Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Inside the Council of Europe
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Inside the Council of Europe
This episode is a free preview. Please take out a paid subscription to hear the second half. Your support is very very very much appreciated.
The activities of the acronymic institutions that macro-manage our European lives are a big black hole to everyone but a small circle of insiders. Their purpose is vague, their processes boringly impenetrable, and even the purported benefits of membership are ill-defined.
Nobody really knows what goes on inside “supranational bodies” like the UNHCR, OHCHR, the OECD, the ODHR, the CJEU, ECHR, the FRA, and all the various Committees, Commissions and Councils on the prevention or promotion of whateverthefuck. But we are all aware that these entities are necessary and Good in some unspecified way, because they get cited all the time when our domestic governments and their lackies in the NGO sector try to sell us on unpopular social changes.
Many of these “bodies” produce nothing of legal import, and are essentially just advocacy-toolmakers for activists and politicians, creating elite-driven, fake consensus that is then presented to the rest of us as '“international standards”. Such decrees and decisions, resolutions and recommendations are non-binding soft law.
But soft law is a bit like currency — it has no intrinsic value beyond the value we collectively agree to assign to it; its power is reliant on network effects, with compliance self-enforced via more people buying-in. Everyone agrees because everyone agrees.
And we currently assign a lot of value to soft law that comes from the Council of Europe.
For a very long time, it was understood that we should all respect and adhere to these soft laws because this institution, the COE, is a particularly strong bulwark against a return to the kind of savagery that led to the Second World War. The institution itself was born of post-Hitler Never-Againism, with the stated aim to “promote cooperation on human rights and the rule of law”.
But how does “human rights”, as understood in rubble-ravaged Dresden, compare to our understanding of the term in 2026? Did the war-weary decision men of the 1950s ever envision that safeguards against ethnic cleansing would one day be re-interpreted to include safeguards against, uh, psychologists telling a child the painful truth that humans can’t change sex?
The Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) churns out advocacy material at the behest of some of the most deranged activist extremists on the continent.
If you’re a lobbyist who can’t get the legal changes you want at home, you can go to the swivel-eyed militants of the COE to help you generate some kind of guideline, or even judicial outcome (via the ECtHR, another nightmare) that you can then use to browbeat the plebs back home with.
The various bodies within the Council of Europe will even do a name-and-shame every so often, to call out, country-by-country, who is adhering to their instructions. Bad grades are further used by activists to apply political pressure. Non-compliance can damage a government’s reputation not just in the COE, but also among peer governments of nations with whom they are considered ideologically aligned.
The opacity of these institution very much benefits the extremists and their unpalatable demands. The less you know, the better. The media can’t figure out how to report on the goings-on here, because it all seems so boring and inconsequential. The activists wouldn’t alter this setup for the world.
In an effort to get a better understanding of what goes on, Annette Pacey from Athena Forum shared with me all the goss about what she saw when the spent a few days in Strasbourg to follow the PACE vote on conversion therapy bans. She tried to sus out how it all works, but also attempted to convince visiting delegations that sex falsification is not, in fact, a universal human right or a “European value”.
It was an enlightening conversation. Enjoy!
Show notes
Topics discussed
· The structure and function of the Council of Europe versus the European Union· The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and its political groups· The Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination· The resolution “For a ban on conversion practices” and its legislative trajectory· The role of rapporteurs, including UK MP Kate Osborne· Political group strategy, amendments, and voting coordination· Attendance patterns and procedural dynamics in Strasbourg· The distinction between sexual orientation and gender identity in law· The concept of “affirmation” in policy frameworks· The broader impact of Council of Europe resolutions on national legislation
About the Guest
Annette Pacey is a writer and policy commentator affiliated with Athena Forum, a European network focused on evidence-based policy and sex-based rights. She also has a Substack/podcast called Gender Lupa (see links below).
She attended the January 2026 session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, where she engaged directly with delegates across political groups regarding the draft resolution on conversion practices.
Annette speaks in a personal capacity in this episode and reflects on her observations of institutional process, political negotiation, and advocacy dynamics inside PACE.
Institutional Context: The Council of Europe and PACE
The Council of Europe is a pan-European intergovernmental organization founded in 1949 and headquartered in Strasbourg, France. It currently has 46 member states and is distinct from the European Union.
🔗 Council of Europe — Official Website
https://www.coe.int
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) is composed of sitting national parliamentarians from member states. Delegates are not directly elected to PACE but are appointed from their domestic parliaments.
🔗 Parliamentary Assembly (PACE)
https://pace.coe.int
Political groups within PACE include:· SOC — Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group· EPP/CD — Group of the European People’s Party· ALDE — Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe· EC/DA — European Conservatives Group and Democratic Alliance· UEL — Unified European Left
🔗 Political Groups Overviewhttps://pace.coe.int/en/pages/political-groups
The Conversion Practices Resolution
The episode centers on the resolution titled:
“For a ban on conversion practices”
The report was prepared by Kate Osborne MP (UK, Labour), serving as rapporteur for the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination.
