ‘Web accessibility; ‘Web accessibility directive – Standards and harmonisation’). The directive applies to public websites and applications that display information about the elections, the voting procedure and complaints mechanisms related to the elections.

In 2022, the European Commission reviewed the Member States’ application of the directive. It found that its initial implementation marked progress in accessibility, although many people with disabilities still find public sector websites and mobile applications difficult to use.Most public sector bodies noted that the directive had introduced additional economic costs. However, accessibility-related costs do not constitute a major barrier to implementing the directive, the Commission noted. However, the directive’s enforcement procedure is still an issue, as feedback and enforcement procedures are under-reported and underused (pp. 24, 43, 47, and 79).

The proposal for a new EU electoral law requires that the elections of the members of the European Parliament be accessible (Article 7). According to the text proposed, Member States must ensure that all citizens, including persons with disabilities, have equal access to relevant materials, to voting facilities and to polling stations. Furthermore, Member States will have to make appropriate arrangements for independent and secret voting and ensure that persons with disabilities receive, at their request, assistance in voting by a person of their choice. If the proposed text is adopted, it will contribute significantly towards ensuring the access of persons with disabilities to the EU electoral process. However, the European Parliament notes that some Member States expressed reservations in the Council of the EU about the ‘lead candidate process, the EU-wide constituency, the voting age of 16 years, [and] the obligation to provide postal voting’.

During an election, voting usually takes place at a polling station. Member States must ensure under Article 29 of the CRPD that electoral facilities are accessible for all persons with disabilities (see Legal corner 4).

Legal corner  Accessibility of polling stations

The ECtHR dismissed a complaint against Slovenia in 2021. The applicants alleged a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No 12 to the ECHR (general prohibition of discrimination) due to the inaccessibility of polling stations. The court held that ‘States enjoy a margin of appreciation in assessing the needs of people with disabilities in respect of elections and the means of providing them with adequate access to polling stations within the context of the allocation of limited State resources’. It noted that the applicants were able to vote at polling stations near their residences, in accordance with their wishes, and assistance could be provided to them on the spot by means of a reasonable accommodation to their needs.

Source:  ECtHR, Toplak and Mrak v Slovenia, Nos 34591/19 and 42545/19, 26 October 2021, paragraphs 88–92 and 119–121

In 2014, 12 Member States had legal accessibility standards for polling stations. In 2024, the number was 14 (Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Greece, France, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden). In these Member States, the detail and content of the relevant legislation vary.

In Romania, the standards apply to equipment and locations (Hotărâre nr. 44 din 10 noiembrie 2016). In Belgium, the focus is on the accessibility of polling booths (information received by Franet by email from the office of Annelies Verlinden, Minister of the Interior, Institutional Reform and Democratic Renewal, 31 October 2023). In Lithuania, municipal administrations have a legal duty to assess the polling stations in terms of their accessibility for disabled and elderly voters within 20 days of election announcements. Governments may ask non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to assess the suitability of polling stations (Seimas, Lietuvos Respublikos rinkimų kodekso patvirtinimo, įsigaliojimo ir įgyvendinimo konstitucinis įstatymas, Article 131).

Accessibility standards are applicable to only some polling stations in Bulgaria, Denmark, Hungary and Poland. These Member States define the minimum number of polling stations that must be accessible in a certain area or district. For example, Denmark (Ministry of the Interior and Health, ‘Hvordan stemmer jeg?) and Hungary (Act XXXVI of 2013 on election procedure (2013. évi XXXVI. törvény a választási eljárásról), Section 166(1)) do so.

No national legal standards are in place in the remaining nine Member States. It is unclear how they fulfil their obligations under Article 9(2)a of the CRPD.

Guidelines on how to make polling stations accessible are now available in all Member States. In 2014, eight Member States had no guidelines in place. Detailed guidelines are now available in more Member States (19) than in 2014 (16). Cyprus, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia do not have detailed guidelines. In 2014, three of the Member States had guidelines but they were not detailed.

