Cruelty Free Europe (CFE) thank the Commission for the opportunity to share our thoughts on the proposal of a Circular Economy Act (CEA) for the EU. CFE supports the CEA as we see the clear environmental and economic benefits that it will bring for the EU, and beyond. However, this comes with the caveat that we do not support new tests on live animals being performed as a result of this Act.
Cruelty Free Europe
NGO · Belgium · EU Transparency Register 842315534764-63
Counts here are a floor, never a total: they cover the 326 consultation files tracked so far (29,503 submissions, mostly 2025–26), so an organization's real filing history is larger, not smaller.
Who they are
Among the 784 non-governmental organisations on this site, they rank #31 by legislative files engaged — a count of participation, not a measure of influence.
Declares membership of
- Not appplicable
Self-declared to the EU Transparency Register (snapshot 30 Aug 2026).
- Register category
- Non-governmental organisations
- Head office
- Brussels, Belgium
Self-declared to the EU Transparency Register (snapshot 30 Aug 2026); cost bands are floors, not audited totals. Reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU.
Track Cruelty in PolicySpeak: request access →
Work at Cruelty Free Europe? so we know who speaks for it.
Their record over time
Cruelty Free Europe filed 12 positions between 12 Apr 2022 and 3 Aug 2026, across 10 of the 326 legislative files tracked here, attaching a full position paper 9 times.
What they argued
Cruelty Free Europe welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the European Commissions adopted act for the initiative Targeted revision of the EU rules for medical devices and in vitro diagnostics. We support the aim of this initiative to streamline and future-proof the regulatory framework for medical devices and in vitro devices.
Full feedback provided in the attached document. In their current form, Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on medical devices and Regulation (EU) 2017/746 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices lack sufficient clarity around pre-clinical testing requirements, in particular, tests needed for conformity with the general safety and performance requirements and marketing authorisation of medical devices which may involve the use…
The proposal for a new European Biotech Act is perfectly placed to not only accelerate biotech products from laboratory-to-factory-to-market, but to also expedite the development of non-animal science, including test methods, for the protection of human health and the environment.
Cruelty Free Europe (CFE) thanks the European Commission for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Biotech Act II. We understand that plant protection products (PPPs) are being considered to fall under scope of this potential new Act.
Revision of the CPR could simplify the implementation of EU legislation applicable to chemicals. The Call for Evidence asks whether the CPR is internally consistent and whether it aligns with other chemicals legislation. The answer, certainly in relation to alignment of animal testing provisions, is clearly that it does not.
Cruelty Free Europe supports closer alignment of EU agencies tasked with chemicals management, and the streamlining of substance assessments, in order to ensure a high level protection of human health and the environment. As part of these efforts, the avoidance of animal testing must be a common, shared goal across all agencies.
Cruelty Free Europe thank the Commission for the opportunity to provide a second round of feedback on the proposal for an ECHA Basic Regulation, following the publication of the proposed text. ECHA is perfectly positioned at the interface of chemical safety and the advancement of regulatory toxicity testing to play a pivotal role in Europes transition away from the use of animals in science.
The need to use non-animal methods to the maximum possible extent and to transition away from testing on animals is clear. ECHA is very well placed to make valuable contributions to these efforts; the tasks and structures of ECHA must be fit for purpose.
Cruelty Free Europe welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft Commission implementing regulation, laying down certain uniform quality management and procedural requirements for the conformity assessment activities carried out by a notified body designated under Regulations (EU) 2017/745 and (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
CFE welcomes the opportunity to input into this call for evidence. The upcoming public consultation, targeted Member State consultation and stakeholder consultation must enable the evaluation of EFSAs performance specifically on the overall progress made towards the objective of the complete replacement of testing on animals.
Cruelty Free Europe thanks for the Commission for the opportunity to provide comments on the EU GLP Directives, an invaluable tool for ensuring the quality and reliability of data used for regulatory decision-making.
Looking for an argument rather than an organization? Search every submission for a phrase and see everyone who used it.
Turns up on the same files
Organizations that also filed on at least two of the same consultations. A shared interest in the same dossiers — not evidence of coordination, and we do not suggest any.
- Eurogroup for Animals · 7 files in common
- EFPIA · 7 files in common
- Cefic · 6 files in common
- Wirtschaftskammer Österreich · 5 files in common
- BEUC - The European Consumer Organisation · 5 files in common
Showing 5 of 243.
Is this your organization?
Everything on this page comes from Cruelty Free Europe’s own submissions to the European Commission — we have added nothing and interpreted nothing. If something is wrong or out of date, email info@policyspeak.com and we will correct it. If you are an individual named in a record, our privacy policy sets out your rights to correction, objection and removal.
Quotes are verbatim from submissions published by the European Commission, trimmed to their opening passage and never summarized by a model. Organizations only, never individuals. Reused under Commission Decision 2011/833/EU; the European Commission is not liable for this reuse.