Operationalizing Intersectional Human Rights in EU External Relations: A Roadmap for the Czech Republic

INTRODUCTION

The European Union (EU) increasingly defines its external action through a human rights lens yet lacks an explicit intersectional framework. While the European Gender Action Plan for External Relations 2020–2027 (GAP III)2 recognizes that EU external actions require an “intersectional approach” – with a reference to Article 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – many vulnerabilities remain invisible (Maes & Debusscher, 2024).3 The Horizon Europe HRJust Project has demonstrated that integrating an intersectional perspective into policymaking helps identify overlapping forms of disadvantage and enhances the legitimacy and effectiveness of rights-based governance.

This paper proposes that the EU should institutionalize an intersectional human-rights test across its external relations. Such a test would assess, before policy adoption, how policy measures (e.g. in the field of climate or migration) affect people across intersecting identities – like gender, ethnicity, age, disability, and socio-economic status. Such a test would operationalize the EU’s Treaty obligations (Articles 2 and 21 TEU) and the principles of coherence and equality underpinning the European Green Deal and the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020–2027, among others. The EU has the potential to lead the way externally and promote intersectionality.

For Czechia, this approach offers strategic advantages. By usingintersectional tools in its foreign and development policy, the Czech government can advance a more inclusive diplomacy while reinforcing the credibility of the EU’s human-rights narrative.

QUESTION: ANALYSIS

Intersectionality, as developed in critical legal scholarship, reveals how multiple identity categories intersect to create distinct forms of disadvantage. Originally grounded in non-discrimination law, intersectionality now informs broader human rights law and governance. As Alessi (2025)4 argues, it has a transformative function: it not only 64 SVĚT V PROMĚNÁCH 2026: ANALÝZY ÚMV diagnoses inequalities but also requires structural changes in how law and policy respond to them. Intersectionality has been described as a lens that “renders visible how different vectors of social hierarchy intersect and mutually reinforce each other, thus shaping people’s varying experiences of oppression and marginalization” (Hesselink & Tjon Soei Len, 2025).5 For example, the Pay Transparency Directive 2023/970/EC, Article 3(2)(e), defines intersectional discrimination as “discrimination based on a combination of sex and any other ground or grounds of discrimination protected under Directives 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC”. Hesselink and Tjon Soei Len, however, argue that EU antidiscrimination law remains structurally blind to discrimination at the intersection of different forms of discrimination (Ibid.; see also Howard, 2024).

Empirical research conducted during the Horizon Europe HRJust project has confirmed this theoretical insight. In its comparative study of human rights justifications (HRJs) – through the policy fields of climate, migration and COVID-19-related policy measures – the project found that states often use human rights language as a governance tool, raising the question of how we can ensure that states’ use of human rights as a justification is genuine and that they would not just use them as a shield for arbitrary or unjust conduct, or even a violation of human rights obligations (Cristani & Fornalé, 2025).7 In this respect, an intersectional test can provide an early-warning mechanism while ensuring that human-rights arguments are applied consistently and legitimately.

The relevance of intersectionality in policymaking is increasingly recognized by international organizations. In March 2024, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers adopted the new Gender Equality Strategy for 2024–2029 (CM(2024)17- final – [1491/4.3a]): under Strategic Objective 6, the Strategy explicitly recognizes that “adopting a gender mainstreaming and intersectional approach to all policies and activities [… would] result in better informed policy making” (Council of Europe, 2024). Similarly, in her 2025 report delivered to the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance highlighted that “urgent and bold action should be taken by States to implement an intersectional approach” (Human Rights Council, 2025).8 At the EU level, this is also reflected in the above-mentioned GAP III, according to which “[a]n approach is intersectional when it is based on an acknowledgement of the multiple characteristics and identities of an individual, to analyse and respond to the ways in which sex and gender intersect with other personal characteristics”. HRJust’s findings suggest that incorporating gender and intersectionality can improve identification of vulnerabilities and help shape more targeted policy responses for vulnerable groups.

In the climate policy domain in particular, fieldwork comprising interviews (43 interviews with policy officers, civil society representatives, judges and arbitrators from Europe and abroad, conducted between April and August 2024) and a research survey (filled in by 21 targeted stakeholder between March and April 2025) revealed that while states increasingly invoke human rights language to justify climate policies, they often neglect to address gender and socio-economic dimensions in a meaningful way. The interviewees stressed that not all women are affected equally by climate change: indigenous women, women with lower socio-economic status, and women with disabilities often face multiple and intersecting vulnerabilities that are systematically overlooked in national policymaking (Lukešová et al., 2025).

This gap is increasingly being challenged by civil society actors and international institutions, which advocate for more inclusive and intersectional approaches. Civil society actors are not merely advocates but can offer grounded expertise on the structural inequalities that shape climate impacts (Cristani & Fornalé, 2025).