Figure 3 – Numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 with guidelines on how to make polling stations accessible

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 that provide or provided guidelines on how to make polling stations accessible. Detailed guidance was available in 16 states in 2014 and in 19 states in 2024. Guidance, but not detailed, was available in 3 states in 2014 and in 8 states in 2024. No guidance was available in 8 states in 2014.

Source: FRA, 2024.

Different kinds of authorities issue guidelines on accessible polling stations. These may be central election authorities (Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Spain and Sweden) or government entities, such as the Ministry of Justice (Finland) or the Ministry of the Interior (France, Italy and the Netherlands). Special entities responsible for disability issues may also issue them, for example the Federal Office for Accessibility in Germany.

DPOs have sometimes worked with public bodies to produce such guidelines. For example, in Portugal, the result was that the guidelines included a detailed checklist of the minimum accessibility conditions for polling stations (National Elections Commission, Plano de Atividades e Orçamento 2023). In Luxembourg, a DPO contributed to the development of guidelines to help municipalities improve access to voting for everyone (Info-Handicap, Accessibilité des bureaux de vote en vue des élections législatives et communales).

The guidelines in Bulgaria (Central Electoral Commission, Решение № 2545-МИ София) and Denmark (Ministry of the Interior and Health, ‘Vejledning om afholdelse af folketingsvalg’; Ministry of the Interior and Health, ‘Kan jeg få hjælp til at stemme?) mostly address physical accessibility. In Croatia, the guidelines cover not how to make the polling stations accessible, but rather how to assess situations when voters with disabilities may not be able to access them (information provided by Franet).

Austria, Estonia, Germany, France, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden have official data (data provided by public authorities) on the percentages of polling stations that are accessible to people with disabilities. In 2014, only five Member States did.

A significant improvement was noted in Estonia. In 2019, only 60 % of polling stations met the needs of people with restricted mobility. By the 2021 local elections, 80 % did, and 95 % of main polling stations were accessible (Chancellor of Justice, Year in Review 2022). An increase in accessible polling stations was also reported in Lithuania, from 68.9 % in 2020 to 88.1 % in 2022 (Department for the Affairs of the Disabled under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 12 November 2023).

Conversely, the percentage of inaccessible polling stations increased in the Netherlands from 63 % in 2022 to 79 % in 2023 (Netherlands Institute for Human Rights, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 9 November 2023; Government of the Netherlands, Steekproef Toegankelijkheid Stemlokalen 2023, p. 15). Many polling stations were recently not independently accessible by voters with disabilities in Portugal (Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), ‘Portugal – Early parliamentary elections, 10 March 2024 – ODIHR needs assessment mission report, 9–12 January 2024’, p. 6) and Spain (OSCE, ‘Spain – Early parliamentary elections, 23 July 2023 – ODIHR Election Expert Team final report’, pp. 11–12).

Belgium, Finland and Poland provide a transport service or cover costs of transport to the polling station. Only Malta has audio equipment in place for people with hearing impairments (OSCE, ‘Republic of Malta – Early parliamentary elections, 26 March 2022 – ODIHR Election Expert Team final report’, p. 18). In Portugal, a positive key development was the possibility of voting by using Braille. However, that was excluded for local elections (information provided by Franet). 

National human rights institutions (NHRIs), ombudspersons and equality bodies noted problems in the accessibility of polling stations for people with visual and hearing disability. In Bulgaria, people with a visual disability face certain obstacles in accessing voting instructions, particularly concerning machine-assisted voting, and the lack of sound signals from the voting devices sometimes leads to invalid votes (Ombudsman, letter to Franet of 21 November 2023).

