Mairead McGuinness is reportedly set to become the European Union’s next Special Envoy on freedom of religion or belief, ending a politically awkward vacancy that, over the past year, drew mounting pressure from MEPs, bishops, advocacy organisations and commentators who warned that Brussels was weakening its own human-rights credibility by leaving the post unfilled.

After more than a year of silence around one of the EU’s most symbolic human-rights posts, Brussels appears close to acting. EURACTIV reported on 25 March that former European commissioner Mairead McGuinness is set to become the EU’s Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or belief outside the Union. If confirmed, the appointment would end a vacancy that became increasingly difficult for the Commission to explain as public calls for action grew louder across the past 12 months.

The post is not a ceremonial one. Under the Commission’s published mandate for the special envoy, the office is meant to engage national authorities and civil society in countries where violations occur, support interreligious dialogue, contribute to deradicalisation work, promote tolerance in education, and coordinate with the EU Special Representative for Human Rights. In other words, it is one of the Union’s clearest external instruments for turning its FoRB principles into diplomatic practice.

Yet when the second von der Leyen Commission took office on 1 December 2024, the envoy role was left vacant. That absence soon turned into a recurring point of criticism. In April 2025, the European Parliament’s Intergroup on Freedom of Religion, Belief and Conscience renewed its appeal to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Magnus Brunner, calling for the urgent appointment of a qualified envoy with proper resources and autonomy. The letter of 4 April 2025, signed by the intergroup’s co-chairs and supported by a broader cross-party group of MEPs, argued that the worsening situation for believers and non-believers abroad required a timely, credible and fully backed appointment.

A month later, the intergroup published von der Leyen’s response, saying she remained committed to the role and intended to renew it. But the reassurance did not settle the matter. By the summer, frustration had deepened. On 22 August 2025, ECR MEPs Bert-Jan Ruissen and Carlo Fidanza publicly urged the Commission to fill the post immediately, saying it had been vacant since December 2024 and linking the delay to the EU’s wider response to religiously motivated violence and persecution.

Pressure widened further in autumn. In October 2025, the bishops of the European Union, gathered under COMECE, wrote to von der Leyen to say that one year into the mandate of the von der Leyen II Commission, the envoy was still missing. Their argument was not only moral but geopolitical: in a world marked by instability, the bishops said, the EU needed a visible and effective instrument to defend freedom of religion or belief as part of its external action.

By the end of 2025, the debate had also broadened beyond whether the envoy should be appointed to the kind of person the EU should choose. In December, Humanists International published a letter from 18 cross-party MEPs warning that the next envoy should not use the mandate in ways that undermine the rights of women, LGBTIQ+ people or non-believers. That intervention added a second layer to the discussion: not only speed, but also the universality and consistency of the human-rights framework the envoy is expected to uphold.

Human Rights Without Frontiers pushed the criticism further. In a series of reports during 2025 and early 2026, including a January 2026 assessment, the Brussels-based NGO argued that the Commission had allowed the office to lapse again without transparency, and criticised the absence of a public call for candidates. HRWF also framed the problem as structural, saying the envoy role has repeatedly suffered from long interruptions rather than stable continuity.

Willy Fautre from HRWF and through The European Times has also tracked the issue closely. In September 2025, it reported on the ECR call for an urgent appointment. More recently, it published a strongly worded piece titled “Shame on the EU! 15th month without EU Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief is over”, reflecting the sense among some observers that the vacancy had moved from bureaucratic delay into a test of political will.

The timing has been especially awkward for Brussels because the EU continues to present itself internationally as a defender of FoRB. Earlier this month, the EU Delegation in Geneva marked the 40th anniversary of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, stressing that the EU has long supported the mandate and sees FoRB as foundational for human dignity and social cohesion. That message sits uneasily beside the long vacancy in the Union’s own envoy post.

If McGuinness is confirmed, Brussels will be choosing a figure with deep institutional experience. According to her official Commission biography, she served as European Commissioner for financial services from 2020 to 2024, was First Vice-President of the European Parliament from 2017 to 2020, and had previously spent 16 years as an MEP. Official biographies of her earlier parliamentary work also note that she led Parliament’s dialogue with religious and philosophical organisations under Article 17, giving her familiarity with one of the EU’s most sensitive church-state interfaces.

That background may help explain why her name has circulated in Brussels for weeks. Dutch daily Reformatorisch Dagblad had already reported in early March that McGuinness was being considered for the FoRB brief, before EURACTIV published its exclusive on Tuesday. Several Brussels observers saw her as a plausible choice precisely because she combines political seniority, knowledge of the institutions and prior experience with religion-related dialogue inside the Parliament.

Still, any appointment is unlikely to end the debate entirely. Those who campaigned for the role’s reinstatement will want to see whether the envoy receives meaningful backing, staff and political access rather than a largely symbolic title. Rights organisations that warned against a selective reading of FoRB will also be watching closely. The deeper question raised over the past year has not only been whether the EU wants an envoy, but whether it wants one with enough independence, clarity and institutional support to matter.

