A round table convened by Democracy Without Borders brought together sixteen experts, civil society representatives and dissidents from across Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America to discuss whether the United Nations can be “reclaimed as a platform for freedom and democracy in face of authoritarian influence.”
The event, titled “The UN: Problem or Pathway for Freedom and Democracy?”, took place on 11 November 2025 during Berlin Freedom Week and followed the 2025 General Assembly of the World Liberty Congress convened in the German capital.
Participants examined four guiding questions: the extent of authoritarian influence at the UN, how it materializes in practice, the UN’s current potential to promote democracy, and possible reforms or measures to be pursued.
Kick-off speakers included Lars Castelluci, the German government’s Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Assistance; Mantas Adomėnas, Secretary-General of the Community of Democracies; Lisbeth Pilegaard, Chair of the Executive Committee, European Endowment for Democracy and Ammar Abdulhamid, Chief Governance and Policy Officer, World Liberty Congress, among others.
Photos: DWB
Participants agreed that authoritarian influence has become a significant issue that hampers the UN’s ability to promote human rights and democracy. In the conversation it was pointed out that autocratic governments coordinate successfully in UN bodies to shape agendas, resolutions and voting patterns in their interest and to restrict civil society participation. In the Human Rights Council they were said to shield one another from scrutiny.
The world’s people need to be involved and represented
Despite frustration and criticism, there appeared to be a consensus that the UN was indispensable as a universal platform including all governments, in particular to help maintain international peace and security. At the same time, it was recognized that the world’s people needed to be directly involved and represented in the organization. Support for the creation of a UN Parliamentary Assembly, voiced by several speakers, remained unchallenged. Proposals for citizens’ participation put forward were a World Citizens’ Initiative and Citizens’ Assemblies.
The need for UN reforms was widely shared, but the scope and ambition was debated. While the work of UN agencies was appreciated by some as impactful on the ground, others characterized them as too bureaucratic. The UN80 reform process was called “existential” by one speaker.
In terms of ambitious institutional reforms, such as a review of the UN Charter, the participants held diverging views. While some voiced support, a majority appeared to lean towards a cautious approach and warned there was a risk of worsening the situation and no political momentum.
In the field of democracy promotion and authoritarian influence, there was a common perception that democratic governments have lost the initiative and failed to mount an adequate response. Participants emphasized the need for democracies and pro-democracy actors to “join forces” and contest authoritarian governments at the UN. The idea of a “circle of friends” for human rights formed by like-minded governments was put forward.
Is the UN even able to appoint one person to defend democracy?
One speaker noted that the best democracy promotion was for democracies to lead by example and serve as appealing models. Another speaker conceded, however, that too often democratic governments were “unable to deliver” in this regard. Some participants underlined the importance of pursuing compelling, values-based narratives and emotional, people-centered communication, instead of a focus on democratic procedures and institutions.
The appointment of a UN Special Rapporteur on Democracy was endorsed by many speakers and characterized as a test. Is the UN even able to “appoint one person to defend democracy?” one participant asked. Nonetheless, other participants wondered what exactly the mandate would entail. Disappointment with existing mandates was expressed together with a warning not to proliferate such mandates further and instead make current arrangements work.
In the meeting’s conclusion, the perceived lack of political will to advance meaningful pro-democracy initiatives was pointed out: “where are the democratic governments who are willing to take the lead?”
Participants noted that having conversations such as this was already a small step forward and many voiced an interest in staying involved and helping advance some of the items elaborated on.
A more detailed report is available here.