In Cyprus, people with a visual disability cannot use the ballot papers, owing to the lack of assistive devices or technologies, such as magnifiers and tactile voting devices (Ombudsman, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 9 November 2023). In the Netherlands, although polling stations are accessible overall, problems were noted in the accessibility of ballot papers for voters with a visual disability. The lack of Braille overlay tools at polling stations was also noted (OSCE, ‘The Netherlands – Early parliamentary elections, 22 November 2023 – ODIHR needs assessment mission report, 18–21 September 2023’, p. 2)

In Belgium, the general population stereotypes people with disabilities as unable to vote, the voting environment (crowds, long waits, etc.) induces anxiety and ballots are not easy to read (Unia, ‘Rapport sur la participation aux élections des personnes en situation de handicap’). Similarly, the Lithuanian equality body reported stereotypes and lack of accessible information on election campaigns and debates (Department for the Affairs of the Disabled under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 12 November 2023). Lack of easy-read material was noted in Poland (Commissioner for Human Rights, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 8 November 2023) and Cyprus (Ombudsman, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 9 November 2023).

Lack of physical accessibility of polling stations was highlighted in Finland (Parliamentary Ombudsman, ‘Deficiencies in arrangements for advance voting and voting at special advance voting facilities found in unannounced inspections, 31 March 2023), Greece (OSCE, ‘Greece – Early parliamentary elections, 21 May 2023 – ODIHR election assessment mission final report’, p. 1), Lithuania (Ombudsman, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 10 November 2023), the Netherlands (ieder(in), Meldpunt onbeperkt stemmen verkiezingen 2023) and Slovenia (Advocate of the Principle of Equality, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 28 November 2023).

Lack of accessible information and communication was reported in Poland (Commissioner for Human Rights, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 8 November 2023), Slovenia (Advocate of the Principle of Equality, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 28 November 2023) and Sweden (Equality Ombudsman, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 7 November 2023). A positive practice in Poland, however, was the translation of election-related materials into Polish Sign Language (Commissioner for Human Rights, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 8 November 2023).

Limited national case-law could be found on access to polling stations.

In Bulgaria, the Pazardzhik Administrative Court considered a case in which the mayors decided to organise mobile polling boxes in districts where they received the minimum required number of applications from people with disabilities within the statutory time limit, under the Electoral Code. The mayors restricted themselves to verifying the existence of a disability certificate and not the disability itself. A political party participating in the elections complained, arguing that the mayors should have verified if their disabilities prevented people from voting in a regular polling station in practice. The court dismissed the appeal, noting that the law obliged local authorities only to verify the existence of a valid disability certificate without further examining the nature and implications of the disability (case No 308/2023, 29 March 2023; case No 309/2023, 29 March 2023; case No 310/2023, 29 March 2023).

In Lithuania, the Supreme Administrative Court found a violation of the rights of two people with physical disabilities. In the first case, the violation was a lack of parking places for people with disabilities at the polling station. The premises could be accessed only with the help of other people. In the second case, the right to vote in secret had been breached, as the applicant could not get into the polling station and had to vote outside the premises (case No eA-113-492/2020, 18 February 2020).

NHRIs and equality bodies examined a few complaints on access to polling stations, for example in Croatia (Ombudsperson for Persons with Disabilities, Izvješće o radu Pravobraniteljice za osobe s invaliditetom 2020), Malta (information provided to Franet by the Commission for the Rights of Persons with Disability by email on 15 November 2023), Portugal (Ombudsperson Office’s written response to Franet of 5 December 2023) and Finland (Parliamentary Ombudsman, ‘Äänestyspaikan valaistus ja vaalisalaisuuden turvaaminen, 30 November 2021).

Promising practice – Questionnaire for municipalities on the accessibility of polling stations

The equality body in Czechia issued a questionnaire for municipalities on the accessibility of polling stations for people with disabilities. After filling the questionnaire, the municipal authorities are invited to publish it on their websites to inform voters about, for example, how many parking spaces there are for people with disabilities at the polling station, the accessibility of the building for wheelchair users, and the size of lifts and doors.