That is why the reported nomination of McGuinness matters beyond personnel. It could close a damaging gap in the EU’s human-rights architecture. But it will only count as a real reset if Brussels now turns an overdue appointment into a durable and credible policy instrument.

European basketball’s biggest story today is not only on the court. Fresh reporting on Tuesday says the EuroLeague and its licensed clubs are now valued at more than €3.2 billion, a figure that lands at a sensitive moment for the sport. With the NBA and FIBA still exploring a new European competition, the valuation reads as more than a financial update. It is also a statement that Europe’s existing elite club structure sees itself as a major sports property that does not intend to be sidelined.

According to reporting published today by AS and Palco23, and reflected in material from the EuroLeague Media Centre, a valuation study by JB Capital places the combined enterprise value of the league and its licensed clubs above €3.2 billion. The reports value the league itself at about €1.41 billion for the 2025-26 season, while the licensed clubs together are valued at roughly €1.8 billion.

More than a balance-sheet update

The figures matter because they point to a larger restructuring of the sport. Today’s reporting says individual club valuations range from more than €60 million to more than €320 million, and that the combined value of the league and its clubs could rise to €4.3 billion by the 2026-27 season if the current 10-year licensing framework evolves into a system of permanent franchises. In European sport, terms such as “license” and “franchise” are not merely technical. They signal different ideas about access, permanence and control.

Earlier this month, EuroLeague shareholders approved what the competition described as a transformational strategic roadmap. Business reporting said the plan includes evaluating a possible €1.5 billion capital raise to support growth initiatives, along with an additional €1 billion commercial vehicle focused on arena development and modernization. The same reporting linked the roadmap to permanent licenses, team expansion, digital acceleration, geographical growth and governance reform.

The NBA factor behind the timing

The valuation story lands in the middle of a wider struggle over who will shape elite basketball in Europe. In January, Reuters reported that NBA commissioner Adam Silver said a new Europe-wide competition could launch within the next two years, with the league hoping to tap the depth of supporter culture already seen around European football. The Financial Times also reported earlier this year that the NBA was preparing to present financial plans for a possible European league to prospective investors.

Seen in that context, today’s €3.2 billion figure looks like more than a business headline. It looks like a strategic message. EuroLeague is effectively telling clubs, investors and partners that it already has scale, commercial weight and long-term growth potential. The timing of the valuation, coming alongside the league’s new roadmap and the continuing NBA-FIBA interest in reshaping the market, gives the announcement significance well beyond sport finance.

A European sports question, not only a basketball one

For Europe, the issue goes beyond basketball finance. It touches on the wider European sports model, where club identity is often tied to cities, supporter communities and domestic competitions rather than to closed commercial systems. A move toward more permanent franchises may bring investment and stability, but it also raises familiar questions about merit, access and the relationship between continental competition and national leagues.

That broader background helps explain why basketball has become such a serious continental issue. As The European Times noted in an earlier feature on the rise of the sport across the continent, Europe’s basketball culture was not built only through commercial expansion, but through schools, municipal halls, historic clubs and deeply rooted fan communities. Today’s valuation does not erase that story. It shows that the old basketball map now sits inside a far larger investment battle.

For now, the same-day headline is clear: Europe’s top basketball competition has been valued at more than €3.2 billion, and that figure arrives just as the fight over the future of the sport is becoming more explicit. The next stage will show whether European basketball can modernise on its own terms, or whether outside capital and new league models will redraw the court entirely.

Polling stations across Italy have opened for a crucial two-day referendum on judicial reform, marking a significant political moment for Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni‘s government. The vote centers on a proposal that aims to overhaul the judiciary by creating distinct career paths for judges and prosecutors. This change has not only polarized the political landscape but also united the centre-left opposition against the reform.

The proposed judicial reform, which passed through parliament last October without securing the necessary two-thirds majority to avoid a popular vote, has become a litmus test for Meloni’s leadership. The referendum requires voters to decide between confirming or rejecting the reform through a simple “Yes” or “No” vote on their ballot papers. Recent polling suggests a neck-and-neck race, with the “No” camp gaining momentum in the final days leading up to the vote.

High Voter Turnout Signals Intense Interest

According to data from the Interior Ministry’s Eligendo portal, voter turnout reached 14.88% by midday on Sunday, doubling the turnout rate of last year’s citizenship referendum and marking the highest engagement for any referendum in over two decades. This heightened participation underscores the high stakes involved and reflects the public’s vested interest in reshaping Italy’s judicial framework.

The current system allows judges and prosecutors to belong to the same professional body, with opportunities to switch roles throughout their careers after passing a unified entrance exam. The reform seeks to dismantle this structure by establishing separate career tracks for each role. Moreover, it proposes splitting the governing Superior Council of the Magistracy into two distinct councils—one for judges and another for prosecutors—each chaired by the Italian president and composed of members selected by lottery.