🔗 Resolution Text and Report (Doc. 16315)https://pace.coe.int/en/files/35742
The resolution calls on member states to:
· Introduce legislative bans on conversion practices· Provide criminal sanctions where appropriate· Prohibit so-called “conversion practices” affecting sexual orientation and gender identity· Implement awareness campaigns and support mechanisms
As discussed in the episode, Council of Europe resolutions are not binding law. However, they are frequently cited as human rights standards and can influence national legislation.
Legal Precedents Referenced
Malta — Affirmation of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Gender Expression Act (2016)Malta was the first European country to introduce legislation addressing conversion practices.
🔗 Malta Legislation Overviewhttps://legislation.mt/eli/cap/540/eng
Spain — Law 4/2023 (Ley para la igualdad real y efectiva de las personas trans)Spain’s 2023 reform includes provisions addressing conversion practices.
🔗 Spanish Official Gazette (BOE)https://www.boe.es/eli/es/l/2023/02/28/4
Political Dynamics Discussed
The episode examines:
· Amendment strategies within the EPP group· Pre-agreed amendments negotiated with the rapporteur· The role of party leadership in shaping final votes· Attendance patterns on the final day of plenary· Strategic considerations among center-right delegates
The conversation reflects on how procedural decisions and group coordination can affect the substance of policy outcomes.
Individuals referenced
🔗 Kate Osborne MPUK Labour MP; Rapporteur on conversion practiceshttps://members.parliament.uk/member/4657
🔗 Helena DalliEuropean Commissioner for Equalityhttps://commission.europa.eu/persons/helena-dalli_en
🔗 Thor Bjørn JaglandFormer Secretary General of the Council of Europe (2009–2019)https://www.coe.int/en/web/secretary-general/former-secretaries-general
Athena Forum
Athena Forum is a European civil society initiative focused on evidence-based policy and sex-based rights.
🔗 Athena Forum
https://athena-forum.eu/
https://x.com/RoisinMichaux
👤 Annette Pacey
• LinkedIn: https://es.linkedin.com/in/annette-pacey-6a159b3a• X (Twitter): https://x.com/annettepacey?lang=en• Substack (Gender Lupa): https://genderlupa.substack.com/podcast
🔗 Apple Podcasts — Peaked
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit peaked.substack.com/subscribe
View all episodes
By Róisín MichauxThis episode is a free preview. Please take out a paid subscription to hear the second half. Your support is very very very much appreciated.
The activities of the acronymic institutions that macro-manage our European lives are a big black hole to everyone but a small circle of insiders. Their purpose is vague, their processes boringly impenetrable, and even the purported benefits of membership are ill-defined.
Nobody really knows what goes on inside “supranational bodies” like the UNHCR, OHCHR, the OECD, the ODHR, the CJEU, ECHR, the FRA, and all the various Committees, Commissions and Councils on the prevention or promotion of whateverthefuck. But we are all aware that these entities are necessary and Good in some unspecified way, because they get cited all the time when our domestic governments and their lackies in the NGO sector try to sell us on unpopular social changes.
Many of these “bodies” produce nothing of legal import, and are essentially just advocacy-toolmakers for activists and politicians, creating elite-driven, fake consensus that is then presented to the rest of us as '“international standards”. Such decrees and decisions, resolutions and recommendations are non-binding soft law.
But soft law is a bit like currency — it has no intrinsic value beyond the value we collectively agree to assign to it; its power is reliant on network effects, with compliance self-enforced via more people buying-in. Everyone agrees because everyone agrees.
And we currently assign a lot of value to soft law that comes from the Council of Europe.
For a very long time, it was understood that we should all respect and adhere to these soft laws because this institution, the COE, is a particularly strong bulwark against a return to the kind of savagery that led to the Second World War. The institution itself was born of post-Hitler Never-Againism, with the stated aim to “promote cooperation on human rights and the rule of law”.
But how does “human rights”, as understood in rubble-ravaged Dresden, compare to our understanding of the term in 2026? Did the war-weary decision men of the 1950s ever envision that safeguards against ethnic cleansing would one day be re-interpreted to include safeguards against, uh, psychologists telling a child the painful truth that humans can’t change sex?
The Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) churns out advocacy material at the behest of some of the most deranged activist extremists on the continent.
If you’re a lobbyist who can’t get the legal changes you want at home, you can go to the swivel-eyed militants of the COE to help you generate some kind of guideline, or even judicial outcome (via the ECtHR, another nightmare) that you can then use to browbeat the plebs back home with.
The various bodies within the Council of Europe will even do a name-and-shame every so often, to call out, country-by-country, who is adhering to their instructions. Bad grades are further used by activists to apply political pressure. Non-compliance can damage a government’s reputation not just in the COE, but also among peer governments of nations with whom they are considered ideologically aligned.