 

Promising practice – Municipality’s actions to ensure the accessibility of the elections

The Burgas Municipality in Bulgaria took a series of actions to accommodate the needs of people with a visual disability in the 2023 elections. It launched a dedicated subsite, audio-describing the list of candidates and mentioning each candidate’s number on the ballot paper. The municipality also organised special transport on election day for all people with reduced mobility or a visual disability. The municipal website published information about all accessible polling stations and the accessibility aids they offered. On election day, boards with Braille text, QR codes and sound information were placed in front of 35 polling stations in Burgas.

 

Promising practice – Enhancing the political participation of people with intellectual disabilities

The EU-funded project myPart, covering Austria, Hungary, Portugal and Slovenia, aimed to enhance the political participation of people with intellectual disabilities in 2019–2022. It included accessible education activities and raised the awareness of society, politicians and decision-makers about the rights of people with intellectual disabilities and on how to better involve them in political and public life.

Public buildings are often used not only as polling stations but also for council meetings, consultations or political speeches. Although no EU legal framework similar to the web accessibility directive is in place for the accessibility of the physical environment, the 2014 public procurement directive is relevant to buildings acquired by public authorities for the purpose of elections. The directive establishes rules for how, by means of a public contract, public authorities acquire works, supplies or services from economic operators chosen by those authorities. It obliges Member States to consider the CRPD in public procurement procedures (recital 3). For all procurement intended for use by natural persons, the technical specifications must include accessibility (recital 76 and Article 42).

Fewer Member States (10) have now mandatory accessibility standards for national and local authority buildings (Austria, Denmark, France, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain and Sweden) than in 2014 (14). Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Italy, Malta, Poland, Romania and Slovenia partially ensure accessibility without applying it to all cases. Accessibility standards may apply to new or public buildings only (in Cyprus and Romania) or do not relate to elections specifically (in Croatia, Finland, Italy, Malta and Slovenia). In Belgium, Czechia, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg, Portugal and Slovakia, there are no mandatory accessibility standards for national and local authority buildings.

Figure 4 – Number of Member States in 2014 and 2024 with mandatory accessibility standards for national and local authority buildings in the context of elections

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 that have or had mandatory accessibility standards for national and local authority buildings in the context of elections. The question asked was ‘Are there mandatory accessibility standards for national and local buildings in the election context?’ The answer was ‘yes’ in 14 states in 2014 and in 10 states in 2024. The answer was ‘partially’ in 8 states in 2014 and in 10 states in 2024. The answer was ‘no’ or ‘no information’ in 5 states in 2014 and in 7 states in 2024.

Source: FRA, 2024.

Different levels of government fulfil the standards to different degrees. For example, it varies between national and regional election offices in Poland (Ministry of Funds and Regional Policy, ‘Raport o dostępności podmiotów publicznych). Offices and venues of political parties, when located in private buildings, usually do not need to comply with the same standards, as reported in Cyprus and in Romania (Ordin nr. 189/2013). In Cyprus, the Cyprus Paraplegics Organization repeatedly asked for the adoption of regulations providing for strict administrative fines for lack of accessibility to buildings, as a measure to address the lack of compliance with accessibility regulations (U.S. Department of State (2023), ‘2022 country reports on human rights practices: Cyprus).

Some official data (data from public authorities) are available on the percentages of public buildings that are accessible for people with disabilities in Croatia, Estonia, Germany, Finland, France, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Finland. This is an improvement from 2014, when official data could be identified in only five Member States. However, the data are difficult to compare because different methodologies are used to map the accessibility of public buildings. No such data are available in the remaining 16 Member States.

The indicator ‘Do websites providing instructions for voting and information on candidates meet accessibility standards?’ was assessed considering the new harmonised European standard EN 301 549 v3.2.1 (2021-03) on accessibility requirements for ICT and services, which the European Commission adopted under the web accessibility directive (Legal corner 5). Websites and mobile applications are presumed to conform with the directive’s accessibility requirements if they meet the harmonised standards or parts thereof.

