EU Ethics Code and Bias Against Religious Minorities

The European Commission’s Code of Good Administrative Behaviour legally binds EU officials to act lawfully, impartially and without discrimination. Yet religious and belief minorities report that daily administrative practices do not always match these obligations — particularly in access to dialogue, handling complaints and responding to requests for information.

A binding Code on how EU officials must behave

On 4 December 2024, the European Commission adopted Decision (EU) 2024/3083, establishing a stand-alone Code of Good Administrative Behaviour for Staff of the European Commission in their relations with the public. The Code transforms the “right to good administration” found in Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into precise rules governing the conduct of Commission fonctionnaires.

It applies to all Commission officials and other staff, and instructs seconded national experts, trainees and contractors on how they must interact with the public — including religious and belief communities.

The Code is built around key principles:

• Lawfulness — officials must apply EU law accurately and respect all rules and procedures.
• Equal treatment and non-discrimination — no differential treatment based on nationality, sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.
• Objectivity and impartiality — decisions cannot be influenced by personal preferences or political considerations.
• Consistency — similar cases must be treated similarly, and deviations must be justified.

It also introduces procedural guarantees:

• Replies to the public should normally be sent within 15 working days.
• A holding reply must be sent when more time is needed.
• Individuals must be properly informed of reasons for decisions, including appeal options.
• Complaints about breaches of the Code can be filed with the Commission’s Secretariat-General, and subsequently with the European Ombudsman.

Religion and belief: a protected ground

The Code explicitly mirrors Article 21 of the EU Charter, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion or belief. This means that officials cannot treat religious minorities differently from large or familiar religious actors — unless they can justify it objectively and within the limits of EU law.

EU law does not recognise categories such as “traditional religion”, “historic church”, or “cultural religion” as valid criteria for prioritising or excluding stakeholders. These terms do not appear in Article 17 TFEU, Article 21 of the Charter, EU access-to-documents rules, CJEU case law or ECHR jurisprudence. The EU cannot legally establish religious hierarchies based on tradition, age or social acceptance.

How fonctionnaires can — and sometimes do — violate these rules

Despite the strength of the legal framework, long-standing concerns raised by civil society, experts and Ombudsman inquiries point to recurring patterns that may disadvantage religious minorities.

1. Opaque and shifting criteria for access to Article 17 dialogue

Civil society organisations have documented cases where religious or belief minorities are not invited to consultations or meetings under Article 17 TFEU, without adequate justification. A 2013 Ombudsman decision found maladministration in how the Commission organised high-level meetings with religious leaders, noting unequal access between religious and non-religious actors.

2. Informal use of labels such as “traditional” or “non-traditional”

Some officials continue to reference “traditional” or “historic” religions in correspondence or meeting selection, even though such categories have no legal standing. This can lead to preferential treatment of majority actors and unjustified scepticism toward newer religious communities.

3. Unequal treatment in administrative handling

Delays in responding to letters, failure to provide reasons for decisions, or inconsistent treatment of access-to-documents requests can amount to indirect discrimination when they systematically affect minority communities.

4. Failure to address allegations of discrimination

The Ombudsman has criticised the Commission in past cases for failing to take discrimination allegations seriously. When a minority community raises concerns about unequal treatment — for example, being excluded from consultation rounds or ignored in dialogue processes — officials must assess and respond to those claims meaningfully.

5. Selective consultation of stakeholders

Experts and MEPs have warned that some EU services rely disproportionately on majority religious interlocutors, giving less weight to smaller or less familiar communities despite their legal equality. This contradicts the Code’s principles of impartiality and equal treatment.

What religious minorities can do when the Code is ignored

• Reference the Code directly in correspondence when deadlines are missed or decisions are unexplained.
• File a formal complaint to the Secretariat-General’s ethics and good administration unit.
• Escalate to the European Ombudsman in cases of non-response, unreasonable delay, or discriminatory treatment.
• Engage relevant MEPs — especially those in the Parliament’s FoRB Intergroup — to ensure political follow-up.

The adoption of Decision (EU) 2024/3083 means the standards are clear. The remaining challenge is ensuring that all communities — majority or minority, religious or non-religious — are treated with the fairness and dignity that EU law demands.

Sources

• Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3083 establishing the Code of Good Administrative Behaviour.
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Articles 21 and 41.
• Article 17 TFEU — EU dialogue with churches, religious associations and philosophical organisations.
• European Ombudsman decisions related to discrimination and Article 17 implementation.
• European Parliament research on freedom of religion or belief and institutional dialogue.