The opacity of these institution very much benefits the extremists and their unpalatable demands. The less you know, the better. The media can’t figure out how to report on the goings-on here, because it all seems so boring and inconsequential. The activists wouldn’t alter this setup for the world.
In an effort to get a better understanding of what goes on, Annette Pacey from Athena Forum shared with me all the goss about what she saw when the spent a few days in Strasbourg to follow the PACE vote on conversion therapy bans. She tried to sus out how it all works, but also attempted to convince visiting delegations that sex falsification is not, in fact, a universal human right or a “European value”.
It was an enlightening conversation. Enjoy!
Show notes
Topics discussed
· The structure and function of the Council of Europe versus the European Union· The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) and its political groups· The Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination· The resolution “For a ban on conversion practices” and its legislative trajectory· The role of rapporteurs, including UK MP Kate Osborne· Political group strategy, amendments, and voting coordination· Attendance patterns and procedural dynamics in Strasbourg· The distinction between sexual orientation and gender identity in law· The concept of “affirmation” in policy frameworks· The broader impact of Council of Europe resolutions on national legislation
About the Guest
Annette Pacey is a writer and policy commentator affiliated with Athena Forum, a European network focused on evidence-based policy and sex-based rights. She also has a Substack/podcast called Gender Lupa (see links below).
She attended the January 2026 session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, where she engaged directly with delegates across political groups regarding the draft resolution on conversion practices.
Annette speaks in a personal capacity in this episode and reflects on her observations of institutional process, political negotiation, and advocacy dynamics inside PACE.
Institutional Context: The Council of Europe and PACE
The Council of Europe is a pan-European intergovernmental organization founded in 1949 and headquartered in Strasbourg, France. It currently has 46 member states and is distinct from the European Union.
🔗 Council of Europe — Official Website
https://www.coe.int
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) is composed of sitting national parliamentarians from member states. Delegates are not directly elected to PACE but are appointed from their domestic parliaments.
🔗 Parliamentary Assembly (PACE)
https://pace.coe.int
Political groups within PACE include:· SOC — Socialists, Democrats and Greens Group· EPP/CD — Group of the European People’s Party· ALDE — Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe· EC/DA — European Conservatives Group and Democratic Alliance· UEL — Unified European Left
🔗 Political Groups Overviewhttps://pace.coe.int/en/pages/political-groups
The Conversion Practices Resolution
The episode centers on the resolution titled:
“For a ban on conversion practices”
The report was prepared by Kate Osborne MP (UK, Labour), serving as rapporteur for the Committee on Equality and Non-Discrimination.
🔗 Resolution Text and Report (Doc. 16315)https://pace.coe.int/en/files/35742
The resolution calls on member states to:
· Introduce legislative bans on conversion practices· Provide criminal sanctions where appropriate· Prohibit so-called “conversion practices” affecting sexual orientation and gender identity· Implement awareness campaigns and support mechanisms
As discussed in the episode, Council of Europe resolutions are not binding law. However, they are frequently cited as human rights standards and can influence national legislation.
Legal Precedents Referenced
Malta — Affirmation of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Gender Expression Act (2016)Malta was the first European country to introduce legislation addressing conversion practices.
🔗 Malta Legislation Overviewhttps://legislation.mt/eli/cap/540/eng
Spain — Law 4/2023 (Ley para la igualdad real y efectiva de las personas trans)Spain’s 2023 reform includes provisions addressing conversion practices.
🔗 Spanish Official Gazette (BOE)https://www.boe.es/eli/es/l/2023/02/28/4
Political Dynamics Discussed
The episode examines:
· Amendment strategies within the EPP group· Pre-agreed amendments negotiated with the rapporteur· The role of party leadership in shaping final votes· Attendance patterns on the final day of plenary· Strategic considerations among center-right delegates
The conversation reflects on how procedural decisions and group coordination can affect the substance of policy outcomes.
Individuals referenced
🔗 Kate Osborne MPUK Labour MP; Rapporteur on conversion practiceshttps://members.parliament.uk/member/4657
🔗 Helena DalliEuropean Commissioner for Equalityhttps://commission.europa.eu/persons/helena-dalli_en
🔗 Thor Bjørn JaglandFormer Secretary General of the Council of Europe (2009–2019)https://www.coe.int/en/web/secretary-general/former-secretaries-general
Athena Forum
Athena Forum is a European civil society initiative focused on evidence-based policy and sex-based rights.
🔗 Athena Forum
https://athena-forum.eu/
https://x.com/RoisinMichaux
👤 Annette Pacey
• LinkedIn: https://es.linkedin.com/in/annette-pacey-6a159b3a• X (Twitter): https://x.com/annettepacey?lang=en• Substack (Gender Lupa): https://genderlupa.substack.com/podcast
🔗 Apple Podcasts — Peaked
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit peaked.substack.com/subscribe