Legal corner – New harmonised European standard

The current harmonised standard is EN 301 549 v3.2.1 (2021-03). It draws heavily from the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, published by the World Wide Web Consortium. These guidelines are internationally recognised requirements for producing web content. They are considered best practice and are very widely used. The clauses added to the standard are, for example, synchronisation between audio and video, visual indicator of audio with video, speaker identification with video (sign language) communication and spoken subtitles.

EN 301 549 v3.2.1 includes requirements that are not part of WCAG 2.1, and requirements that are not relevant to the web accessibility directive, for example accessibility requirements of computer hardware systems. The requirements of the standard that are relevant to the directive are defined in Annex A of the standard.

Sources: European Commission, ‘Web accessibility’; European Commission, ‘Latest changes to accessibility standard’.

In the pre-election context, the 2014 public procurement directive is also relevant. The directive establishes rules for public procurement – public authorities’ acquisition, by means of a public contract, of works, supplies or services from economic operators chosen by those authorities. Member States must consider accessibility when procuring works, supplies or services related to public websites and applications (Article 42).

In 16 Member States, the law (legal accessibility standards) obliges public providers of internet and web-based services to make public information accessible. Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden apply those standards to private providers as well. All Member States have incorporated the minimum requirements of the web accessibility directive into national law, according to the European Commission’s 2022 ‘Study supporting the review of the application of the web accessibility directive’ (p. 24).

In three Member States (Austria, Finland and France), public websites that provide instructions for voting and information on candidates meet the new accessibility standard.

Eighteen Member States have accessibility measures in place, although they are not fully compliant with the directive. In Italy, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal, Romania and Spain, the relevant websites do not meet accessibility standards or no data could be identified.

Figure 5 – Numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 whose website providing instructions for voting and information on candidates met/meets accessibility standards

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the number of Member States in 2014 and 2024 whose website providing instructions for voting and information on candidates meets accessibility standards. The website complied with the web accessibility directive in 9 states in 2014 and in 3 states in 2024. The website partially met the standards by implementing some accessibility measures in 12 states in 2014 and in 18 states in 2024. The website did not meet the standards or no data were identified in 6 states both in 2014 and in 2024.

Source: FRA, 2024.

Accessibility measures include videos in sign language, videos with subtitles and audio description (Belgium, Slovenia and Sweden); compatibility with screen reader software (Denmark); changing of contrast and size (Estonia, Latvia and Slovenia); and easy-read information (Sweden). However, some public websites make exceptions for PDF files, documents from political parties and maps, for example in Germany (Franet’s assessment). Furthermore, DPOs criticised the lack of easy-read and easily understandable information for people with disabilities, for example in Belgium (information received by Franet from the organisation Inclusion by email, 22 November 2023) and Hungary (Hungarian Down Foundation (Down Alapítvány), letter to Franet of 2 November 2023).

Public websites containing information on complaints mechanisms regarding political participation comply with the new accessibility standard in Belgium, Czechia, Estonia, Finland and Ireland. Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Sweden have some accessibility measures in place. For Austria, Greece, France, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, the relevant information on public websites is not accessible or no data could be identified.

According to the accessibility statements of the websites of the European Union, European Parliament, Council of the EU and European Commission, those websites partially comply with EN 301 549 v3.2.1. For example, the official EU website and the European Commission’s website mention that they partially comply with EN 301 549 v3.2.1. and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 standard. The European Parliament’s website says that it is being optimised to apply the European standard and is partially compliant with the WCAG 2 standard. The Council of the EU website, the European Economic and Social Committee website and the European Ombudsman’s website (except for the subtitling of videos) mention that they comply with WCAG 2.1.

The revised audiovisual media services directive obliges the Member States to ensure that media services provided under their jurisdictions are made continuously and progressively more accessible to persons with disabilities. Member States must also encourage media service providers to develop accessibility action plans. Member States must also designate a contact point providing information and receiving complaints regarding accessibility issues (Article 7).