International institutions are also increasingly endorsing this shift. For example, General Recommendation No. 40 on the equal and inclusive representation of women in decision-making systems (2024) of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) emphasizes the need to move from the mere participation of women to their equal and inclusive representation in decision-making systems. This aligns with HRJust’s recommendation to integrate intersectional human-rights testing into EU external actions to ensure that the vulnerabilities of diverse groups are meaningfully reflected in policy making (Fornalé at al., 2024).

An institutionalized intersectional human-rights test (which can be built on the 2021 Toolbox on the Human Rights Based Approach) should be built on three complementary shifts. 66 SVĚT V PROMĚNÁCH 2026: ANALÝZY ÚMV ONDŘEJ HORKÝ-HLUCHÁŇ First, the EU should embed intersectional human-rights assessments across funding instruments, trade conditionality, and green partnerships. The EU already conducts Sustainability Impact Assessments for trade; these could be expanded into Intersectional Human-Rights Assessments requiring a disaggregated data collection and an inclusive stakeholder consultation process.

Second, the EU should strengthen civil society engagement to ensure that human rights commitments translate into practice. EU institutions and Member States can therefore consider institutionalizing structured dialogues with intersectional networks and grassroots organizations to embed their perspectives into decision-making.

Third, the EU needs to develop targeted capacity-building and monitoring mechanisms to guarantee effective implementation and accountability. Diplomatic staff and officials should receive training in intersectional analysis, and monitoring frameworks can help in systematically tracking how EU external actions affect different population groups.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR CZECHIA

Czechia can leverage its EU membership to use intersectional human-rights approaches within foreign policy and external action. Integrating intersectional testing could strengthen both the legitimacy and efficiency of Czech diplomacy while aligning it with the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020–2027.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs could foster the application of intersectional impact assessments in development programmes in the Western Balkans or Eastern Partnership regions while ensuring that gender, ethnicity, and disability factors are explicitly considered. Czechia can also advocate for intersectional assessment criteria in external agreements and sanctions regimes within the Council of the EUʼs Working Party on Human Rights (COHOM) and the European External Action Service (EEAS).

Domestically, there are already some promising initiatives of this sort in Czechia, like the Women’s Network on Czech European, Foreign and Security Policy, established by the Association for International Affairs (AMO), which provides a platform for women active in diplomacy, politics, academia, the media, and civil society to exchange expertise and discuss international developments. Czechia has also advanced the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) Agenda through its National Action Plans, as the first one was adopted for 2017–2020 and then renewed for 2021–2025. In 2021, an inter-ministerial working group was established to support monitoring and information exchange on WPS implementation.

Building on these positive experiences, the Czech government could institutionalize regular inter-ministerial working group meetings – extending beyond the WPS framework – to promote inclusive dialogue among ministries, civil society, and academia.

Challenges still remain, however. The domestic polarization on migration and gender equality may limit the enthusiasm for intersectional frameworks. Also, administrative capacities are uneven, and smaller ministries may need EU-level technical assistance. At the EU level, resistance from some member states could hinder the mainstreaming of intersectionality across external relations.

Finally, intersectionality must not become a procedural formality. The human-rights discourse can be instrumentalized when disconnected from genuine participation. A meaningful civil-society engagement, participatory monitoring, and transparent evaluations are essential to ensuring the dominance of substance over form in this area.

FORESIGHT

Several developments make the adoption of intersectional approaches both necessary and feasible. The EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020–2025 already identifies intersectionality as a horizontal principle for all actions (COM/2020/152 final), and its successor strategy (2026–2030) plans to include “[i]ntersectionality […as] a cross-cutting principle for the implementation of the new strategy” (European Commission, 2025)11 in line with GAP III (when it comes to EU external relations).

The European Court of Human Rights’ landmark decision in the case Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland of 2024 has already linked climate policy and human rights, establishing that climate inaction disproportionately affects older women. This precedent paves the way for intersectional reasoning in EU climate policy.

For Czech foreign policy, these developments create an opportunity to lead by example. Czechia could advocate for an EU Intersectional Human-Rights Task Force – jointly coordinated by the EEAS and member-state experts – to use intersectional testing in selected EU external programmes. This initiative would align Czech diplomacy with EU values and enhance its role as a constructive actor in shaping future human-rights governance.

→ Institutionalize intersectional impact assessments. The EU and its member states, including Czechia, should consider integrating intersectional human-rights testing into all their external policies.

→ Empower civil society. The EU and its member states, including Czechia, should strengthen their dialogue with civil society to embed intersectionality and gender equality as consistent policy priorities.

→ Build capacities and accountability frameworks. Czechia can be an intersectionality leader within the EU by training officials in intersectional analysis and advocating for EU-wide data collection and monitoring mechanisms.