Political Ramifications for Meloni

The referendum is widely viewed as a barometer for Meloni’s government as national elections loom next year. Initially cautious about associating her image with the contentious reform, Meloni has recently embraced the “Yes” campaign more openly. In her campaign rhetoric, she has painted a stark picture of potential consequences should the reform fail.

“If the reform doesn’t pass this time, we will probably not have another chance,” Meloni declared at a campaign event last week. She argued that failure to implement these changes would result in “even more powerful factions” within the judiciary and raise public safety concerns due to lenient sentences.

Implications of a “No” Vote

A political analyst suggests that a victory for the “No” camp would deal a blow to Meloni’s perceived invincibility and invigorate opposition forces by highlighting an alternative governance path. Such an outcome could potentially weaken her domestic authority and complicate her international standing as she navigates through her tenure.

The referendum has not only tested Meloni’s policy agenda but also her ability to unify her party and rally public support amid growing political divisions. The centre-left opposition has capitalized on these divisions, positioning itself as a counterbalance to Meloni’s administration.

Looking Ahead

As Italians cast their votes, the outcome remains uncertain but undeniably critical for shaping Italy’s judicial landscape and its broader political future. A successful “Yes” vote would empower Meloni’s government to enact substantial reforms that could redefine judicial operations in Italy. Conversely, a “No” outcome could signal significant challenges ahead for her leadership.

With national elections on the horizon next year, this referendum serves as an early indicator of public sentiment and may influence electoral strategies across Italy’s political spectrum. As polling stations prepare to close after two days of voting, all eyes will be on Italy as it stands at this pivotal crossroads.

The political dynamics within Europe are witnessing significant shifts as Slovenia’s liberal leader Robert Golob secured a narrow victory in the recent parliamentary elections. This development comes at a crucial time as Italy is on the brink of concluding a pivotal referendum that could reshape its judiciary system. Both events hold substantial implications for the European Union’s political landscape.

Slovenia’s Liberals Secure Narrow Victory

In Slovenia, the incumbent liberal leader Robert Golob emerged victorious in the parliamentary elections held over the weekend. With 99.85% of the votes counted, Golob’s party, Gibanje Svoboda (The Freedom Movement), garnered 28.62% of the vote, slightly edging out the populist conservatives led by Janez Janša, who received 27.95%. This result translates into 29 seats for Golob’s party compared to Janša’s 28 seats, according to AFP.

The outcome is seen as a relief for Brussels due to Golob’s pro-EU stance. His victory positions him to lead exploratory talks to form the next government—a task that promises to be challenging given the close results and diverse political landscape in Slovenia. Addressing his supporters after the results were announced in Ljubljana, Golob expressed gratitude for the public’s confidence and extended an invitation to other parties to join discussions on forming a coalition government. “Since we have received the (people’s) confidence, now we can think about going forward under a free sun,” he stated.

Italy’s Referendum: A Test for Current Government

Meanwhile, Italy is in the final hours of a national referendum focused on amendments to its post-fascism constitution that aim to overhaul the judiciary system. The polling stations are set to close at 2 pm UK time (3 pm local), marking the end of what has been perceived as not just a technical vote but a de facto confidence measure on the current administration.

The referendum seeks public approval for changes that would significantly alter how justice is administered in Italy. Despite being a complex and technical ballot issue, it has taken on broader political significance as an indicator of support for the current government ahead of general elections scheduled for 2027. Early voter turnout reports indicate that over 46% of eligible voters had cast their ballots by Sunday evening, with preliminary suggestions hinting at potential support for the “yes” campaign.

Broader Implications Across Europe

The outcomes in Slovenia and Italy are part of a broader tapestry of political activity across Europe. In France, Socialist Emmanuel Grégoire was elected mayor of Paris as Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally failed to capture key cities during the second round of local elections. Similarly, in Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s Christian Democrats claimed victory in Rhineland-Palatinate, wresting control from their coalition partners, the Social Democrats.

These developments underscore shifting allegiances and evolving political sentiments across Europe. The Slovenian election results may bolster pro-EU sentiments within the bloc amidst rising populist movements. Meanwhile, Italy’s referendum could either consolidate or challenge the current government’s position.

As these electoral outcomes unfold, they will likely influence policy directions at both national and EU levels. Slovenia’s potential coalition negotiations will be closely monitored by EU diplomats eager to maintain stability and continuity within member states. In Italy, the referendum results will be pivotal in determining not only judicial reforms but also setting the tone for future political debates leading up to the next general election.

With Denmark also heading to polls tomorrow and other European nations preparing for various local and national elections throughout the year, 2026 promises to be a year of significant political realignment across Europe. These developments will undoubtedly shape discussions around EU integration, sovereignty issues, and responses to global challenges such as economic recovery and security concerns.