Thirteen Member States have introduced accessibility obligations for a certain proportion of programmes, and several Member States apply more stringent accessibility requirements to audiovisual media services of general interest, political and economic debates, and news programmes, the European Commission reported in 2024 (p. 8).

Twenty Member States – Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia Spain and Sweden – have legal accessibility standards for both public and private providers of media services. In 2014, 15 Member States did. Fewer Member States (2) make those standards applicable only to public media providers than in 2014 (7). No legal accessibility standards, for either public or private media, are in place in Czechia, Denmark, Lithuania, Malta or Romania.

Figure 6 –Numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 having accessibility standards for public and private providers of media

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 having accessibility standards for public and private providers of media. There were standards covering both public and private providers in 15 states in 2014 and in 19 states in 2024. There were standards covering only public providers in 7 states in 2014 and in 3 states in 2024. There were no standards in 5 states both in 2014 and in 2024. The 2014 figures do not include Belgium as the answer varies for each community: Yes (Flemish community) and No (French community).

Source: FRA, 2024.

National laws that set accessibility standards for people with visual or hearing disabilities, including subtitling, audio description and sign language, are found in Austria (Bundesgesetz, mit dem das Audiovisuelle Mediendienste-Gesetz, das KommAustria-Gesetz, das ORF-Gesetz und das Privatradiogesetz geändert werden), Belgium (Decreet betreffende radio-omroep en televisie), Bulgaria (Закон за хората с увреждания, Article 64), France (Directive «Services de médias audiovisuels»), Hungary (2010. évi CLXXXV. törvény a médiaszolgáltatásokról és a tömegkommunikációról, Section 39(2a)) and Slovenia (Zakon o avdiovizualnih medijskih storitvah). In the Netherlands, national law covers only persons with a hearing disability (Mediabesluit 2008, Article 15).

Member States may also require media service providers to develop action plans to ensure accessibility of content, as in Austria (Communication Authority of Austria, ‘Bericht zur Barrierefreiheit 2022), Bulgaria (Закон за радиото и телевизията, Article 8a), Cyprus (Ο περί Ραδιοφωνικού Ιδρύματος Κύπρου Νόμος, Cap. 300Α, Article 18C) and Germany (Zweiter Medienänderungsstaatsvertrag), or codes of conduct, for example in Latvia. Broadcasting authorities in Luxembourg have published guidelines on accessibility for media providers (Loi du 27 juillet 1991 sur les médias électroniques, Article 27c). In Bulgaria, out of all private media service providers (around 130 audiovisual media providers and 80 radio broadcasters), the majority had submitted such action plans by December 2022 (Council for Electronic Media, Отчет на СЕМ за изпълнението на изискванията за достъпност на медийните услуги (чл. 8а от ЗРТ)).

NHRIs’ recommendations have had an impact on the accessibility of public broadcasting during elections in Cyprus. The public broadcaster implemented the Ombudsman’s recommendation to provide sign language interpretation of debates. However, private television stations did not (Commissioner for Administration and the Protection of Human Rights, reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 9 November 2023).

A significant development was that sign language interpretation of key programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates is now available in 23 Member States. In 2014, only 11 Member States provided it. No information could be found in Croatia, Estonia, Poland and Romania by the end of 2023, in contrast with 12 States in 2014.

Figure 7 – Numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 whose television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates had/have national sign language interpretation

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 whose television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates had or have national sign language interpretation. Some key programmes had sign language interpretation in 11 states in 2014 and in 23 states in 2024. No programme had sign language interpretation in 4 states in 2014. There was no information in 12 states in 2014 and in 4 states in 2024.

Source: FRA, 2024.

