Thank you for inviting me to this important discussion. The topic could not be more fitting for one of my first events as European Ombudsman.

Throughout my career, I have always believed in the importance of empowering individuals in their interactions with public institutions and ensuring that these institutions serve citizens effectively. This is also the fundamental purpose of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI).

Yet, despite being a powerful instrument of democratic participation, it is fair to say that the ECI still has not fully lived up to its potential.

We find ourselves in a period of increasing polarization, where trust in institutions is eroding, and political discourse often resembles more of a competitive sport rather than a shared effort to build a better future — weakening public confidence in governments and fracturing the bonds that hold societies together.

The ECI offers a different approach — collaborative rather than competitive. It provides citizens with a direct mechanism to raise issues that matter to them and engage constructively with the institutions that govern them.

It is a means to be heard, not just as individuals, but as co-creators of the European political space.

In many ways, the ECI mirrors the work of the European Ombudsman. Submitting a complaint to my Office is an act of trust — that there is still an institution, within the system, able to hear and respond. Similarly, signing or launching a Citizens’ Initiative is not merely an expression of opinion but a call for action and a sign of continued belief in the European project.

However, trust can never be taken for granted.

The ECI was created to empower citizens, but there is a growing gap between expectations and what the instrument actually delivers. Citizens often expect that collecting one million signatures will lead directly to new legislation. The reality, however, as we all know, is that the Commission is only obliged to consider an initiative, not act upon it.

And while it is understandable that not every proposal can result in a legislative change - one wonders - if no initiative ever leads to a direct legislative proposal, are we truly listening?

The case of the End the Cage Age initiative is a perfect illustration. After years of campaigning and gathering public support, as well as hope, citizens expected meaningful action. But the complaints filed with my Office only reflected deep frustration and disappointment, highlighting the very real risk that, over time, enthusiasm for this democratic tool may fade.

If citizens believe their participation will not lead to meaningful change, they may disengage entirely — not just from the ECI, but from democratic processes more broadly.

Building trust requires truthfulness. Citizens need to be fully informed about what the ECI can and cannot do. And forgive me, but the burden of managing expectations cannot fall on the public — it falls on political leaders and institutions.

It is not possible to please everyone in a democracy, but it is possible — and essential — to be honest.

Representative democracy depends on citizens knowing who they are voting for and what policies they support. Overpromising deepens disillusionment.

At the same time, the Commission must ensure that responses to successful initiatives go beyond procedural formalities. Even when legislative action is not possible, clear and transparent explanations must be provided, showing citizens that their efforts are taken seriously and have real influence on policy debates.

One thing is for me clear, for the ECI to reach its full potential, we must improve communication about its purpose and function. Too many European citizens are unaware of this instrument, and those who do know about it often do not fully understand how it works.

Awareness campaigns must be strengthened so that more people can engage. Schools, universities, civil society organizations, and especially the media all have a role to play.

Moreover, the EU institutions should invest in making the ECI more accessible and visible. Digital platforms, social media, and outreach events should be used to ensure that citizens understand not only how to participate in an initiative but also how the Commission evaluates and responds to them.

Better communication is also needed when initiatives reach the required signatures. The Commission must engage in open, public discussions about the proposals, making the decision-making process more transparent and showing that every initiative—whether it leads to legislation or not — contributes to shaping the European agenda.

The ECI is a bridge between citizens and EU institutions. But a bridge is only useful if people know it exists and trust that it will take them where they want to go.

To preserve the ECI as a meaningful tool of democratic participation, we must address this gap between expectations and reality. That means ensuring transparency, honesty, and responsiveness from EU institutions. It also means making citizens more aware of this instrument and its potential to drive change. Goals that align closely with the principles of good administration and the exercise of the European Ombudsman’s mandate.

If we fail to do this, the ECI risks becoming little more than rhetoric — an unfulfilled promise rather than a true mechanism for action. But if we succeed, we will strengthen not only this instrument but also the trust that is so essential for the future of our Union.