The appointment of former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar as Vice Chair of a democracy initiative linked to Open Society Foundations has once again brought these concerns into focus.
The appointment of Leo Varadkar to Democracy27 raises serious questions about the judgment behind the organization’s leadership selections. Given his record in office and the widespread public frustration over housing, healthcare, immigration, and the cost-of-living crisis during his tenure, critics may reasonably ask why he was chosen to help “renew democracy” in the first place.
Far from strengthening the initiative’s credibility, his appointment risks doing the opposite.
Democracy ’27 or Hypocrisy ’26?
If Democracy27 had to turn to a politician so closely associated with policies that many voters believe he failed to deliver, what does that say about the calibre of the wider committee? The appointment may leave many wondering whether the committee’s leadership reflects the level of expertise and public confidence one would expect.
For an initiative dedicated to rebuilding trust in democracy, appointing a former Taoiseach who left office before completing his term is an unusual choice.
It risks looking less like a movement for democratic reform and more like a gathering of former political players reluctant to leave the field remaining close to the action in the hope that someone will hand them another jersey.
The question for George Soros is a simple one: who still wants him on the pitch?
One is left wondering whether George Soros is becoming the veteran player who refuses to leave the dressing room as well, still convinced he belongs on the team long after many supporters have moved on.
After decades of involvement or interference, depending on how you look at it, in political and social causes across multiple countries, I have to ask whether he is acting as a philanthropist supporting democratic values or as an unelected person with money, exerting influence over societies that never asked for his intervention.
At what point does philanthropy become political interference, and who gets to decide where that line is drawn?
The growing involvement of foreign-funded organizations in Irish public life
This raises an important question: who should shape Ireland’s political future of the Irish people, or wealthy international actors with vast financial resources?
George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF) has spent years funding advocacy groups, civil society organizations, and political campaigns across Ireland. While supporters argue that these activities promote human rights and equality, the broader issue is not whether one agrees with the causes being funded. The issue is whether a foreign billionaire and his network should have such significant influence over the direction of Irish society.
The Legal Question: Influence Versus Interference
Under Irish law, advocacy, charitable giving, and support for civil society organizations are generally lawful. However, legality alone does not settle the question of whether existing safeguards are sufficient.
Modern democracies increasingly face challenges from well-funded international networks capable of shaping public debate, influencing legislation, and directing political priorities without standing for election or being directly accountable to voters.
The concern is not necessarily that laws have been broken. The concern is that current laws may not adequately protect democratic decision-making from disproportionate external influence.
Ireland’s Transparency Gap
Irish voters deserve to know:
- Which organizations receive foreign funding.
- How much funding they receive.
- What policy objectives are attached to that funding.
- Which politicians, civil servants, and public bodies engage with foreign-funded advocacy groups.
Greater transparency would allow citizens to assess for themselves whether outside interests are exercising undue influence over domestic affairs.
Strengthening Democratic Safeguards
If Ireland wishes to protect public confidence in its democratic institutions, several reforms could be considered:
1. Mandatory Disclosure of Foreign Funding
Organizations involved in political advocacy, public policy campaigns, or referendum activities should be required to disclose all significant foreign funding sources in a clear and publicly accessible register.
2. Enhanced Lobbying Transparency
Any organization receiving substantial overseas funding should be subject to stricter lobbying disclosure requirements when seeking to influence legislation, public policy, or government decision-making.
3. Parliamentary Oversight
The Oireachtas should establish a dedicated committee to examine the role of foreign-funded organizations in Irish political life and assess whether existing regulations remain fit for purpose.
4. Review of Referendum and Campaign Financing Rules
Ireland’s referendum process is a cornerstone of national sovereignty. Existing campaign finance laws should be reviewed regularly to ensure that foreign money cannot indirectly shape constitutional debates through third-party organizations.
5. Greater Public Accountability
Political leaders who take positions within organizations linked to foreign-funded advocacy networks should be transparent about those relationships and any potential conflicts of interest.
The Democracy27 Connection
Concerns about foreign-funded influence have intensified following the launch of Democracy27, a new initiative that supposedly seeks to address challenges facing democratic institutions across Europe.
Launched on June 1, 2026, Democracy27 is chaired by former European Commission Vice-President Věra Jourová and includes former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and former French minister Najat Vallaud-Belkacem as vice-chairs. The task force brings together politicians, activists, academics, and public figures, including former European Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly and French activist Priscillia Ludosky.
According to its stated mission, Democracy27 will conduct visits across multiple countries, host citizen dialogues, and produce a major report in 2027 examining issues such as disinformation, digital inequality, declining public trust, and political disengagement among younger generations.
Described as an initiative, an important effort to strengthen democratic participation and address emerging threats to democratic governance.
Unelected transnational influence
Democracy derives its legitimacy from the consent of the people it governs. That raises an obvious question here: why should wealthy international figures, operating through foundations and influence networks, have a role in shaping Ireland’s and Europe’s democratic future when they are neither elected by European voters nor accountable to them?
The issue is not whether organizations such as Democracy27 should exist, but whether the public is being given sufficient information to understand who funds them, who influences them, why they were set up, and what impact they may have on national political debates
One Final Question
What really is “Democracy27”
Democracy27 presents itself as a project to renew democracy, but is it just another attempt by an interconnected network of, well established, political and institutional elites to influence how democracy should function to benefit, them specifically, across Europe.