Public broadcasters in Austria, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Slovenia and Spain usually provide sign language interpretation. It applies to communications by the election authorities (videos, press releases, etc.) in France (Arcom, ‘Accessibilité), Cyprus (Franet consultation with the public television channel CYBC, 14 December 2023) and Lithuania (CRPD Committee, Combined second and third periodic reports submitted by Lithuania under article 35 of the Convention, paragraph 242). Conversely, in Denmark (Tegnsprogstolkning: TV AVISEN) and Malta (information provided by Franet), programmes made by the electoral authorities focusing on voting procedures and instructions on how to vote do not have sign language interpretation, although sign language interpretation is offered for news broadcasts and other programmes. Sign language interpretation was noted for election discussions in Finland, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg and Portugal (information provided by Franet).

A positive trend was also noted in the provision of audio description of television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates. This is now available in Belgium, Germany, Greece, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Slovakia and Sweden. In 2014, it was available in only five Member States.

Furthermore, in more Member States (21) than in 2014 (14), some key television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates are subtitled. In Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Poland and Romania, either subtitling is not provided or this information could not be verified.

Figure 8 – Numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 with subtitled television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 whose television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates are or were subtitled. Some key programmes were subtitled in 14 states in 2014 and in 21 states in 2024. Key programmes were not subtitled in 8 states in 2014 and in 2 states in 2024. No information could be found in 5 states in 2014 and in 4 states in 2024.

Source: FRA, 2024.

Typically, public broadcasters are to subtitle television programmes providing instructions for voting and information on candidates. National law in Czechia provides that over 70 % of public television broadcasting must include closed or open captions (Zákon o České televizi, Section3, paragraph 1(j)). In Luxembourg, for the 2023 elections, political parties were required to provide their television spots with subtitles in French and German (Luxembourg’s Independent Broadcasting Authority, Principes directeurs pour les élections législatives du 8 octobre 2023). In Lithuania, broadcasts of debates between candidates and between parties are subtitled (CRPD Committee, Combined second and third periodic reports submitted by Lithuania under article 35 of the Convention, paragraph 242).

Media service providers mainly use teletext subtitles, for example in Austria (Austrian Public Broadcasting Agency, ‘Das ORF TELETEXT-Gehörlosenservice – Untertitelung) and the Netherlands (NPO, ‘TT888 ondertiteling; RTL, ‘Ondertiteling). Public broadcasters have created separate sections on accessibility on their websites in Denmark (TV2, ‘Tilgængelighed’; DR, ‘Tilgængelighed). Most notably, the portal of the Slovenian public broadcaster RTV Slovenia includes an archive with television programmes that are accessible by means of subtitling, Slovene Sign Language interpretation, audio subtitling and audio descriptions (RTV Slovenia Programmes Accessibility Service, ‘Dostopno).

Promising practice – Public broadcasters required to submit action plans on accessibility

In Bulgaria, the Radio and Television Act lays down that public and private broadcasters must ensure that the content of their services is gradually made accessible to people with sensory disabilities. Means of making the content of audiovisual media services accessible may include, but are not limited to, sign language interpretation, subtitling, speech subtitling and audio description. Radio broadcasters should make programmes and broadcasts accessible to persons with sensory disabilities through the internet, mobile applications or other technical means at their disposal, within the time limits and in the ways that their own action plans specify.

 

Promising practice – Broadcasting authority publishing guidelines on accessibility

In Luxembourg, the broadcasting authority published guidelines for the production, programming and broadcasting of election messages by audiovisual media service providers ahead of national and municipal elections in 2023. These included concrete recommendations on programme accessibility for people with disabilities, notably the legal obligation on political parties to provide television spots with subtitles in French and German.

Some political party manifestos were provided in accessible formats during the most recent elections in more Member States (16) than in 2014 (13). In Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Croatia, Italy, Malta, Poland and Romania, no political party provided accessible manifestos. In 2014 as well, this was the case in 9 Member States. No information could be found for Czechia or Greece in 2024.

Figure 9 – Numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 where some political party manifestos were provided in accessible formats during the most recent elections

A graph with blue and green bars

Description automatically generated

Alternative text: A comparative chart showing the numbers of Member States in 2014 and 2024 where some political party manifestos were provided in accessible formats during the most recent elections. Some manifestos were provided in accessible formats in 13 states in 2014 and in 16 states in 2024. No manifestos were provided in accessible formats in 9 states in 2014 and in 9 states in 2024. No data in 5 states in 2014 and in 2 states in 2024.

Source: FRA, 2024.

Few political parties provided accessible manifestos in 16 Member States.Where political parties make their manifestos accessible, they do not consider all types of disabilities but tend to focus on one aspect of accessibility.

Accessible formats of manifestos are mostly related to easy-read text (Finland, France, Ireland, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Sweden). Manifestos translated into sign language were made available by some political parties in Austria, Estonia, Finland, the Netherlands, Portugal and Slovakia. Manifestos in audio format were noted in France, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Slovenia. Braille versions of manifestos were reported in the Netherlands and Portugal. Some parties created subtitled videos, for example in Denmark (Parliament, Hvordan man stemmer).

The French National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) reported that the accessibility of election campaigns has improved (reply to FRA’s questionnaire of 10 November 2023).

In Portugal, electoral campaigns were not accessible (CRPD Committee, Concluding observations on the initial report of Portugal (2016), paragraph 55). In Germany, political parties did not provide reasonable accommodation, in particular sign language interpretation (CRPD Committee, Concluding observations on the combined second and third periodic reports of Germany (2023), paragraph 65).

Promising practice – French Electoral Code obliges candidates to ensure campaigns’ accessibility

The French Electoral Code obliges prefectures to establish a campaign material commission to check that the design of campaign materials and ballot papers complies with the technical requirements of the Electoral Code. In practice, these commissions often consulted candidates before the 2022 elections and pre-screened the draft materials, including for their compliance with the new obligation to be produced in easy-read formats (OSCE, ‘France – Parliamentary elections, 12 and 19 June 2022 – ODIHR election assessment mission final report, p. 9).

There was insufficient use of easy-read campaigns or accessible materials to communicate with people with disabilities during the last elections in Czechia (OSCE, ‘The Czech Republic – Presidential election, 13–14 and 27–28 January 2023 – ODIHR Election Expert Team final report, p. 4), Denmark (OSCE, ‘Denmark – Early general elections, 1 November 2022 – ODIHR Election Expert Team final report, p. 2), Latvia (OSCE, ‘Latvia – Parliamentary elections, 1 October 2022 – ODIHR election assessment mission final report, pp. 2 and 14), Portugal (OSCE, ‘Portugal – Early parliamentary elections, 10 March 2024 – ODIHR needs assessment mission report, 9–12 January 2024, p. 6) and Slovakia (OSCE, ‘Slovak Republic – Early parliamentary elections, 30 September 2023 – ODIHR election assessment mission final report, p. 12).

FRA invited political parties participating in the elections to the European Parliament to provide information on their commitment to accessibility of the election process. Two of them replied.

The European Christian Political Movement indicated in an email on 8 February 2024 that the national members decide on accessibility. The movement ensures the physical accessibility of the meeting places for campaigns and encourages its national members to involve people with disabilities in the elections.

The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe replied by email on 5 March 2024 that it will provide easy-read version of their manifesto and include subtitles in videos. It is also developing a new website in consultation with the EDF.

The EDF and the Funka Foundation found widespread problems with the accessibility of the seven main political parties’ websites (A. Felix, ‘Access denied: The (in)accessibility of European political party websites’ (2024)).

Promising practice – Study circles for people with intellectual disabilities to engage in voting

Small study circle groups learn from easy-read materials and Digital Accessible Information System (DAISY)-formatted audio texts that describe Swedish democracy and the voting process. A leader teaches voting practices and Swedish democracy, and supports the participants to find answers to questions by gathering information from parties and the media. The leader also arranges discussions with active politicians, who are trained in easy language before entering the conversation.

Source: Zero Project.